helpful, the lonely feel loved. great words from barbara bush tonight. i feel that way when i get home and see squire. that's our story tonight, we will see you back your tonight at seven. have a great evening, tucker carlson is up next. ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson "tucn tonight." one of the most striking features of the debate over immigration in america is the fact that it's not much of a debate. you will notice the failure, indeed the refusal of our elites to grapple with what exactly it means to allow millions of low skilled workers from around the world to move here. when it comes to details about that that quote the statue of liberty and they move on quickly. they don't really want to know much about the effects of their policies. maybe they really believe that every immigrant is a high school valedictorian or some world crest stem talent who is only prevented by founding apple or curing cancer by the biggest tree.

either way, facts rarely enter into the conversation. it's wholly emotional. facts matter in senate we have some. under study for the of american immigration reform finds that this country's approximately 11 million immigrants cost taxpayers about $135 billion per year and medical, education and law enforcement expenses. there is an offset to this, taxes. according to the study, these illegal immigrants pay only about 19 billion a year in taxes. that leaves a deficit which you pay of 116 billion. even by washington standards that's a huge number. to put it into some perspective americans spend only about 70 billion every year paying tuition at public colleges and universities. if you eliminate the expenses of illegal immigrants we could make every public college in the country tuition-free and still have nearly $50 billion left over to, i don't know, fix decaying infrastructure or subsidize health insurance for the middle class or probably a lot more.

it's worth considering as we debate border control and amnesty, these numbers. we also have another set of numbers. these from the center for immigration studies on chain migration. when advocates in new york or washington tell you what immigration that was pretend as if there's an economic rationale for. it's important like every immigrant is a high qualified expert in a coveted field and needs to be here for the sake of our economy. in fact, according to the numbers, government numbers, your typical immigrant to the u.s. is simply related to somebody who who is already he. usually a previous immigrant. according to data, in recent years every so-called "initiating immigrant," the first one, has brought an average of 3.5 family members into the country with him. if for some countries the rate is even higher. each legal immigrant from mexico has brought an average of more than six additional family members here as well. many of these family members have little prospect for contravening economically. for instance, 24% of immigrants are older than 50 so if they become u.s. citizens they can

become eligible for social security and medicare despite paying very little into those programs. none of this is an attack on anyone as an individual, willing to believe in most of these people as immigrants are good people because they like the are good people. but it is still an extremely expensive proposition for america, far more than most people understand. all this ought to weigh heavily on congress as it debates passing and amnesty for daca beneficiaries, supposedly by not fingering a legal group of immigrants who came here as kids. if the 700,000 daca recipients become legal citizens, of course they will bring many more. estimates suggest millions more including parents and siblings who may also have entered this country illegally. wherever you are on this question, these are serious matters, they deserve a serious debate in congress and yet don't count on that happening. on the left the only interest is admitting as many immigrants as possible for the gift of getting

and holding political power. that's the whole game. on the right many only care about their business interest is who want to keep their labor costs as low as possible. the concerns of regular voters who worry about their ability to stay afloat with stagnant wages pay their mortgages and kids at summer camp, pay off their car loan, the cultural cohesion of the country, no one cares about them. if they think about those worries at all in congress is only to tell voters their concerns are silly, illegitimate and they are bigots for having them. joining us now, two men behind the studies we told about some of the executive director of the center for immigration studies, dan is the president, they are both the studio tonight. thank you both for joining us very much. dan, first to you. you produced a study we just preferred refer to that estimates the cost of illegal immigration. it's very different from the estimates that i hear from people i talked to on the show more proponents of illegal

immigration. tell me how you got these. >> it's about assumptions, they often mix legal and illegal immigrants and they parse the data to try and -- we went down and scrub the basic raw data from states, from pew, estimates for the synod of immigration studies and put them together for updated assumptions. the children of illegal immigrants cost or minus a month care. they don't look at education costs simply for children of u.s. illegal immigrants for u.s. citizens. you have to include those. they tend to overestimate the taxes. darker, low skill immigration is inappropriate to our u.s. economy. we shouldn't be importing low skill immigrants, most immigrants, average income 30 $36,000 of income a year. privatizing profits and accommodating costs on the taxpayer. it's a net loss on the community for the american community to be allowing immigration.

>> tucker: and rich neighborhood to get help. >> the problem is as mark stein likes to say eventually run out of neighborhoods. spoon the other assumption that drives me is that when advocates for illegal immigration say we will grant amnesty to x number of people, is that the actual number and your studies suggest the numbers are much bigger. >> clearly much bigger. if, for instance, congress just amnesty to the people who have this daca amnesty. 700,000 people. we are talking at least a million and a half people over the next number of years that would be coming after them. but that's actually the narrowest possibility. senator durbin and senator lindsey graham have a bill that would not just look at those young people who are covered by this daca amnesty but would open a whole new can of worms from scratch. >> tucker: we admit about

1.1 million illegal immigrants are here and that's the number i always go with but that's not the real number it sounds like. >> in a sense it is but it would be following up if we legalized more people. >> tucker: because of chain migration, which applies to all legal immigrants, that means you have a net gain of a lot more people than just that every year. >> the long-term effect is anonymous. for instance, the amnesty in the senate they are talking about, dream amnesties, they would amnesty 2-3 million people, bigger than even the reagan amnesty of 30 years ago. double that number for the future over the next say ten or 20 years would come in because it's like -- remember there was an add back in the '80s, a shampoo attic where girl love the shampoo so much and she told to friends, they told two friends and someone and you had these multiplying images, that's what this is. a green card to an immigrant, he sponsors relatives, they sponsor

relatives. >> tucker: how can people get away with saying that low-wage immigration is an economic benefit to the united states? are they lying or misguided? >> is about redistribution. the elites on top, the employers benefit from reducing wages and the american people, average americans, american workers, what used to be the middle class, they get hurt, they are at the bottom. it's a complete scam and everything about our labor force shifted to this postindustrial superpower information economy. suggested massive illegal immigration tolerated on a long-term basis or chain migration that d skills the labor flow, gives the american people incredibly bad -- go >> tucker: when hear people defendant, what they're really defending our their own prerogatives. when they defended they are basically defending it because they are getting a lot out of it, but they are not. >> in the '80s, everybody knew people who actually had

relatives doing the work, the hard work. social dissidence has increased to the point where elites are completely detached by the tremendous terrible impacts, systemic illegal immigration and chain migration are having on the american people. he went totally agree, thank you very much, both of you. our immigration advocates are concerned with the prospects of chain migration creating a de facto amnesty or hundreds of billions instead of funding college of infrastructure, simon rosenberg, an advocate for immigration and he joins us denigrated things a lot for coming on. >> good to be here. >> tucker: you can debate the numbers but what you can't debate is that the numbers matter. i can say from first-hand experience having had thousands, hundreds of these debates, herec justification for these policies, the statue of liberty tells us it's a country based on immigration. if like facts don't play a role in this debate on the left. >> let's talk about the report you referenced.

you presented a balance sheet, there was income and expenditures. they left out a big benefit on the positive side of the balance sheet, gdp. talk about illegal immigrants make up about 5% of all workers in america which is close to a trillion dollars a year of productivity coming out of the united states. the cost, which i think are wildly inflated, i could debate this with you for a long time, the net benefit to the country is still in the hundreds of billions of dollars if you have an honest balance sheet. >> tucker: no, actually, your accounting clearly was in washington a while. using gdp is the measure of prosperity -- >> as a matter of productivity. >> tucker: it doesn't matter how much you make, it matters how much you make minus what you spend. >> business also has a net worth so part of the whole premise of gdp is that the workers of the united states, not the business, the workers create a certain amount of wealth.

$18 trillion a year in the segment of that that is made up by undocumented immigrants in the united states is close to a trillion dollars of value a year. >> tucker: what you are assuming what you are leaving out, you are assuming that where they to leave those jobs would not be filled. you have almost 100 million americans at working age not working. i wonder if that has an effect, if that is affected by immigration. >> this is basic economics 101. >> tucker: you are engaging in washington-based economics, everything is fine. >> you asked me to come on to talk about the study but what i'm saying to you is the balance sheet that they present in the study is not accurate. >> tucker: so are you saying that having 11 million illegal immigrants in the country, almost all of them working for low wages, almost all of them with low education is a net -- who are working -- and sending a huge proportion of what they make abroad to foreign countries.

>> reporting. >> tucker: a big portion. the single biggest cash flow into mexico. you're saying it's a net economic gain for the united states? >> there's no question. in the report -- >> tucker: there's no question? >> based on economics 101. we are talking about a trillion dollars worth -- >> tucker: i'm starting -- >> l. as you know, hispanic immigrants in particular have the highest worker participation rates of any demographic group in the united states. if they don't work they don't get welfare. if they don't work they have to go home. >> tucker: they do get welfare in a lot of ways. >> that's not welfare. >> tucker: publicly subsidized. >> but that's not welfare. >> tucker: call it what you want, it's something you didn't pay for your getting free from taxpayers. >> studies show undocumented immigrants to pay taxes. >> tucker: you've noted a couple of times you got a phd in economics 101 as you put it. if the law of supply and demand,

which you will acknowledge is a law. if you bring in over 1 million low-wage workers every year into a country with a finite population, what you think happens to the value of work at the low end of the scale, do you think it rises? to wages go up when you do that? >> i think the debate that you're trying to have here is a good one. what is the right number for people to come in. >> tucker: what you're saying is just kind of silly, actually. >> please, tucker. >> tucker: i'm serious. >> one of the lowest unemployment rates that without in the modern history. incomes have gone up now at a very rapid rate two years in a row, they are coming back from the great recession that took place. if the highest stock market in the history of the country, the economy is not suffering in the way many representatives -- i would argue in a timer we have very low unemployment rates, incomes are going up high as they've ever been, the highest stock market in the history of

the country and high corporate values. >> tucker: what you were saying -- you are going on and giving me this propaganda points that here every day. if they don't reflect the conditions of the country outside of the difficulty when i live in. >> that's not true. >> tucker: 95 -- they are not working. the unemployment rate -- >> the unemployment rate is wisconsin is 3.7%. >> tucker: the unemployment rate is different from the reality of work. if you have 95 million people who are not working, and some cases for good reasons, a lot of cases they are on disability, that is not good for your country. it may not be reflected in an employment rate, it's reflected in the death rate of opiate o.d. >> is that immigrants fault? >> tucker: i think people have seen their wages decline at the lower end. immigration is one part of that, why don't you just admitted? >> what we know from studies that we've done, my own organization has done is that the impact on the lower end of the workforce with the rates of immigration we had is

demonstrable, there is no question about it. >> tucker: then we agree. >> can i finish? >> tucker: of course. >> the overall net for the economy is that for the country as a whole, the rate of immigration we've had has produced far more benefits than costs. that's indisputable fact. >> tucker: now you are filibustering. you said it, i'm going to make the obvious point, those benefits, like all economic benefits in the last 40 years have not been evenly distribute distributed. our part is starting and i think we should admitted. >> i write about this all the time, are we done? >> tucker: he's telling me i have to go, we've got to go. great to see a period and we'd spoken a lot in the last couple of days about the nfl, currently the central figure in the war of respect due to our flag may seem like it's got nothing to do with you if you don't watch sports, we wanted to tell you how much you are paying the nfl every year if you are a taxpayer.

according to watchdog.org, in the past two decades nfl teams have received 7 billion in taxpayer support for their stadiums. the stadiums, often privately owned, operated for profit, routinely financed by tax-free bonds usually reserved for public infrastructure. the nfl enjoys a special exemption, you pick up the tab and they mark the things that you care about, just so you know. meanwhile, president trump has continued to throw attacks at the league, the football league, predicting imminent disaster if they continue to let protests happened during anthem. >> the nfl is in a very bad spot. you cannot have people disrespecting our national anthem, our flag, our country, and that's what they are doing. in my opinion the nfl has to change or, do know it's going to happen, their business is going to go to hell. >> tucker: marc stein know something about powerful organizations going to decline, he's been writing what you're up for decades he joins us tonight.

it does seem like a kind of perverse system where u.s. taxpayers help make nfl team owners richards while they allow their employees to give the finger to the country that subsidizes them. how does that work? >> i think the owners actually giving the finger too, the joining hands and taking part in this subversion of a civic ritual. the justification for these subsidies by taxpayers for football stadiums, which i don't agree with, but the justification is that somehow it is a public, civic event in which the entire community can participate as a community. that's the justification for these subventions which have made these people and enormously rich. you can't have that and then for these organizations to strike at the most basic civic ritual, standing up for the national anthem.

a national anthem can be a national anthem or it can be an opportunity for self-expression. but it can't be both. a subversion -- the subversion of the most basic civic ritual of all by these and enormously wealthy people, privileged beyond belief is absolutely revolting. >> tucker: has there ever been a country where the elites, the people who are supposed to be running the country to whom the rest of us mere plebes look on in all and ask, how should we live, we take our cues from you. has there ever been a country where those people attack the basic symbols of the country, it seems so perverse and decadent to me. >> what's interesting to me about this, there are people -- i spent a lot of my time in the province of quebec where the lieutenant governor enters for the first half of god save the queen and the last half of all canada. neither of which they care a hoot for but they still all rise

reluctantly to their feet and at least kind of look semibored as they are standing up for it. if the prime minister of australia ran a campaign to get rid of the the australian flag but he still stands up for the flag. what is going on here is absolutely extraordinary where people are actually taking the most basic act a citizen can do, rise to his feet when he hears the national anthem and have constructed an entirely different ritual around it. and to listen to people saying -- as you said yesterday, the free speech argument is completely disingenuous. these are the same people who say that if ben shapiro or the head of the imf comes to an american college, it's so traumatizing you have to have a safe space for them. these same people will defend the hollowing out one of the the

few communal acts remaining in a divided nation and they will defend it on free-speech grounds, completely disingenuous. >> tucker: what you think would happen if nfl players did this to the mexican flag, if they said mexico has a long history of mistreating its minorities, which it does come as you know. we are not going to stand for the mexican flag and we will talk during the anthem, how do you think msnbc would respond to that? >> they would regard that is absolutely disgraceful. the point here is identity politics is all about the old leninist fame, who, whom, who is doing what to whom? it is all right to trash icons of the american inheritance. in the same way that for the dallas school board to propose getting rid of anything named after madison, jefferson and franklin is fine, it's okay to come up with their own way of

respecting the american flag. it's nothing to do with whether they have the right to do it. it's nothing to do with whether it's legal or illegal, it's just that in the realm of manners were most of us live, or we don't require a policeman to tell us we can do something, this is disgraceful. >> tucker: it is. mark stein, always sums it up perfectly, thank you. >> thanks a lot, tucker! >> tucker: up next, the left is obsessed with fine racism everywhere. we will explain why if they want to find bigotry, it may not be where they expect to find it. also, hollywood has become obsessed with the politics of donald trump and russia, a new documentary about armenian genocide is being shunned in los angeles because it's "too political." uff happens. shut down cold symptoms fast with maximum strength alka seltzer plus liquid gels.

...has grown into an enterprise. that's why i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. now, i'm earning unlimited 2% cash back on every purchase i make. everything. what's in your wallet? we see their hunger. their courage. we see their dreams. we see the things that built our nation. and we wonder, what would happen if everyone had equal access to education? what would they discover? what new worlds would they build? that's why we built a university for everyone. southern new hampshire university for tech advice. dell small business advisor with one phone call, i get products that suit my needs and i get back to business. ♪

♪ if you could book a flight, then add a hotel, or car, or activity in one place and save, where would you go? expedia thithis is the new new york.e? think again. we are building new airports all across the state. new roads and bridges. new mass transit. new business friendly environment. new lower taxes. and new university partnerships to grow the businesses of tomorrow today. learn more at esd.ny.gov

♪ >> tucker: it wasn't that long ago that calling someone a racist was a big deal. it was a devastating attack on a person's character, if not blood liable. now everywhere you look, people just barely to the right of al gore are being denounced as white supremacists, white nationalists, neo-confederates. it happened to us last week. on a website called media-ite, blogger wrote tucker carlson isn't even trying to hide his white nationalist leanings anymore. as evidence for this? a segment that we did pointing out the democratic party has basically given up trying to appeal to the american middle class and i started openly encouraging illegal immigration. we didn't mention race at all because it's irrelevant. stagnant blue color which black americans in st. louis every bit

as much as they hurt white americans in des moines. how exactly does that qualify as white nationalism? he didn't explain or accept her invitation to come on the show. like an awful lot of name colors, he's a coward. too bad, it would've been interesting to tell us exactly what i white nationalist is and how we qualify. he's not the first person to make that charge, by the way. if absurd and untrue, not to mention conveniently imprecise. typically we just shrug it off on the theory that it's pointless to argue with demagogues. but there's enough of that kind of libel flying around the country right now that we thought it might be worth taking a second to lay out clearly what the show believes on the question of race. above all we believe that skin color is not the most important thing about a person's. what matters most is how you live, the choices you make, what you love, what you hate, how you treat others. that puts us at odds with the modern left, which classifies

people first and foremost by their race. if we think that's unfair. your race is one thing, you cannot control, you were born with it. that's why it's wrong to judge people on the basis of it, it used to be the very definition of racism before liberals changed the rules to exempt themselves from it. the show is based in washington, d.c., the most democratic city in america so we know and like a lot of people who call themselves liberal. many of them are decent human beings and motivated by noble impulses. some of them sincerely believe that tribalism empowers people. they are wrong. tribalism diminishes people. it makes their inequalities irrelevant. it lumps them into a pile with a lot of other people who just happened to look alike. it's dehumanizing, it erases the individual. unfortunately it's also politically hard to resist. groupthink and race hatred are remarkably efficient organizing tools as both parties have proved over the years. and so tribalism flourishes in this country.

in the workplace, the academy, the media. the leftist created systems where people are judged, punished and rewarded solely based on their immutable characteristics. this is bigotry, the very definition of it. yet in an orwellian sleight-of-hand for which they've become justly famous, the left now claims that all who complain about this aren't themselves bigots. the most remarkable part is how quickly progresses have forgotten the lessons of the worst things this country ever did, slavery and segregation. not everyone who looks like is alike. a collective is immoral. if you find yourself generalizing about entire groups, stop. it never ends well. more than anything people are more important than tribes. everyone of them is an individual created by god, treat them that way. we are all equal but not everybody thinks they equally deserve the right to say what they think in public. a student op-ed in ohio suggested speakers ought to be barred from campus if their rhetoric annoys leftists.

we will talk to the author of that piece just ahead. ♪ what's already within me. because my body can still make its own insulin. and once-weekly trulicity activates my body to release it. trulicity is not insulin. it comes in a once-weekly, truly easy-to-use pen. it works 24/7, and you don't have to see or handle a needle. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, if you have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you're allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain,

or symptoms like itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i choose once-weekly trulicity to activate my within. if you need help lowering your a1c and blood sugar, activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity. i was playing golf love golf.... i used to love golf. wait, what, what happened? i was having a good round, and then my friend, sheila, right as i was stepping into the tee box mentioned a tip a pro gave her. no. yep. did it help? it completely ruined my game. well, the truth is, that advice was never meant for you. i like you. you want to show me your swing? it's too soon. get advice that's right for you. investment management services from td ameritrade.

and the wolf huffed like you do sometimes, grandpa? well, when you have copd, it can be hard to breathe. it can be hard to get air out, which can make it hard to get air in. so i talked to my doctor. she said... symbicort could help you breathe better, starting within 5 minutes. symbicort doesn't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden symptoms. symbicort helps provide significant improvement of your lung function.

symbicort is for copd, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema. it should not be taken more than twice a day. symbicort contains formoterol. medicines like formoterol increase the risk of death from asthma problems. symbicort may increase your risk of lung infections, osteoporosis, and some eye problems. you should tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. symbicort could mean a day with better breathing. watch out, piggies! (child giggles) symbicort. breathe better starting within 5 minutes. get symbicort free for up to one year. visit saveonsymbicort.com today to learn more. >> tucker: amari garrett is a student at denison university in ohio. he recently well written piece for the student newspaper in which he said people shouldn't try to play devil's attic ticket, shouldn't ask demanding questions for the sake of understanding opposing views. doing so leads to "the security of hate speech under the guise of free speech which normalizes

and make space for micro-aggressions, segregation, exclusion and prejudice." it's easy to make fun of that, hard to understand but we must say amari was great about to come on tonight. if we are grateful for that. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: first off, it seems to be the key phrase in the paragraph i just read, hate speech. if not constitutionally recognized idea, as you know. there's no such thing actually as hate speech. tell me how it's interpreted on your campus, what is hate speec speech? >> hate speech is speech that comes out of the rhetoric that targets certain groups or individuals because of who they are or their social location in society. what's more about hate speech is that usually it incites violence and brings harm to these people who white nationalists and white supremacists often target. >> tucker: it is speech that targets groups because of their

immutable characteristics? if you were to say for example i don't like you because i think -- i don't know you but i see your skin color, you are a beneficiary of white privilege, i'm attacking you because of your membership in a group. it could incite violence, without qualify as hate speech? >> most definitely. when we are attacking people because of who they are and where they are situated in society we don't look at where we can change that and how we can reshape society. >> tucker: right. okay, i agree with you that that is wrong. we did a segment on it about 3 minutes ago and i sincerely agree with you on that. it's wrong, it happens a lot in our society and i don't like it. the question though is should you try to prevent people from expressing their views even if you dislike them? so, do you think it's okay to

keep somebody from talking if you disagree with that person? >> no. >> tucker: you don't. >> these aren't simple disagreements that we are talking about here. often times we are talking about topics of hate speech and free speech and the way in which rhetoric and speech has become so important because of the demagoguery that has been witnessed throughout the recent election. oftentimes it's historically the university has been a place of politics, debate and speech. so this is nothing new. we know that people like to espouse white nationalists and white supremacist views at campuses around the country. even around the world. >> tucker: that's a debatable point that you just made but the first point you made is not debatable, traditionally colleges have been a place where people can say what they think,

what's new, i'm old enough to remember it is not now students like you are saying no, you are not allowed express those views. >> it is a new thing and it's because we are now at a space in society where we are concerned for the safety of people, right? we have a change in society where we are no longer allowing groups of people to be targeted and come under the harm -- >> tucker: i've been to denison in ohio. how many people have been killed by white supremacist on your campus recently? >> nobody has been killed by white supremacy but i'm sure that there are a lot of people living under the stress of white supremacy. >> tucker: so if i make you -- >> if you speak -- >> tucker: hold on, you said that there was the fear of imminent violence but you are

conceding there hasn't actually been in a violence, so the standard is if i make you -- >> is about enabling people to carry out micro aggressions, whether that be the use of the n-word, the use of different speech. we are not just talking about people who -- >> tucker: when you watch television and you see like in berkeley people with black handkerchiefs over their faces hitting other people with chair legs or spraying them with hair spray, that's actual violence, i think you would agree. they are on the left, does that challenge -- >> the violence that occurred from the left has been entirely reactionary to the white nationalist violence that has come from groups like the kkk and white nationalists. >> tucker: we are out of time. >> white nationalists are completely invested in violence. >> tucker: i don't want to be mean because you're just a kid but i wish i knew who taught you this stuff.

tell your professor, whoever taught you the stuff to come on the show because i would love to talk to him. you are brave to come on and i appreciated. we are out of time sadly. thanks. republicans have reveal their plan to overhaul the tax code. the budget chief from the white house, omb director mick mulvaney joins us next. ♪ and over-the-counter treatments, but my symptoms keep coming back. it turns out i have irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, or ibs-d. a condition that's really frustrating. that's why i talked to my doctor about viberzi... ...a different way to treat ibs-d. viberzi is a prescription medication you take every day that helps proactively manage both abdominal pain and diarrhea at the same time. so i can stay ahead of my symptoms. viberzi can cause new or worsening abdominal pain. do not take viberzi if you have no gallbladder, have pancreas or severe liver problems, problems with alcohol abuse,

long-lasting or severe constipation, or a bowel or gallbladder blockage. pancreatitis may occur and can lead to hospitalization and death. if you are taking viberzi, you should not take medicines that cause constipation. the most common side effects of viberzi include constipation, nausea, and abdominal pain. stay ahead of ibs-d with viberzi. the whole country booking on choice hotels.com. four words, badda book. badda boom...

let it sink in. shouldn't we say we have the lowest price? nope, badda book. badda boom. have you ever stayed with choice hotels? like at a comfort inn? yep. free waffles, can't go wrong. i like it. promote that guy. get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed. when you book direct at choicehotels.com. book now. with steak and shrimp? more shrimp. and you know what goes great with that shrimp? you guessed it. more shrimp. steak and unlimited shrimp, starting at $15.99. only at outback. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember.

>> tucker: after months of wrangling and talking bout of the republicans have unbent their tax plan. if passed it would be the biggest tax reform, the biggest change to the tax code and more than three decades. the proposed bill would cut corporate taxes quite a bit, increase deductions and otherwise simplify the code substantially. mick mulvaney is the director at the office of management and budget. he joined us tonight. >> for having me. >> tucker: there's always a winner there's always a loser, for the winners and losers?

>> the winners are probably the middle class, they will end up paying less tax and it will be easier for them to pay it. it's a simpler, fairer system, about 90% of households right now i think actually hire somebody else to do their taxes. if that's families paying people, ordinary folks are paying somebody else to do their taxes and we let them pay less and pay it themselves, and i thk that's a big win for people. i think that the economy writ large as the other big winner here. that's what's driving the corporate tax, hope we get a chance to talk about that. a big piece of this, central piece of this is the corporate tax rate reduction. we do that to try and drive productivity, drive investment in america, drive economic growth, economic development. i think the two winners here are individual families, ordinary americans, what some people call the middle class, everybody considers themselves to be middle class and the overall economy because we are sort of revitalizing the american machine. >> tucker: who are the losers? >> i think right now if you

probably make a lot of money at the very high-end and have a very extensive house in new york or california you're probably a loser because the one of the proposals is to remove the reduction for state and local taxes. and if you are living in a $2 million house in los angeles, california, you're going to be paying more tax. >> tucker: the idea is -- they are almost all blue states that have these -- in new jersey, california, new york, very high property taxes but they are in effect subsidized by the rest of the country under the current code because they are deductibl deductible. >> we can talk about the economic impact of a lot of these things and i hope we do but from a general policy, getting rid of that state and local tax deduction is a great policy because you're absolutely right, folks in places like south carolina have been subsidizing folks who live in new york city for a long time and it's just not fair, that's why we talk about a more fair tax code and getting rid of those types of -- >> tucker: use a very rich people will pay more, what's the threshold for that? >> it depends.

everybody has learned that we've gone through this is that there is no ordinary american family, there are so many different moving pieces and parts. you can live in a fancy house making a lot of money in a low tax state. the treatment will be very different if you are living in a house in a high tax state. you asked me who the losers were, folks were making a lot of money living at her expensive house and california, the winners are a lot of other folks but it sort of hard to say in between. >> tucker: if i go to work every day and live off the wages that i make -- >> you are a lot better off. >> tucker: if i inherit a bunch of money and live off the dividends and the investments of the money i've inherited and taxed at a lower rate. why is that fair and will not come closer into balance? >> i didn't follow the question. >> tucker: are taxes on labor are far higher than the tax on capital. if i inherit a bunch of money and live off the dividends of my investments on paying a lot less but somebody who works. >> if you're making 50,000 in dividends is it really going to

be $50,000 in earnings. to a certain extent perhaps but keep in mind we are increasing the standard deduction here to take it to i think $24,000 for a family. that's a lot of money to be earning an interest if you have inherited but if you are a family making $24,000 a year of your effective rate is zero on that. i think that's what's more important. >> tucker: thought we are still taxing -- we tax things based on whether we think they're good at night cigarette taxes are so high and solar panel subsidies are real. i never understood why we tax investments at so much lower rates. >> i think we are trying to move away from that. clearly we don't get rid of all of those discrepancies, but we do move away from the tax code that is driven towards behavior. most of the deductions are gone. most of the loopholes are gone, in fact i think the only ones that were really sort of pushing right now are the charitable deduction and the mortgage interest deduction. everything else pretty much gone. the tax break you got for buying a solar powered something or

other, all of that tax code, the use of the tax code, we try to get rid of because we don't think it's fair. >> tucker: quickly, the corporate tax rate, 35? >> 35 now. large corporations. >> tucker: bring it down to 20. if you do that, what percentage of companies will actually pay that? >> again we think more will pay that rate then pay the 35% rate now because we get rid of all of the deductions. keep in mind, one of the things -- again, back to the policies. 35% tax rate, a fairly stiff tax rate, the highest of any developed country in the world, right? the power that lobbyists have to go and get a special tax credit or a deduction is pretty severe. >> tucker: i'm laughing because i live next to them and they all have bigger balls than i do. >> when you take that rate down to 20% the ability to stuff that we can give away goes away, the leverage goes away. >> tucker: that's a totally fair point and if you live here you see it. i know you have. thank you for joining us.

>> thank you. >> tucker: up next, the great dean payne is here to discuss hollywood's newest obsession with russia and the political standards that govern what art is allowed. stay tuned. ♪

♪ >> tucker: a group of executives in hollywood recently got a two hour briefing on the moscow project, an effort to find and expose collusion between donald trump and vladimir putin. actor dean cain is from l.a., he grew up out there, knows everybody and of course stars in and makes his own movies. he joins us here. what is this? >> i'm going to go see the movie when it comes out. i can imagine what it is. there's a lot of people who were very upset that donald trump's

president, they will not accept it. they will overturn any rock and even probably make up stories to find collusion at this point. i think that oliver stone should probably directed because he's pretty good at revisionist history. >> tucker: i talked to oliver stone about it, he doesn't buy any of it i don't think. a dozen! i'm not speaking out of turn but i don't think oliver stone believes this at all. >> it's been so long. where's the proof? >> tucker: you've made a movie on the armenian genocide, god bless you for doing that because it's an important thing to remember and learn from. but you are having trouble getting it out there because why? >> we had trouble in glendale, california, a huge romanian population, the second largest armenians in the world. outside of our main it's the first, the largest group. and they wouldn't let us advertise because they called her to political and we ended up making a big stink about it, got

media involved -- >> tucker: political? >> they say it's political and we argue, i argue with not political at all. it's a human rights story, there's no politics, is the holocaust political? no. the problem is our government hasn't recognized the genocide. 47 of our 50 states have put our federal government hasn't and that's because i think it's because we have an airbase in turkey and we are trying to keep things nice. >> tucker: it implicates the ottomans, the turks. and speaking a foreign influence on our domestic politics, the government of turkey has an effect on decisions our policymakers make. >> absolutely, i've been lobbying congress the last couple days to say look, look at this. what we are trying to say is call it genocide. acknowledge that it's genocide because if you don't genocide denied is genocide continued and it allows other things to be happening today in south sitting, iraq, to the christians there. it's happening now. >> tucker: no one ever says this, it wasn't just the armenians being killed by the

ottoman turks. it was a christian minority being slaughtered by a muslim majority. i think that makes it harder for people to not acknowledge it was genocide. >> i think absolutely it does. that's why they are acknowledget acknowledging it today. >> tucker: i'm going to watch it. thank you. talking to sean hannity next, she's in washington. we will be right back. ♪ it's ok that everybody ignores me when i drive. it's fine, 'cause i get a safe driving bonus check every six months i'm accident-free. and i don't share it with mom. right, mom? right. safe driving bonus checks, only from allstate. switching to allstate is worth it.

only from allstate. ostriches don't really stick their heads in the sand. a peanut is not a nut. and a real john deere... is actually real affordable. you learn something new every day. the surprisingly affordable john deere e series tractors. now you can own america's tractor for just $99 a month. learn more at your john deere dealer. [and her new business: i do, to jeanetgo. jeanette was excellent at marrying people. but had trouble getting paid.

not a good time, jeanette. even worse. now i'm uncomfortable. but here's the good news, jeanette got quickbooks. send that invoice, jeanette. looks like they viewed it. and, ta-da! paid twice as fast. oh, she's an efficient officiant. way to grow, jeanette. new. get paid twice as fast for free. visit quickbooks-dot-com.

♪ hey grandpa. hey, kid. really good to see you. you too. you tell grandma you were going fishing again? maybe. (vo) the best things in life keep going. that's why i got a subaru, too. introducing the all-new crosstrek. love is out there. find it in a subaru crosstrek. >> sadly, the hour is over. went so fast. like life itself. tune in every night at 8:00 to the sworn enemy. professor allen -- he is telling us tomorrow what happened. two special contestants. unless you want to play along from home. time for a third night of sean hannity at 9:00 p.m. massive ratings monday and

tuesday. broke the nielsen meter. congratulations. >> sean: i'm only one studio over from tucker and i can hear you. all right, tucker, thank you so much. welcome to "hannity". we're broadcasting from the swamp, in other words, our nation's capital, washington dr. sebastian gorka and we made a promise to you. we'll hold washington accountable and why we're here. our exclusive sit down interview with speaker of the house paul ryan and ask him about the new tax plan, president trump's agenda and more. first we're following two major breaking news stories tonight. the president unveiled the gop tax plan that calls for massive cuts, sweeping reform. is it enough? will it help you? we'll explain what it means for you and your family. the president is not backing down in the nfl anthem controversy and brand-new comments from the president. we'll play that