thanks for being with us. we'll see you back here tomorrow night. ♪ thoughts or your story anything on your mind @ martha maccallum. see you back here. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to tucker carlson tonight. last night willing to force a government shutdown in order to get a border wall built. the crowd went crazy. everyone loved that except congress. steve king will be joining me for reaction to the president's speech. first, we almost didn't report this story last night because it seemed too absurd. it had to be a hoax one of those things you read on the internet and tell your brother-in-law. seemed el embarrassed. the cultural revolution the left hasn't become this hysterical and reactionary we figured, oh but we were

wrong. turns out espn actually did pull football announcer robert lee from its upcoming broadcast of the uva home opener. the reason? lee who is asian shares a first and last name with a long dead confederate general. not making that up. in a statement today espn claimed the decision had nothing to do with political correctness or with race. though, of course, the opposite is true in both cases liberals deivedded the decision not even the glorious game of football can keep america the toxic culture ignorance at bay. someone called roxanne jones on cnn's website. whatever that means. you figure it out. news outlets did not help either with coverage that was both misleading and dumb. reuters, the wire service, for example, referred to robert lee as, quote, the namesake of the general though it's pretty unlikely one was named after the other. later corrected to say lee is the doppelganger even dumber since they don't

lookalike. meanwhile america got a little less free in the process. broke the story on fox sports. he calls the network mxespn. hshe worked there until earlier this year and says she was fired for having conservative views. both of them join us tonight. so, clay, first to you. you broke this story. espn racketed in some greater detail today and said this had nothing to do with political correctness and nothing to do with race. am i missing something or is that just like a lie? >> it's a lie. espn lies a lot. tucker you know this having covered politic force a long time. when you put out an initial statement and then you have to follow it with another statement and then you have to follow it with a third statement, what you're realizing is that everybody is calling you on your b.s. and you are continuing to follow it with more bs and so by the time you get to the third statement, the first statement is probably the most reliable. it didn't tell the full

story. but this is what espn does. this is why fans on both the left and right sides of the political spectrum have been abandoning the network because they aren't trustworthy and because they are ms espn they are using their ability to reach people through sports as an opportunity to become a left leaning sports network. and it used to be sports was dessert. it was the toy chest of life. it was where we all went to escape the serious things that confronted us every day and now that's not the case anymore. it's like i have got three kids, tucker. i f. i tell them have you got dessert when i finish this meal and i give them broccoli. they will not be happy. espn is giving us broccoli every day and trying to sell it as dessert. >> tucker: that's the frustrating thing. i'm almost never offended by msnbc the real one. they are not lying to me anyway. you worked there. are you surprised by this? >> i probably had the same reaction that you did and most of america did. i can tell you as a former

employee that espn does do its due diligence in trying to affect the political safety of its employees. in fact two and a half years ago i had a video that went viral and a week later i was supposed to cover a play off hockey game and they took every measure to try to protect my physical safety because, let's face it, if you are in a arena or stadium with 40,000 plus people there is not much separation. i would like to believe because that could be the only logical consideration that maybe that was discussed behind the scenes but i think it's more a reflection of society right now and how left wing and p.c. it's gotten that even your name, given at birth, or the possibility of a people omemeon the internet is n to make a personnel change. if that's what we are doing here, tucker, everyone might be out of a job. especially in this industry. >> tucker: idea protecting him from who presumably

people like robert e. lee, their explanation doesn't make sense. clay, there is an employee and i don't mean to single anyone out there. is a guy there called bob lee who actually tweeted last night apparently that this whole story he thought was bizarre. but he shares a name with an infamous german army officer who was indicted at nuremberg. a reporter over at the daily caller called espn as a joke and said one of your employees has the same name as this infamous historical figure are you going to let him on the air? they refused to answer the question twice. of course is he our employee. no they refused to answer. >> this is the situation that they have created, right? here is the big problem. you just hit on it tucker. what's the worse case scenario here, 100,000 people watch a crappy game between university of virginia and saint mary and

few people create memes oh look robert e. lee is trying to sneak back into charlottesville and nobody at espn, i think this goes to brit's point, nobody at espn stands up and says, you know what? the grand scheme of things if we just let him call the game, this is a 45 minute or one hour story on social media that nobody remembers by the time alabama and florida state game is over on that saturday night. instead they have created a multiday mushroom cloud surrounding the company and made me look like a genius for calling them msespn michael sam being gay and a hero or colin kaepernick taking a knee and is he a modern day rosa parks or god forbid caitlin jenner decides want to be a girl and gets heroic award from espn for the entire year. fans are reasonable and they connect all these things and they say boy, it's hard to argue right now that espn is calling straight balls and strikes as john roberts the supreme court justice said. they have got an agenda at

play. and their agenda is very left wing. >> tucker: yeah, it's over weakening. this is a statement that just came in from the president of espn. john, sent internally to espn employees we are quoting now. given the amount of media attention being generated by one of the routine decisions our production teams make every day, what an opening, i wanted to make sure you had the facts. there was never any concern by anyone at any level that robert lee's name would offend anyone watch everything the charlottesville game. among our production staff in charlottesville, there was a question as to whether in these divisive times robert's assignment might create a distraction or even worse expose him to social hectoring and trolling since robert was their primary concern they consulted with him directly. he expressed some trepidation about the assignment and when offered to do the youngstown state/pitt game instead he offered lives in albany and be able to get home to his family saturday evening. i'm disappointed that the good intentions of charlotte

cleetion some hijacked political agenda that would be you and appreciate input throughout the episode. >> tucker: i don't think i have read anything quite that dishonest in a long time. how mean is it to this guy robert lee in the end? they are not protecting him. they exposed him to ridicule. made him famous in the worst way and appreciated him from calling a game because of his name. it's cruel. >> this isn't the type of attention you want on the national scene. obviously we know who he is now, but now these pictures once the 24-hour news cycle goes away, is he going to be associated with robert e. lee and they are super imposed together. i just think that this climate really is sending the wrong message. and clay touched on it with collin kaepernick with him kneeling and kevin durant not wanting to go to the white house and people challenging that if you are sick of being labeled a bigot if they don't agree with whatever is on the left athletes and agenda. hopefully the announcer can recover and we get passed

this cycle. >> tucker: it's mass hysteria. we will be embarrassed at this moment 20 years from now. >> the president of espn took a shot at me. look a this story. everyone who came out said every reasonable person can see an asian guy who is alive today and realize that it's not a dead confederate general from 1870. this is the problem with espn and their leadership. they talk to us like we are a bunch of idiots and imbeciles and sell crap and expect us to see it oh my god how lucky we are that espn is treating us this way. this is not true. this is a lie. just think about this, everybody out there watching right now. espn is the most powerful sports media company in the world. all right? if they come to an employee who might make $75,000 a year and rarely ever gets to call college football games and they say hey, we're a little bit concerned because you have the same name as robert e. lee in charlottesville do you really believe the guy making $75,000 a year makes the decision about whether or not is he going to call the game or like every

employee sitting out there right now when your rich bosses sit you down and said hey we have a little concern why don't do you this instead, he did what the company wanted him to do and now they are throwing him under the bus claiming they are afraid a few people would make fun of him during the game. instead they created a national story that has now lasted for multiple days with his name completely connected to robert e. lee. >> tucker: i agree. i'm sorry i'm laughing when an espn producer calls you dumb the irony goes off. unbelievable. clay and britney great to see you both. clay used to work at espn now he is at fox sports one. he thinks about the broader implication of sports. he joins us tonight. jason, it dawns on me not sports expert this sports channel and/or sports channels seem to feel like they have a big part in shaping the culture. their job isn't just to bring you sports but it's to make america better. they may be biting off more than any sports network can chew, maybe. >> they are biting off way

more than they can true. they are not equipped intellectually, they haven't put in the time. they are way out over their skis. again, tucker, you and i have been having this conversation for a couple of months. people are mostly laughing about this story. i have actually think it's kind of serious. it illustrates silicon valley's influence over the personal media. this is a twitter driven story. espn basically acknowledged why were worried about the twitter reaction. were we far enough left on this position to be protected from a twitter backlash? that's what drove them to make this decision. how much farther left can we move so the twitter won't kill us? executives, not just at espn, but most acutely at espn are making decisions based off of what type of reaction we'll get from twitter and twitter is rigged by silicon valley to be far left, that's the only

opinion that's tolerated there. and that's how these decisions happen. >> tucker: i think that's really really wise. i have taken twitter off all my devices i know i'm not supposed to admit that but i have. i don't think can you make clear decisions when you hear the howelling o howling ofb in the background. you can't. >> the thing john skipper said there. i have respect for him. this is the other thing going on at espn. he basically said we wanted to avoid the distraction of robert lee. and we didn't want to create a distraction. if you look at espn and the sports media's narrative on collin kaepernick, in the nfl says we want to avoid the distraction of collin kaepernick so therefore we don't want to be associated with, they are clobbered and beat up and how dare you suggest that collin kaepernick is any type of distraction. but when it's one of their employees who is a potential distraction, they make the same damn decision as the nfl. that's the hypocrisy it's

crazy man the time we are living in and the madness that silicon valley, twitter, google, through facebook, the racial division that they are driving intentionally and the rest of the american media is so addicted to the silicon valley social media, that we won't stand up and do the right thing. you can't be honest in this society more as a media person because executives and people running these media corporations live in fear of social media. >> tucker: you got to write a book on this. when you do, i hope you will sell it on this show like repeatedly. i think it's a smart -- you are right. jason whitlock, thank you. >> thank you. >> tucker: anti-trump protesters got violent in phoenix while the press labeled them peace activists, of course. i will show you some the highlights. can you decide how actively they are pursuing peace. also congressman steve king will be here to react to the president's statement he

would welcome a government shutdown for sake of a border wall. he may get that. congress king in a second. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ president trump spoke last night in phoenix and in what has become a routine display, thousands of left wing protesters showed up. some decided to riot. watch this. ♪ [chanting]

[sirens] >> tucker: ouch. that now famous piece of tape. demonstrators threw bottles, rocks and tear gas canisters at the police. pretty violent behavior both reuters and "the washington post" describe that group as, quote, peace activists. evidently war is now peace. that's not too surprising since post believes freedom is strength. orwellian slogannings somehow real. protesters made it clear they despise donald trump but still like him more than many members of the press do. they flailed about in their attempts to one up one another's rhetoric last night. watch this. >> i think it's one of the more morally shocking things

that he is basically going there in the hopes of starting a riot. the only defensible explanation is if he is not mentally well because if he is, then he is just such an incredible self-centered narcissist unfit jerk. >> he has given oxygen to racists. he hasn't really said anything, denounced the alt right. he talked about the kkk and whatever. he hasn't really done that. he is clearly trying to ignite a civil war in this country. he has not tamped down race. >> tucker: i kind of like don lemon. how could you not. igniting civil war. step back from the ledge, don. you are getting close. former speak of the house joins us in the studio tonight. mr. speaker, igniting a civil war, how seriously should we take rhetoric like that? >> i think you described it very seriously. i think pragueer did a piece

about three months ago on america's second civil war, arguing what you are seeing with antifa, what you are seeing on college campuses, what you are seeing to some extent in the bureaucracy is a real division of the country. you just had the former director of national intelligence explain that he thinks trump may not be mentally stable enough to be president. >> tucker: this is the one who lied to congress about spying on america? >> sadly i knew clapper back when he was a normal military guy before he went off the deep end. i mean, he clearly spun out in a way. but, you have had these kind of things going on. so, i think the gap is getting wider. i think that the chaos, what happened to the left is at 8:00 in the evening, hillary was going to break the glass ceiling and at 11:00 in the evening donald j. trump was going to be president. and the hard left has never recovered. it's the great trauma but they have never recovered from. and they are now seeing their world start to be taken apart. instead of left wing judge they get a right wing judge. instead of more regulations

they are getting less regulations. instead of america being defeated and weak. america is suddenly getting stronger and beginning to win. it's horrifying if you are a real left winger. >> tucker: i spend a lot of time on this show pointing out the hysteria and absurdity by some on the left it's unbelievable. >> i don't want a civil war. i don't want this to happen. i don't want the country to be this divided. what's the solution to this? >> well, look, i think a very good friend of mine teaches civil war history at gettysburg, college he has made the case that the parallels between trump's inaugural and lincoln's inaugural and the reactions them are amazing. but if you go and you look at how south kore south caroline newspapers responded to lincoln and how the left responded to trump. they are almost verbatim parallels. and you know, i wish we could all sing kum ba yah and come together and i don't think that's going to happen. i think what's going to

happen is the left is going to get crazier and crazier. you did this piece i have to get this in i think we really ought to talk about. espn is the extremely stupid political network. no matter how trump goes off the reservation, they find a way to be dumber. i mean every time you get ready to think the president shouldn't do x. they come along and do something crazy on the left. >> tucker: almost like they are working for him. is it -- this move toward permanent division? what do you do about it? if it -- societies that turn against themselves, you know, it's bad. >> look as historian my view is pretty straightforward. one side or the other wins. it's not like you come together some grand compromise. one side or the other wins. what's happening and what's driving the left crazy is the 8 years of obama were a disaster at every level below the presidency. they lost state legislative seats governorships and house and senate. so the country in response to seeing the left began

moving away from the left. that process, i think, is continuing. i think that's part of why you see a democratic party that can't recover even when the president gives them opportunities. i think also they are faced with reality. for example, they are now having their new battle cry which is medicare for all. sounds terrific. how would you like your taxes to go up 300 percent? and even vermont has concluded they can't afford it. >> tucker: of course. >> if california thought they could. california thinks they can't afford it you see democrats nationally signing up for a program they can't possibly defend. >> tucker: are there there any responsible democrats at the national level? >> hard to know. >> tucker: however disorganized the trump people are and very frustrating as someone who agrees with them a lot how disorganized they are. look at the alternative those people shouldn't be in power at all. >> a lot of individual democrats i respect. and if i'm talking to them over lunch or if i have a

cup of coffee with them. one-on-one they are terrific. then they go back on the democratic caucus. and they are not allowed to be normal. >> tucker: no room for moderation. >> they suddenly go i have to be this person. you saw this can tim kaine. when he got to the vice presidential nominee, whatever he used to believe he didn't quite believe. now you have to believe. >> tucker: became a hater and sad to watch. >> much better guy. >> tucker: i know he is it was depressing. mr. speaker, great to be with you. you didn't make me feel better. >> i'm sorry. >> tucker: i appreciate it president trump said is he willing to force a government shutdown in order to get a border wall. we have congressman steve king f

>> tucker: well addressing his supporters in phoenix last night, the president signaled he was willing to endure a government shutdown for the sake of building a border wall. >> we are building a wall on the southern border, which is absolutely necessary. now, the obstructionist democrats would like us not to do it but, believe me, we have to close down our government. we're building that wall. [cheers and applause] >> let me be very clear, to democrats in congress who oppose a border wall and stand in the way of border security. you are putting all of america's safety at risk. >> tucker: congressman steve king represents the state of iowa. he supports a border wall.

he joins us tonight. congressman, thanks a lot for coming on. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: i was sitting in the commercial break trying to think the people i know personally in washington who support a border wall. i got to five total. that would include you and the president. i'm including employees at the white house. almost nobody here supports a border wall. the country does. washington doesn't. how are you going to get it done when so few here support it? >> i think their lack of conviction has been demonstrated in the past will manifest itself in this little battle, tucker. i say that with a bit of sarcasm with my voice. if you remember that there was a government shutdown in 2013. it was over a principle of not funding the unconstitutional obamacare legislation that was there. and the president shut the country down and he closed down our national monuments and made it as difficult as possible for the american people and eventually congress caved in on a principle. constitutional principle i might add. well, this is a mandate that

came from the american people the mandate says build the wall. of the president said he is going to build the wall. if he vetoes an proposition bill because it lacks funding for the wall. 1.6 billion has been his ask. if he vetoes that, congress has to override the veto. the votes won't be there to override a presidential veto and eventually this will get done. the other thing is the democrats are ready to shut the government down if they don't get half a billion dollars of funding for planned parenthood. whose principles are stronger here? the democrats wanting to fund the abortion that comes out of planned parenthood or the republicans like me and the president who want to follow through on the mandate that came from the american people. this will get done. the funding will come through. i'm very confident of it. i say it out loud here. because i believe it will come true. >> tucker: what's the counter case against the wall? this is what surprises me. i don't hear a lot of people arguing in favor of the wall. it's a very easy argument to make. it's worked in places around the world where it's been

tried. where it doesn't work we know that. the argument against the wall isn't really an argument. why don't republicans force the left to explain why they are against it. >> you know, i don't know why they are working so hard. i think there are many of them that are just overthinking it. because the opponents have been more vocal. they are buying in to some of those arguments. when you bring up the argue. that it's too expensive. we can't afford to build it, that's not a serious argument. >> tucker: no, it's not. >> there are $60 billion a year in transfer payments that are wired out of u.s. labor, a lot of it is laundered drug money that goes down to south of the border. about half of that to mexico, the rest toft hemisphere south of the border. think of that. we build interstate highways across expensive iowa cornfields for $4 million a mile that pays for real estate and everything. we can build a wall cheaper than we can build an interstate. we need to do it and it will pay for itself, i believe, before we can even get it completed. and especially because and in the end if we do a good

job on this wall, we are going to need not more boots on the ground to enforce it, but less boots on the ground because there will be few people that try and fewer places where they can get in. this makes complete sense to me, tucker. i hope we have a strong national debate over it. >> tucker: i hope so, too. >> face the facts. >> tucker: even within the republican caucus. do you think the speaker of the house is for it? my sense is not because he finds it embarrassing or immoral moral or something. do you think speaker ryan would support a border wall? >> i remember a conversation i had with the speaker in the first week or so in january. and his commitment at that time was to provide the president the resources he needs to secure the border. and there is nobody at that time thinking that building a wall wasn't part of the resources needed to secure the border. so i think the speaker has a commitment. he lacks the enthusiasm that i have, tucker. but i'm hopeful that he will understand it. this is going to be -- this is a legacy for donald trump but more importantly than that, it's the wall is a monument to the rule of law.

and that's the difference between a third world and first world. and i will say that if you look around the world, there have been many walls built throughout history. i asked victor davis hanson one of america's preeminent his tore yarns has there ever been a case other than the berlin wall where the wall was built to keep people in than keep people out. there is a significant moral difference. north and south korea would be the exception. and other than that, all the other walls were built to keep people out. they are moral. they work. history is full of them. >> tucker: exactly. congressman king, thanks a lot for coming by tonight. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: well, for decades the aclu has been the left chief guardian not just the left but the america's guardian of free speech. declare certain forms of speech not worth defending. major change. plus, i will show you excerpts from hillary clinton's upcoming new book which you will want to buy immediately. she describes how she is not

intimidated by donald trump and then goes on to say she is intimidated by donald trump. which is it? why will unpack it in a minute. ♪ ♪

you won't see these folks at the post office. ♪ they have businesses to run. they have passions to pursue. how do they avoid trips to the post office? stamps.com mail letters, ship packages, all the services of the post office right on your computer. get a 4 week trial, plus $100 in extras

including postage and a digital scale. go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again. >> tucker: for almost a century whatever the other flaws the american civil liberties union has championed itself as free speech in the nation. they have been. they stand up for all kinds of unsavory characters. westboro baptist church. no figure in the history of american free speech jurisprudence that the aclu has defended that may be changing, however, now. last week critical race studies expert k. sue park who is a professor of some kind wrote a "new york times" op-ed barely literate one saying the aclu needs to rethink its position on free speech. the aclu itself meanwhile has announced that it won't defend a group's right to march in public if that group plans to carry guns even if those guns are

legal. editor editor at law news.com. thanks for coming on tonight. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: part of this seems to be disingenuous. i havread a lot about free speeh going back 100 years they have defended people nobody else would because their position has always been if free speech doesn't protect unpopular speech, it's not really free. it's a meaningless right unless it protects the minority. why wouldn't you be standing with that century long tradition of protecting free speech? >> well, tucker, i think two things. first of all, the aclu is a private organization. it has limited resources and it's not going to take on nor does it have to take on every client in the world. >> tucker: that's true. >> it has made a decision that these extremists white supremacist hate groups are

just not worth its limited rye sources. i think there is a change there but the change is not a change about the interpretation of first amendment law the aclu has not said free speech is no longer protected. looked at these groups increased risk of violence. by the way speech that is really violent or creates imminent danger isn't protected anyway. so these groups really don't often don't fall under the protected speech any way. >> tucker: that's wrong. >> it's not wrong. >> tucker: decided brandenburg vs. ohio in 1969. >> that's right. speech that i know sights violence is not protected. >> tucker: that's not true. it didn't say that it's imminent violence. >> that's right. imminent violence. >> tucker: i can get up and say under brandenburg i think we ought to overthrow the government by force. that's sphreech. >> that's right. >> tucker: if i say burn 7/11 right now that is not.

>> that's right. >> tucker: what's changed is the aclu has caved to mob pressure. >> i actually think that's where you are wrong. i do think -- you are right that the law has not changed. you're wrong that the hate groups have not changed. because, in fact, the culture that we li in right now has changed significantly with respect to white supremacist hate groups. these groups are now more violent than ever. they are growing at a rate that's bigger than ever. we now have a president that has done things that have emboldened these groups. there actually is more of a threat of imminent violence than there ever has been before. i think if you ask anyone in law enforcement, they would tell you that there is a greater risk of imminent violence now than ever before. >> tucker: i don't know what you mean by anyone in law enforcement. that's entirely subjective judgment and betrays of lack of historical perspective on your part. it doesn't change the principle. the principle is. this unless you are telling people to commit violence imminently, right now, have you a constitutionally right of protected free speech. do you no longer agree it's

worth on principle standing up for that the unpopular minority has a right to say things the majority hates under the bill of rights? you don't agree with that anymore, no one on the left does. that's why i'm saying the whole system is going to collapse unless you guys stand up and do what you have done for 100 years which is defend free speech. >> i think that's unfair characterization. just because the aclu has chosen to not represent this one particular group, i don't think that you can take that forward and make the judgment that this group has decided that no one with an unpopular view is worth their time. >> tucker: it's not just the aclu. you are making a fair pointed in that they don't need to take every case. i agree with that of course. under normal circumstances i would say whatever, the aclu is irrelevant anyway. we have the supreme court decisions. okay? it's not just them. it's all over the american left you are seeing people say speech equals violence, i'm not going to defend that. the left -- >> -- when speech does equal violence, and i will agree that speech doesn't always equal violence. even hate speech doesn't

always equal violence. >> tucker: there is no such thing as hate speech. >> there is no such thing? he will with, let me give you a great example. >> tucker: there is no such thing as hate speech. >> let's just put that aside for a minute because i think we are going to agree to disagree on that. there is something called hate speech and these groups excel at it. >> tucker: legally there is no category called hate speech. i know you work for some law website i am here to tell the truth that's a fake category you are making up. >> i didn't say it's a legal distinction. >> tucker: speech you hate is hate speech fine. let's talk about the law here. >> what the law says is that when speech incites imminent violence that speech is not protected and these groups, which at their core, in their mission statements their core is to rid america of anyone who is the no white, that presents a different challenge than any other kind of speech. i think that in the aclu or other lawyers or anyone else

wishes to take its resources and say that these groups are simply not worth their time, i think that's their right to do and i don't think it shows any change in the law. >> tucker: i agree with you it's their right to do that. i agree with you on that. they are private institutions. they can do that we are moving toward a situation where the left is encouraging congress to ban certain kinds of political speech. >> i think there is a big difference between saying we are not going to fight for the speech and saying that we want to ban it. >> tucker: are you not living in this country? there are people, we have them on the show all the time. congress needs to step in and ban certain kinds of speech on the internet. that's insane. what about the legacy of free expression in this country? when are you guys, liberals, going to stand up for that? that's the point i'm making. it's not just about the aclu. it's much bigger than this. don't you see this? >> what i see is that we have to look at all speech on a case-by-case basis. when that speech shows imminent danger and that speech is there for the purpose of inciting violence, in many of these cases with these white supremacist groups, when you look at their mission staples statements you will

see that their underlying mission basically is genocide. >> tucker: okay. >> basically. >> it has to be taken in that context. >> tucker: okay. >> if you don't take it in that context. >> tucker: we are moving very quickly toward banning speech and i think we are requesting to regret it. >> i don't think we are looking at banning speech at all. we are choosing what to fight for. >> tucker: thank you for joining us tonight. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: hillary clinton new book which we know you will buy immediately. describes meeting donald trump and describes him essentially as a hollywood movie monster. mark steyn who once reviewed hollywood movies will assess that description.

♪ the time of my life ♪ and i owe it all to you

♪ >> tucker: probably the greatest thing the internet has ever produced and yet it turns out hillary clinton wasn't having the time of her life on that debate stage last year. her new book "what happened" is just three weeks away from lee lease. you probably ordered it we have newly released excerpts in them. clinton identifies her revulsion sharing the debate stage with donald trump. >> it was the second presidential debate and donald trump was looming behind me. two days before the world heard him brag about groping women. now we were on a small stage and no matter where i walked, he followed me closely stair thatting at me, making faces. it was incredibly uncomfortable. he was literally breathing down my neck. my skin crawled. it was one of those moments where you wish you could hit pause and ask everyone

watching, well, what would you do? do you stay calm? keep smiling and carry on as if he weren't repeatedly invading your space or do you turn, look him in the eye and say loudly and clearly, back up, you creep. get away from me. >> tucker: that's from the audio book. imagine listening to that on a long trip. i don't even think hillary voters would want to do that. mark steyn has written more books than hillary. he joins us now. there is this moment in there. i don't think we played it. these are her thoughts on the debate stage with trump. i know you love to intimidate women but you can't intimidate me. she basically goes on to explain how intimidated she is by him. which is it? is she the victim or the strong person? >> yeah. that's -- when you said that was the audio book by the way, i have already got that voice in my car. it's the one that tells you to fasten your seat belt. i don't actually need an

extended directive. >> tucker: sorry to laugh. >> initially what i heard it, when she is talking about this guy looming behind her, making her feel uncomfortable, invading her space with a reputation for groping women and she wants to say back off, you creep, i thought she was recalling her first date with bill. but apparently not. this is how she feels about trump. and there is something actually quite amazing, even when we go back to what you have been talking about tonight with the espn and all that, that hillary clinton is so unself-aware that she writes an entire -- thcentral passage of her book is what it is like to be made to feel uncomfortable with a man with a reputation tore groping women. now you know how paula and monica and kathleen and juanita and all the rest of

them feel. it's incredible. this could have been an interesting book. if it's as phony as this, this is just going to be, i believe, her third unread memoir. >> tucker: you have got to wonder if there is not an editor who maybe took psych 101 in college who said to her maybe you shouldn't write that in here she says i -- she said i've had a lifetime of dealing with difficult men. maybe the editor would say yeah, let's go ahead and take that out. because we don't want to add to the psycho drama. i guess no one in her universe can tell her that. >> no. and can't tell her the truth which is that we would all actually like to know the truth of the clinton marriage. she knows some very dark secrets and that would make an interesting book. but, what's interesting here, too is that if you just think and we talked about this a few months ago, if you just think of the excuses she has come up with as to why she lost the election, we did a whole segment on her blaming it on

macedonian content farmers if you recall. and you actually sent a reporter to the macedonian embassy in washington. >> tucker: somebody to defend the honor of macedonia, yeah. >> exactly. so this would be the all-time greatest thriller if hillary traces the secret of her defeat. she actually visits a macedonian content farm and there is some old macedonian content farmers sitting on the weathered porch of the macedonia content farm playing the instrument as they sing the ancient peasant songs of their people. farmers back through the generations. that would have been an interesting book to read. to actually unravel the mystery as to why the most inevitable president in the history of the inevitability is now a washed up and wandering in the woods and talking to herself and saying to bill well, you know, that donald trump really made me feel

uncomfortable and he has this reputation for groping women, bill. where are you going? you just popping in to see that attractive young widow who has moved in next door? that would be an actual hillary clinton book worth reading. you know, tucker, the thing about -- i read her first memoir cover to cover. and the nonsense in hillary's account of her life, going back to her very name when as you recall she told sir edmund hillary conqueror of everest that she had been named after him, he conquered everest in 1953. she was born in 148 when sir edmund was a obscure new england beekeeper. >> i remember that macedonian farmer. mark, we are out of time. i'm sorry. it's great to see you. >> great to see you, tucker. >> tucker: we'll be

>> tucker: man, that was a fun show. sadly, it's over. we will be back at 8:00. the show that is the sworn enemy of line co smugness and groupthink. see you tomorrow night. "the five" is next. >> greg: high mike, i am greg gutfeld. she plays hide and seek in the dollhouse, dana perino. kimberly guilfoyle. juan williams. brian kilmeade. "the five." we learned one thing last night. the media is the disease and donald trump is the cure. >> i mean, truly dishonest people. the media and the fake media. they make up stories. i'm really doing this to show you how dishonest these people are. cnn is really bad. but abc did this morning -- i don't want to much but i wte