friends friends. " " "listen to "brian kilmeade show" on radio. let's take a wide shot and focus on something else. carlson is u. >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight" ." the left has finally found the only immigrant in history who had no right to come to america. the only one who didn't improve the place by his presence, his name, christopher columbus. his crime? violating the sovereignty of the people who lived here already. plus he was the wrong ethnicity. try making that argument about any other immigrant to america and see how long you keep your job. but whatever, happy columbus day anyway, enjoy it while you can. her grandchildren won't even know it existed. progressives had declared war on

christopher columbus as they have on most things older than last week. this is year zero on the revolutionary calendar. history starts now. ignorance of the past isn't simply tolerated, it's required. does your average protester know anything about christopher columbus? that he celebrated as a hero throughout much of latin america for example? of course not. the left speaks only of his genocide, mostly because his ships brought old world diseases to the new world. of course those ships returned to europe with syphilis and tobacco, which proves only that real history is more complicated than the childish theology your kids are no learning in school. you could make those arguments to liberals if you wanted to but save your breath, they don't care, because none of this is really about christopher columbus. what we are watching is a full-scale assault from within on the west itself. its history, its political and intellectual legacy. it's not a debate where one side tries to convince the other. it's a war, with one side trying

to erase all remnants of its opponent. in this case, western civilization. consider what happened recently at a sleepy academic journal called third world quarterly. professor bruce gilley published a paper entitled "the case for colonialism." professor gilley argued that westernization of the world, while flawed obviously, was "objectively beneficial. he noted that countries that have embraced western institutions left behind the colonial powers had succeeded while countries dominated by anticolonial ideologies have not succeeded, to put it mildly. you might agree with his thesis or you might disagree, but in this current moment of revolutionary fervor you are not even allowed to have thoughts like that. the paper has since been pulled after half the publications board resigned in protest of it. keep in mind nobody alleged plagiarism here or inaccuracy, they just didn't like the conclusion, so they silenced the person who wrote it.

reason, tolerance, free inquiry, those are western civilizations central gift to this world. it shouldn't surprise us that in places where the west is under attack, those very principles are under attack too. when they come for the columbus statue in your town it's worth fighting back because it's not about the statue, is about something much deeper. jason nichols is a professor at the university of maryland and he joins us tonight. professor, thanks a lot for coming on. >> thank you, talker, good to see you again. >> tucker: people are upset about columbus. here is the lens through which i view this. here you have an immigrant from a spanish-speaking country coming to this continent for a better life and you are saying is not welcome here. that sounds like bigotry to me. >> tucker, let me adjuster lends a little bit. we have a person coming from outside of our borders coming and terrorizing and killing

200,000 -- 250,000 american citizens in two years. would probably call that person a terrorist, correct. those of the people we don't want in our country, the bad immigrants, who with that and try to keep out. >> tucker: i hate to give a history lesson to a professor, but columbus did not kill 200,000 people. what you are referring to or the viruses that columbus and his crew and subsequent waves of explorers and immigrants from your brought to the new world that decimated the native population which is obviously a tragedy, but it's very different from what you're saying. >> and also talk about european brutality. he laid the map basically for the trans-atlantic slave trade. he was the first person to take captives across the atlantic. again, he was part of things that i think as americans we don't stand for. >> you are aware, slavery was

pre-existing in the americas. the native population practice slavery as i'm sure you know. my only point -- i'm not even here -- i'm not defending columbus. i don't need to, he's not a relative of mine, he's been dead for 500 years. i just want to make two points, one that history is a lot more complex than theologians were mishandling it. people are complicated. this is not really about columbus, it's about attacking western civilization, european influence on the americas. you should think through the implications of it, don't you think you might >> again, i view it very differently. i think that this is about people like columbus. we don't go and talk about people who kill 200,000 people through whatever means and enslaved people, columbus on one occasion actually for a man who stole corn, he cut off his ears and nose and sold him into slavery. that's the kind of brutality that we represent? i really don't think so.

>> tucker: it's not. i think you will concede that in 15th century north america as in 15th century europe, brutality was universal and it's appalling and i would never defend any of it, thank god i don't have to. to pretend he was the only one committing it was a historical and wrong. let's just put it in as you would say it is a guy on the left into some context here, fair? >> i'm not saying he's the only person committing violence, that would be like saying usama bin laden is the only terrorist. we have many people who have committed atrocities throughout history. i think when we talk about historical context one thing never changes, killing massive amounts of people, facilitating the rape and murder of lots of people is never a acceptable. never talk about hitler in

positive terms. >> tucker: it's not about columbus, in italian that was acting on behalf of the spanish government. the subsequent waves of europeans who came to this country obviously hurt a lot of the indigenous population but also had a pretty great effect on the continent. they turned it into america, which to this day is a beacon of hope for the world, that's what everyone wants to come here. we were trying to delegitimize that and let's be honest about that. >> again i disagree. we are talking about the mainland of the united states. columbus never made it here. we're talking about people who came, the europeans who came to ellis island and other places, that influence we can say for the most part has been positive. they've done some good things, some bad things. i don't think there's any american would sit here and say

we shouldn't have any europeans here in the united states but when they come and threaten -- >> tucker: i think our people in the special who would say that but think of you are not one of them. i'm baffled by this indigenous peoples day. no one is really indigenous. they came here across the land bridge like everyone else however i'm not against that. we are all immigrants including the american indians, as you know. my question to you is all these people are suddenly and love with the native population of america, i don't see them sending any money to the pine ridge indian reservation in south dakota, basically the poorest place in the continent, why is that? it's all kind of theoretical and all the symbolic gestures of support but no actual support. have you noticed that? >> i think that there's more that many of us can do to help our communities. i think that that that relate to the indigenous people is owed by the united states government. they are the people who owe -- spin what they have spent a lot. they have spent an awful lot, it hasn't helped.

why are you off-loading the responsibility to the government? you are calling for indigenous peoples day, what are you send a check for ten grand to indigenous people, i bet they would appreciate it, i know they went, having spoken to them. >> maybe if you give me a job i will have that ten grand but it's not the average american that removed indigenous people from their homes during the trail of tears, that was the united states government and actually some of the president trump raised. those are the acts of the government who owes the indigenous people. >> tucker: let me ask you really quick, are you aware -- i think the trail of tears is appalling in the not defending it, one of the many bad things our government has done, but are you aware that the indians brought their slaves with them? >> i'm absolutely aware. >> tucker: history is complicated, that's the only point i'm making. thank you for joining us, appreciate it. joe is the host, he's been defending statues, he's a lonely voice.

>> if the iconic symbol for italian-americans throughout north america. certainly in the united states. can't believe we are even worrying about this. turning statues down. there are so many things happening in the world, the fires in california, las vegas, the hurricanes, puerto rico. this is all it got to worry about, taking down a statue of christopher columbus? it's people with too much time on their hands. this is a great symbol and you broke it down beautifully who columbus was, a great symbol for the italian-american community, columbus by today's standards would be like an astronaut. what he did was the equivalent of going to the moon. it was a flawed? we talked about this before on your show, of course it was blood. we are all flawed. were we to judge? he's the iconic symbol for italian-americans and we have had, would you have been so disrespected and we will not take it anymore. >> tucker: i thought tony soprano kind of summed this up as distinctly as anybody could on your show years ago when he said he's a hero, that's it, end

of conversation. i thought that was kind of the state of play, how do we go from there to hear? >> i can't figure it out. what is the reason? if there was a solution, you are like i am on the radio show, you have to be solution-based, what is the end game? what is the solution? you want to take the statue down. there's no reason for and for us, i've said this before, the fact that that statue was built in 1892 with a knuckles on the dimes and literally the quarters of immigrants from italy that came to america proud to be american, learn the language, the loss, all they wanted to do, all my grandparents wanted to do was for us to be americans. that's what that symbol is for. this is a bold explorer, did he felt? was a flawed? of course. i'm going to be nice here, the olive branches out but if they want to mess with the italians i'm telling you you will have a problem. do they really think -- do they really think in the city of new york that you're going to take on a statue of christopher

columbus? if you think so then you have a problem, it ain't going to happen. >> tucker: have you seen any votes on this? >> no! >> tucker: there are voters here and they thought they were in control. has any actual anyone actually voted? >> great observation. the speaker of the city council said we are going to have -- tear the statute on and the mayor said we are going to have this commission. we were on the columbus day parade and i was with maria, maria is great and i i have a governor on one side and maria on the other side so the local television station was on told me nothing political, nothing political. i'm trying to be politically correct. maria went right for it. she says there's an elephant in the room, they're attaching down to my stomach turned down statues. the governor goes the statue should stay up, it's a symbol of italian-american unity, all that we worked for and the governor

was quite elegant in that. i think maria for bringing that up because i didn't have the guts to do it. >> tucker: she is my favorite. joe, great to see you. president trump unveiled a 70-point immigration plan. what's needed to fix the immigration crisis. we will discuss it with one of the presidents critics coming up. plus we will talk to a former "new york times" reporter who said hollywood suppressed reports about harvey weinstein's press reports on witness katy perry.

witness katy perry become a legal witness. witness katy perry and left shark. or a card shark. grandma? witness katy perry work. witness katy perry firework. witness katy perry swish. witness katy perry... aaaaaaw look at that dog! katy perry: with music videos and behind the scenes footage, xfinity lets you witness all things me.

>> tucker: last month president trump met with nancy pelosi in the house, chuck schumer in the senate and apparently negotiated a deal to provide amnesty for daca beneficiaries with a few concessions in return. all of that has changed all of a sudden. the administration has not put forth a 70-point immigration plan which calls for easier deportation of people here illegally, a border wall or a partial border wall anyway, and new limits on chain migration, the idea that once you get here all of your relatives can come. those are all preconditions for future amnesty of daca beneficiaries. could this be the beginning of real immigration reform? he hosts a radio program in l.a., he joins us. thanks a lot for coming on. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: i guess i would just make two points on the first is the most obvious one, trump ran on all the stuff so it's not like it's a surprise or it hasn't already been ratified

by voters. government's comes from voters. we had an election about this. for trump to say i want a wall, he said it like a thousand times during the campaign, i'm not really sure whether congress has the moral authority to deny something the voters want or said they wanted. >> the legislative branch is also elected by the voters in the way our government is set up with the three branches the legislative branch -- by the way the constitution says, taxing and spending clause comes from congress. they are the ones who are responsible for it and they are responsible to their voters not on a national scale. >> tucker: they act like i can't believe and wall -- here's what congressman luis gutierrez, actually kind of an extremist and i don't use that term very often but i think it qualifies. here's what he said about the 70 points, all of which you've heard before. you haven't heard him say this. i think we have a graphic of this. he said it's an extension of the white supremacist agenda.

at what they want to do is criminalize and delegitimize latinos. you can agree or disagree with some of the details but there's nothing explicitly racial in the 70 points. if they apply to people from any country on the globe, a variety of hues. to say something like that whips people into a frenzy of race hatred. can you agree that rhetoric like that is out-of-bounds? >> that is a little beyond what i would say about the long and the immigration plan and principles put forth by the white house. i would not go that far but let's be honest the vast majority of people who are here without proper documentation speak other languages, have darker skin, so there would be an undue burden on people of darker skin. i'm not saying it's what's up are missing at all. that went too far. it's get into some the details. >> tucker: it's an undue burden on people who are here

illegally. the missing ingredient in this recipe and i keep thinking this, what about americans were already here, a lot of whom are recent immigrants of different hues, by the way. if they are more affected by this man i am for example. what about them? i never hear anyone on the left mentioned american citizens or whether any of this is good or bad for them, ever. why? >> we do know that overall it can be very good, especially in california, we have entire industries depended on some of these workers that would be contacted. that's when we moved talk about implementing e-verify. for example, if you like to eat lettuce, that's coming from california. that's coming from monterey county. we need workers to pick the lettuce, we need workers to pick the strawberries. americans aren't doing that job, it is actually undocumented workers to let's get a work visa program in place so they can do those jobs. >> tucker: if you were to say i make sweatshirts and i do so

in a sweatshop in indonesia losing 11-year-olds who are chas and if you knock out child labor i may have to pay $6 extra for sweatshirts and we can have that. when did liberals start defending the exploitation of cheap labor? wonder that having? >> i want people out of the shadows so they are not abused or subjugated by on scrupulous people who take advantage of them while they are here working. one of the advantages of a long-term change with increased minimum wage is you will see silicon valley fill that void, john dear chest bought a huge deal -- over $300 million to buy a company that makes the lettuce spot to automate that. there are long-term trends that are happening. why do we want to be as mean as possible? i find it to be not very american to say let's round people up. >> tucker: i like immigrants and for the 50th time i actually really do, i grew up in california, i think they're hardworking and nice people but i think our primary

responsibility is to americans but i wonder is a macro question if we are automating a lot of jobs and you just that we are going to, why do we need 1.1 million legal low skill workers everywhere and an unknown number of illegal ones? what are they going to do exactly? if jobs are going away why are we importing all these people? has anyone ever stopped to ask that question? >> net illegal immigration has been flat for a period of time. it's been going down under president trump with his rhetoric so i think long-term adult solutions. let us implement e-verify. let's get worker programs. long-term there are long-term solutions. short term, why do we have to be anti-american and round people up that is reminiscent of a period of european history that is very unpleasant? >> tucker: you know the truth, there's no economic justification for mass low-wage immigration. nobody even tries to defend it. the jobs are going away, why do

we shut this down right now? it's hurting americans, it's lowering their wages. why are we going along with this? >> the evidence is not showing that it is hurting americans wages. there've been studies showing that that's not the net effect of what is happening with undocumented workers in the first place. i agree with you. i think we need to look at it on a broad scale but we can do it without immediately negatively impacting not just 11 million people but the communities around them, our neighbors, our friends. >> tucker: thank you for coming on, i appreciate it. harvey weinstein, the producer, at a tough week. it publicly exposed as a sexual predator to put it mildly but hollywood and the press apparently knew this for a long time. why is that? here jealous don't like to tell us his experience, to

>> tucker: hollywood producer harvey weinstein was fired yesterday by his own film studio after "the new york times" wrote a lengthy couple of pieces revealing he had been repeatedly accused of sexual harassment by a lot of different women over the past several decades. sharon waxman spent a long time writing for "the new york times," she left to start the wrap. she says the paper could have revealed his alleged misdeeds all the way back in 2004 but spike to peace instead. sharon, thanks for coming on. >> sure. >> tucker: to what extent are

they have the story are you saying in 2004? >> first of all just one nuance, i said the piece was gutted, not spiked. the piece did run but there was no reference to sexual anything or women in the piece. clearly the piece that i wrote last week was really a great piece of reporting, a lot of work. i had a piece of that story 13 years ago and i was really very disappointed that we weren't able to get it into print. what appeared in print was a piece that was buried on the inside of the culture section and it basically talked a miramax executive -- miramax was the company that harvey and bob weinstein had started originally and was owned by the disney company at that time and was talked about him being on the payroll but then being fired. it was kind of a confusing story if you didn't understand the

role that person actually played was as a procurer for harvey. at that was my sources have told me and i had gone to rome, gone to italy to find that story based on tips that i had gotten and i convinced my editor at the time to send me and a new editor came in and that editor kind of inherited the story and what appeared in print after a great deal of pressure and pushback from harvey weinstein as he always did when there was any negative story in the wings. he pushed back really hard. >> tucker: why did nobody write that story subsequently? i knew nothing about this but it sounds like from all the accounts i read this was widely known. is that true? >> i would say that there were always rumors about sexual misconduct. i don't think that anybody knew that there was harassment of any kind inside the company, that was not the reputation but actresses. there were stories out there as there were many of us who tried

to get them. i did speak to one woman who had been paid off on that same trip in london. she really wouldn't tell me anything that i could publish so that part -- that piece of the story i got was not in any form because she had signed a nondisclosure, she was terrified of saying anything but i knew she existed. but i didn't know exactly what happened, all i knew that there was a payoff. certainly nothing i could put into print but the other piece of the story that i have reported could have started a conversation, could have exposed a piece of it and in fact the story "the new york times" ultimately ran going back 30 years, you were talking about a lot of past offenses that i think could have been perhaps -- what i wonder is could some of the more recent things that happened, might any of that have been avoided had "the new york times" published what i had in my notebooks 13

years ago. >> tucker: i guess it's unknowable, common sense suggests of course it could have been avoided. i wish they had run your piece. thank you for explaining that to us, and appreciated it. >> thanks. >> tucker: dean cain is an actor and producer, knows that really well. it was the story i talk to you? >> not in the least. you hear rumors about this, this was the worst kept secret in hollywood, no question about it. >> tucker: cynical as i am about the left, it is still hard for me to believe that a community that is constantly talking about empowering women in the horrors of sexual harassment could have it at this scale. this is not great area stuff, this is ridiculous out-of-control stuff, and not do anything about it for 30 years. that's what happened. >> hollywood loves to wear the self-righteous finger and tell everybody what they should be

doing and what is going on but this is not known as the bastion of morality, harvey weinstein is an extremely powerful man, an absolute bully and he clearly had an ammo something that he did -- you were aware of it, everybody knew. i wasn't somebody that would be a target for him but it's something that he had done for a long time. know him socially, i've seen him in a couple situations. i'm not surprised at all that it has come out, i like to hear that some people are finally saying something. rose were going tweeting, i agree with her finally. at least one late-night guy, john oliver made a joke but everyone has been really quiet because he's known to be a fighter, he's going after whoever he can go after he will do it in the most vicious of way so people scared. >> tucker: just for our viewers who haven't read the series and by the way i think the stuff is usually more complicated than it gets credit for being, this is not like you pressured a woman to have dinner with him, he exposed himself repeatedly to a bunch of

different people identified by name. for real stuff. what i don't get is why "saturday night live" refused to do any joke about it at all and then when asked, the executive producer said it's a new york thing, whatever that means, what does that mean and why haven't they covered this? >> i don't know. i thought president trump was from new york. they've done a couple pieces on him. i think the deal is that there needed to be a huge public outcry like this and there is finally this thing happening. this might be the thing that happens. his apology letter was ridiculous. that was absolutely ridiculous. he said he's going to fight the nra now and go to that. it doesn't make any sense. he is arguing that things -- that he did things that were wrong because there's so many people out there. people of signed nondisclosure agreements and is done it with legal maneuvering but there's too many people, the landslide is there so i think this week you will see a whole different world. you will see jimmy kimmel,

colbert, they will do bits and pieces on it and i think it's finally going to be out there in the open. there such hypocrisy in this to scream about women's rights and all these things and he's this big supporter of it yet he's doing this. it's clear -- you see the m.o., bringing them up to the hotel room, watch me take a shower. it's awful. >> tucker: the most striking part for me is in his explanation letter, wasn't exactly an apology, he talks mostly about himself and his personal journey and his therapist and working through his issues and i thought this is the most single most self-involved person i've ever come across. is that with the culture is like out there, talking about yourself without ceasing? >> let me tell you about me. it's true, it is. it's hollywood. that's what happens. people are very self absorbed out here. they're worried about their own position and their grasp on power. a lot of actors if they are not in the spotlight right now they are forgot about and they don't want that to happen.

same with producers. he's not a filmmaker, he's a producer. he's not directing films, he's a producer. he had a lot of power, he could make or break your career so he became this power mogul, people would excuse his behavior because they wanted to get ahead. that same old hollywood story. >> tucker: you are a brave man to talk about that in public, thank you for doing it. appreciate it. up next, a republican my professor says enough is enough and we need new gun control measures after what happened in las vegas. what exactly should those be? professor joins us next. mike pence showed how disgusted he was by the nfl player protest by walking out of the game. up ahead we will talk to a lawmaker who has a far more ambitious idea, cut off the league's tax break.

>> tucker: liberals responding

to las vegas massacre with horror like everyone else but also with unrelenting please to just do something. few of them graced us with specifics on that and told us what they want lawmakers to actually do. even fewer can explain how doing something will prevent another attack like the one we just saw. leading the charge or do something as a law professor at the university of minnesota, former ethics lawyer for the bush administration. he expressed his outrage on twitter saying "americans are sick of political hacks talk about condolences and sympathy while stopping nra blood money in their pockets. do something." we elected you to do something to protect us. what you were doing to fix progressive gun laws? he finished this way, and not b.s., for thoughts and prayers called priest or rabbi. from decent gun laws call the congressman. what solution does he propose? he joins us tonight. great to see you, you are a smart man, we went to the same high school.

i've known you for a long time, my first thought was he has a solution that he's keeping from the rest of us from inviting you want tonight to tell us what it is. >> i don't think anybody's going to come up with a solution that's going to eliminate all gun violence. we have a lot of it. this keeps happening. at a minimum we ought to have information on people like mr. paddock, who are acquiring thousands of weapons over a very short period of time. it amazes me that the police didn't know that he has acquired that many weapons over such a short period of time. >> tucker: you are a law professor so i know you can handle specific questions. how many weapons in what period of time trigger a visit to your house from authorities? >> i'm not an expert on the threshold ought to be, i think that's up to law enforcement and that's not the only factor. >> tucker: it's not up to law enforcement. nothing is up to law enforcement, it's up to voters to decide with the laws are in

law enforcement forces them by definition. >> they visit your house if the music is too loud. they will visit your house if they think there is something to be concerned about. just asking questions. >> tucker: i guess what struck me was not your concern, which of course i share and her love of country which i share and i think all of our viewers too. there are explicit claim that this could have been solved by laws. you said that repeatedly and suggested that anyone who didn't agree with you had "blood money" in their pockets. that's a happy thing to say. what specific law are you calling for? >> we can talk about the nra blood money, what they've done to the republican party or we can talk about the solutions. i will focus now on the solutions. >> tucker: what are they, you still haven't told me? >> law enforcement ought to know if someone has acquired dozens of weapons and they can use that information along with other information. for example if the person

associating with known terrorist, is the person associating with the ku klux klan, someone who appears to be psychologically unsettled? they can use that along with other information to check out the facts and they do not need a law to pay you a visit in your house and say hello, what's up, what is going on? is he a gun collector, is he a dealer, there might be a good reason to be purchasing dozens of weapons. >> tucker: if you buy too many guns the police should come visit them and ask them why they have the guns and then do what? >> that depends on the circumstances. >> tucker: in this case? the specific circumstance you were tweeting about, what are the police have done in this case? if you buy more than 20 guns in six months the police come into your house and then they ask what? >> they could have paid him a visit and said why do you have the garden? why are you buying all of these guns, what's going on?

they might or might not have figured out this guy was a lunatic or the guy who shot up the gay bar. it goes on and on. >> tucker: before you get back into generalities, since you are a law professor i will hold you to specifics. then do what? you are familiar with the concept of civil liberties, familiar with the constitution. you can't punish someone for something he hasn't done, can you? or are you that we do that? >> you cannot but the police know -- the authorities know how many cars are having a garage, that no all sorts of facts about you. shouldn't they know if you have dozens of these guns and it's not just -- how about the silencers that they are trying to push through? why do we need silencers and guns? the mafia? >> tucker: now you're revealing yourself as ignorant so i will stop you there. >> i would like to hear that. >> tucker: let's be real. >> not what this man. >> tucker: don't embarrass yourself. by using the same criteria that you just lay out muslims are

like to present less% of the population since 9/11, the vast majority of terra deaths have been committed by muslim men. if you have muslim man who is very devout, that's a starker indicator by the numbers. should the police visit him and asking? >> i don't know what this has to do with muslims or anyone else. if you have a christian was associated with the ku klux klan or a muslim who associated with isis, yes, but the vast majority of muslims don't associate with isis. it has nothing to do with it. the police ought to know about the weapons. >> tucker: and then do what? your suggestion is not very smart with respect and then do what? >> i'm not here to tell the police. >> tucker: i don't have to tell you that. >> how to investigate threats to public safety but i can assure you somebody is accumulating that many weapons in the police ought and somebody important were coming in like the president, you bet they would be looking into it. but they don't care when it comes to our family, my family.

>> tucker: i will cut you off because you've got a job and you don't want to be embarrassed in front of your kids. thank you for coming on. the feud between the trump administration and annabelle heated up on sunday after vice president pence walked out of the game in indianapolis. we will talk to it republican congress when who's at the anthem protest joseph the good time to cut off the nfl tax exemption. you are subsidizing that, did you know that? last week's rampage in las vegas las vegas, very confusing new information. we don't know where ♪ if you could book a flight, then add a hotel, or car, or activity in one place and save, where would you go? ♪ expedia. [he has a new business teaching lessons. rodney wanted to know how his business was doing... ...so he got quickbooks. it organizes all his accounts, so he can see his bottom line. ahhh...that's a profit.

know where you stand instantly. visit quickbooks-dot-com.

>> tucker: we have no information just in this hour on last week shooting in las vegas. at a news conference tonight

las vegas police substantially revised the story line, the narrative what happened the night stephen paddock murdered 59 people. according to police tonight he began his rampage by shooting security guard jesus compos at the mandalay bay hotel. a full 6 minutes before he opened fire on the concert from his window. if. this reverses early reports that he was only shot after the end of the rampage. it raises profound questions about what actually happened that night and why have police taken so long to pinpoint paddock location and what happened to campos. it's all very confusing and we are sure it will become clearer by tomorrow night show. we will keep you updated along the way. a month ago espn anchor jemelle hill called president trump and his supporters white supremacists in a lengthy tirade on twitter which is the social media app that is destroyed many careers and reputations. seems determined to make the

leap from covering sports or lecturing everyone on politics. jerry jones recently said he would not tolerate any player who refused to stand for the anthem. in response to that jemelle hill called on fans to boycott the cowboys sponsors. espn, ever sensitive to anything to do with sponsors has suspended her for two weeks. imagine the trouble they could have avoided if they had stuck to sports in the first place as is their charter. at the nfl doesn't itself seem not much better at escaping political controversy. on sunday the vice president walked out of the game in indianapolis after players for the san francisco 49ers protested the national anthem. the walkout was apparently done at the urging of the president trump. one congressman is prepared to do a lot more than simply counter protest the richest sports league. a lead sponsor of the bill that would and various tax breaks the professional football enjoys. the congressman joins us tonight. thanks for coming on.

>> always a pleasure. >> tucker: a quick outline of what kind of taxpayer subsidy in effect the nfl enjoys? >> the current millionaires and billionaires are associated with professional sports leagues including the nfl have a tax exemption. they don't have to pay taxes so that special treatment that is not afforded to just regular folks in my district or the small businesses on main street throughout america. it's my belief that if the congress is serious about getting rid of the loopholes and special interest giveaways and the tax code in the coming weeks and easy place to start is by not subsidizing and not getting special treatment to professional sports leagues, particularly when the nfl league office has embraced this unpatriotic behavior. >> tucker: are confused as to why the congress would be giving tax breaks to one of the most lucrative businesses in america whose employees in some cases are paid tens of billions of dollars a year. why would we have that in the first place? >> it's just more proof that the average american doesn't need a

70,000 page tax code. the tax code is littered with circumstances were special people and special interests and those with special access to members of congress get treatment that everyday americans don't cut. that's why i'm proud that president trump and speaker ryan want to have a tax code that's fair and simple and works for all americans. it would seem ludicrous to leave in the tax code special treatment for professional sports leagues when they are not out there shutting down behavior that is not only unpatriotic, it's just a overgeneralized indictment. rather than taking any we ought to see professional athletes taking a stand and actually supporting this country and if they have grievances about specific policies they should raise those with a solution in mind. >> tucker: i know what you are a politician and everything but everything you said is true about the tax code, that's exactly right. i can verify that as a long-term resident here. i hope you get this done, thank you congressman, a lot. >> thank you, tucker.

>> tucker: tech companies are getting so powerful most people in d.c. are afraid to criticize them. how ♪ approaching medicare eligibility? you may think you can put off checking out your medicare options until you're sixty-five, but now is a good time to get the ball rolling. keep in mind, medicare only covers about eighty percent of part b medical costs. the rest is up to you. that's where aarp medicare supplement insurance plans insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company come in. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they could help pay some of what medicare doesn't, saving you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you've learned that taking informed steps along the way really makes a difference later. that's what it means to go long™. call now and request this free decision guide.

it's full of information on medicare and the range of aarp medicare supplement plans to choose from based on your needs and budget. all plans like these let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients, and there are no network restrictions. unitedhealthcare insurance company has over thirty years experience and the commitment to roll along with you, keeping you on course. so call now and discover how an aarp medicare supplement plan could go long™ for you. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. plus, nine out of ten plan members surveyed say they would recommend their plan to a friend. remember, medicare doesn't cover everything. the rest is up to you. call now, request your free decision guide and start gathering the information you need

to help you keep rolling with confidence. go long™. ♪

>> sean: >> tucker: running fore next year, she's already having her campaign centered. not by the government but by silicon valley. twitter band of video -- a tech company in other words had declared itself a censor, what you are allowed to see and hear. that's terrifying, whether you agree with marcia blackburn or not and it cannot continue. that's it for us. an hour has gone by. every night at 8:00, we're on

the show. sean hannity is next. have a great night it. >> sean: thanks, tucker this is a fox news alert. we're following several major, breaking news stories. you, the american people, are being victimized by a liberal, cultural hypocrisy penn stating every aspect of our lives. the left, the liberals, they like to claim they have moral monopoly and superiority on gay rights, women's rights. tonight, we'll expose the lie. as the harvey weinstein scandal is exposing, the left only cares about one thing -- money. laura ingram is here with reaction. brand-new audio just released. senator bob corker attacking the president to "the new york times." listen to this. >> the volatility is, you know, to anyone who has been