and our ratings prove it. thank you for tuning in. it was a pleasure. good night from new york. new york. ♪ >> tucker: good evening, and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." in a pretty remarkable white house press briefing this afternoon, unexpected as well, white house chief of staff john kelly weighed in on president trump's call to the mother of a slain u.s. soldier. he also spoke about the death of his own son in afghanistan seven years ago. kelly went on to sharply criticized florida congressman frederica wilson. he called her recent attacks on the president's stunning and shameful. kelly pointed out this is not the first time the congresswoman has used the death of others to burnish her own profile. watch. >> i was stunned when i came to

work yesterday morning, and brokenhearted at what i saw a member of congress doing. a member of congress who listened in on a phone call from the president of the united states to a young wife. it stuns me that a member of congress would have listened in on that conversation. absolutely stuns me. and i thought at least that was sacred. in october -- april, rather, of 2015, i was still on active duty, and i went to the dedication of the new fbi field office in miami. and it was dedicated to two men who were killed in a firefight in miami against drug traffickers in 1986 -- a guy by the name of grogan and duke. grogan almost retired, 53 years old. duke, i think less than a year on the job. anyways, they got in a gunfight and they were killed. three other fbi agents were there, were wounded, and now retired.

and a congresswoman stood up, and in the long tradition of empty barrels making the most noise, stood up there in all of that and talked about how she was instrumental in getting the funding for that building, and how she took care of her constituents because she got the money, and she just called up president obama, and on that phone call, he gave the money -- the $20 million -- to build the building. and she sat down. and we were stunned, stunned that she had done it. even for someone that is that empty a barrel, we were stunned. but, you know, none of us went to the press and criticized. none of us stood up and were appalled. we just said, okay, fine. so i still hope, as you write your stories, and i appeal to america, that let's not let this maybe last thing that's held sacred in our society -- a young

man, young woman going out and giving his or her life for our country -- let's try to somehow keep that sacred. but it eroded a great deal yesterday by the selfish behavior of a member of congress. >> tucker: general kelly spoke for about 18 minutes. his words were both poignant and tough. at times, his voice sounded like an echo from an earlier, better age, a time when there were still parts of american life untouched by partisan hatred. when i was a kid growing up, a lot of things were sacred in our country, the journal said. women were sacred and looked upon with great honor. the same is true, kelly noted, for religion, the armed services, and the dignity of life itself. but, as he noted, that's gone. as if to prove it, the left immediately attacked general kelly and his sentiments. ryan fell and we. "kelly isn't just an enabler of trump, he is a believer in him. that makes him as odious as the

rest. don't be distracted by the uniform." "odious." adding, "i keep telling y'all about john kelly. he signed up to make trump's craziness look less crazy. that makes kelly himself very dangerous." congressman wilson of florida agrees with all of this. "john kelly is trying to tell his, keep his job" he she told politico. lieutenant colonel oliver north. thanks for coming on. >> good to see you, tucker. >> tucker: what did you make of this? >> well, i actually watched it. i was at walter reed bethesda visiting a very ill member of the service. stunned is the right word. shocked, dismayed. i think it is unconscionable what she did by injecting herself into this and by making the accusations. i can tell you from personal experience, the most difficult thing in the world you have to do, i have done it as a casualty assistance contact officer, when

we get wounded overseas during the war -- i was back in vietnam -- if you got healthy enough to get around on crutches, they would often assign you a temporary additional duty of being a caco, and your job is to tell the wives of your friends that they are now widows. he walked up the walk with a chaplain. it's the most difficult thing i ever did in the marine corps. and i know that is like. i have also seen presidents do that. i know that president nixon did it up with friends of mine. i know that president bush did it because i watched him do it, going to see the bedsides of dying marines and soldiers and sailors and airmen in that same hospital i was in today, and watch and praying with those guys. it's a very, very difficult thing to do, to walk up and tell a woman that you know, and who was, just moments before, the day before, was the wife of a friend, that she is now a widow. i just -- i find it to be

stunning that she would do this. it tells you an awful lot about what has happened, as general kelly pointed out in that 18-minute -- >> tucker: society itself but she doesn't like the president, she disagrees with him. that's obviously within bounds. there is evidence that this is entirely political. i want to put it up on the screen. congresswoman bolson's point is, trump doesn't know anything about the family and she he doesn't care be to explain that, she sent the street. "i still stand by my account of the call between donald trump and myeshia johnson. that is her name, mr. drum, not the woman or the wife." the irony here is that she misspelled the widow's name in that tweet. this is deep phoniness on display, be foolish phoniness on display. >> we talked about the fact, 30 years ago this past summer, i was asked to testify. they subpoenaed me. one of the questions that was asked was, the day that you left the white house had to be the worst day of your life, and my

response was, the worst days of my life when i held dying marines in my arms and then had to rate the families and then sometimes go see them after i came back myself. and what presidents go through in trying to express their condolences, it's such a personal and such a private and such a difficult thing. i find it stunning that somebody could criticize the president for doing what he did. widow johnson received a call that no one ever wants to get, no one ever wants to see somebody walking up their walk with a chaplain with them. and those kind of things happen too often and more. by the way, 56 american military personnel have been killed in training since june. that number came out of walter reed bethesda table i was up there. that's what they told me. you think about that, all of those people wondering, is some person going to jump up and put it on tv and grouse about

something when this is a moment of bereavement? it is a very, very personal, intimate moment, and she has wrecked it, is what she has done. she is a wrecker. this congressman wilson is a wrecker. >> tucker: i don't have anything to add to that. you said it better than anyone could have. i appreciate your time. well, the press has spent months searching for a rush of scandal, but in an odd twist, the scandal could be one they have had all along or for a number of years, anyway. 2010, the obama administration approved a deal giving a russian firm control over 20% of the american uranium reserves. it wasn't very widely publicized, but it turned out to be a big deal. president trump today blasted the press, saying this is the real scandal. watch. >> if the mainstream media would cover the uranium scandal and that russia has 20% of the

uranium, for whatever reason, and a lot of people understand what those reasons may be, i think that is your russia story. that's your real russia story. not a story where they talk about collusion and there was none. it was a hoax. the problem is that the mainstream media does not want to cover that story because that affects people they protect. and it is a disgrace that the fake news won't cover it. >> tucker: we have faced former state government official who advises the obama campaign -- advised, rather, and joins us tonight. david, i'm almost sorry we played that bite, but because it might give viewers the impression this is a political story. our politics around her, but i'm interested in policy, just as an american, not someone with political views. why is it okay that the obama administration approved the sale of the company that controls 20% of america's uranium reserves to the russians, now described as our mortal enemy.

why did they do that? >> it is a policy issue and also a legal issue. this happened in 2010. one thing i disagree with you about is, it was widely known them. in fact, there were republican members of congress who wrote the administration to argue that they should not approve of this. now, we have a process, that process has to happen any time a company is going to acquire a company that might impact our national security. most countries don't have that process. it's good we have that process that helps us protect our national security. this deal went through that process. it is a really complex process, 12 agencies of the u.s. government are involved, nine agency heads, makes a final decision. secretary clinton, secretary of state at the time, was 1 of 9 who approved of that decision. i believe that was a bad policy decision back then, but that was 2010, and right now it's quite different. the situation with russia is much more extreme, and russia poses a much more significant

threat to our security. >> tucker: for the sake of the debate, i will concede your point and say that russia is a greater threat than in the past. i don't believe that, but i know you do. given that, how horrifying must be for you to read what has happened to that uranium that the openness duration allowed the russians to control. you have in "the new york times," wyoming landowner on whose land some of these uranium deposits it saying, i'm watching trucks come onto my property routinely pack uranium into drums and truck after processing plant abroad. uranium one -- this company has no export process. it is winding up off this continent. you know exactly where it is going, to places that are dangerous to the united states, and that's because the obama administration with hillary clinton as secretary of state, allowed this to happen. why is that considered shameful? >> you're right, we have to be concerned about the export of uranium, but you've overstated what do you "new york times" ae

said. it states that there was one export of uranium. it went to canada, and, by the way -- >> tucker: no, no, let me correct as a factual matter. i'm quoting. "a uranium spokesman said that 25% of gone to western europe and japan. "so another 25% of this uranium, we don't have any proof that it went western europe and japan. we know it left the continent. we don't know if it went to iran or north korea or where it went from there. we have lost control of it. that's the point. >> tucker: first of all, western europe and japan are our allies. uranium does not leave the united states without getting an export license -- >> tucker: false, false. false. they have no export license. that's the whole point of the story. they don't have an export license. we could argue about this story -- >> be more important point of the story is how this deal got

approved. with regard to the export of uranium, i haven't heard anyone say that it made it to anywhere in proper. >> tucker: that's not true. >> in one situation, it went to canada, and it was the trucking company that had the license to make export license. >> tucker: there is no export license to take this out of the country. but we don't control it, the russians do because the obama people and hillary clinton allowed this to do. if you think he russia scandal is, indeed, a scandal, and you do and you've argued it here, then how is this not a scandal at much greater magnitude. this is a huge deal that threatens our national security, but nobody seems to care because it's obama and clinton. >> if this is a scandal, this is a scandal for the trump administration, it means during the trump administration this uranium is leaving the country without having proper licenses. >> tucker: they ought to shut this down right now. i couldn't agree with you more. i am arguing that anybody who is allowing this is in the wrong and is a threat to us, but the genesis of this -- and it is ongoing to this day -- is this

deal. now, the clinton who was a joke through their donations over a hundred million dollars in this uranium country. how is is not quid pro quo? it is a deal you yourselves it was a bad deal, they approved it, the clintons took over $100 million during that period back. why is that not an actual scandal? >> let's break that down. the clintons did not take $100 million. $100 million went in shareable donations to the clinton foundation, and the clinton foundation use that money for charitable purposes. >> tucker: we don't know what they used it for. that's not true. we don't actually review their tax returns. as in the tax returns too, but to stay but are charitable endeavors -- the point is, they control it, it went to their foundations. why do you think, by the way, why do think investors in the rhenium company would be giving $145 million to the clintons? honestly? >> these are american, canadian, and russians who were involved somehow in the deal. i agree with you --

i agree with you that it is dubious, although i don't agree bridge just giving money to a charity somehow influence the clintons. >> tucker: they're not giving money because they care about childhood obesity or cholera. they're getting, giving it because they want the deal to go through. >> tucker: i don't think it is fair for a view to say that bill and hillary clinton don't care aboue purposes >> tucker: the more concerning issue is that bill clinton took speaker fees from a russian investment from there was also involved in this deal in 2010 near the time of that. >> tucker: i agree! >> the question is, did bill influence hillary and did hillary influenced the committee and did she somehow influence the other eight people and there is no evidence. >> tucker: everything about it from the policy to the playoffs is wrong. >> the policy is bad. there is nothing in the ego. so nothing illegal! david tafuri, thank you for joining us.

how did harvey weinstein's behavior go unreported for so long? no information on "the new york times" killed that original story more than ten years ago from the reporter who wrote it. he joins us next

>> tucker: there is still a lot of unanswered questions in the harvey weinstein scandal but only a few involved weinstein himself. instead, the biggest question now is how so many people, including smart ones, journalists, actors, producers, knew about weinstein's behavior and didn't reveal it for years.

sharon waxman is the founder of -- but before that, she was at "the new york times" as a reporter and she was ready to expose weinstein's deeds 13 years ago, and an editor scuttled her story. now she says that story was killed after weinstein himself came to "the new york times" newsroom to argue against it. sharon waxman joins us tonight for the second time. sharon, thanks for coming back. i'm glad you came because i think this is one of the most interesting stories, not that "the new york times" and the end reveal that. they are not solely at fault. but it is a window into how the story didn't come out earlier, and you are at the center of it. what do you know now that you did know when last we talked about why your story didn't run? >> well, i had heard at the time that harvey had come to the newsroom, and i said that in the post that i originally wrote which basically called out the fact that "the new york times" was, to my mind, it kind self-congratulating and saying, nobody else in the media was going to reveal us until we did,

and that was what propelled me to say, hey, guys, actually, we did try to get the story in the paper three years ago, and what ended up in print was way diminished and didn't have context and didn't make any sense. and what my understanding was was that harvey weinstein went to war to get this not to appear in "the new york times" which is, of course, what he does, and i had said at the time which matt damon called me, which i knew. russell crowe called me, which i knew. then i heard that he came to newsroom in order to get the editors not to run the story or to kill the story. i was told "the new york times" went on the record and said he spoke to the former manager editor and said they had no recollection of any such meeting. i thought, wow, i must have a really bad memory. >> tucker: left leg >> in the meantime, three different people have come forward to say, no, there was a meeting, and a colorful detail that harvey weinstein and david boies, his lawyer, were circling in a town

car desperately trying to get a meeting with bill keller until they got one and that they came into the newsroom and that it was the talk of the building, and i don't know the conversation was, but obviously they were not exchanging recipes. so, again, let me be clear. that doesn't mean that they swayed bill keller, the editor at the time, but, again, just my pointing at "the new york times" doesn't like anybody to call them out on things. i get that. but it is true that that meeting happened, that both bill keller and the other side, they have no election of it ever occurring. the meeting did occur, there was severe pressure, and all i know is that my story appeared without any reference to women or sexual anything at all. >> tucker: that's incredible. we should say, "the new york times" did attack you personally after you noted that your original story had been altered to take out all the interesting stuff. do you think it is possible -- rhetorical question here -- that you could forget a meeting with david boies and harvey weinstein

in your own newsroom? >> that's an interesting question. well, what bill keller came back and said to me was somewhat equivocal. he said, i do rumor that there was a meeting with harvey weinstein and david boies, but i think it was about a different . so i came back, him and i said, "no, bill, that may well be they had that meeting, but what i'm asking but is specifically this meeting in 2004, in the fall, three people remember it, incla former editor." he chose not to answer. basically his saying i'm sour grapes because i think the story. which is not what it's about for me. it's about whether we could have exposed his earlier and perhaps saved some women the suffering or the trials of having been prayed upon. and i didn't have the whole story. i'm not trying to assert that. the story i had had to do with a guy in italy who was on the disney payroll whose job was essentially to procure women for him. and now there are a ton of women

women, not an corroborating that story. >> tucker: it would have changed everything if that had run. thank you for filling us in. sharon waxman, thanks. >> yeah, thanks, tucker. >> tucker: several women at this point have accused harvey weinstein of rape and out appears possible post could become criminal charges. an unnamed model and actress who says weinstein raped her spoke with the nypd today, also in utah where he allegedly raped actress bruce mccown way back in 1997. we have an attorney that joins us tonight. emily, as a 9-lawyer, my understanding is there is no statute of limitations on rape charges, is that right? it depends on the state. in 2008, utah did away with the statue of limitations for rape, and that is why they have a small legal loophole that matters here. they have what is known as

absentee. if someone is accused of a crime but leaves the state orders, the statute of limitations stops until and unless they return to that state, so all that matters here for weinstein to be able to be able to be prosecuted in that state is that rose mcgowan state was good in 2007 when they did away with that. because of absentee polling, it is possible. not only would be a refreshingly pricey to prosecute him but it would be legally sound. now, they have been constitutional challenges to this, but the utah supreme court has ruled specifically this pattern, this fact pattern on behalf of the victim and the d.a., and the united states supreme court has ruled that this violence against women instead state orders is not subject to the commerce clause. it means that on weinstein's behalf, touching on federalism, that it won't work here. here it will be sound. >> tucker: it so it sounds like he could end up being

jailed. could the state of utah, for example, bring charges against him without the cooperation of rose mcgowan? does she have to agree to testify against him or should know matt, go ahead anyway? >> they could go ahead anyway. of course, historical crimes, as they are called, those in the past, they are difficult to prosecute because witness cooperation, that pales, let alone whether a victim tales to testify. a20-year-old rape is just as deserving of prosecution as a recent one, and the utep d.a. can absolutely proceed. >> tucker: this is going in a direction i bet you did not expect. emily, thank you for that. >> thank you. >> tucker: well, the shooting in las vegas, the aftermath, ought to be a search for truth, so why is mgm, the casino company, letting it become a battle for the bottom line? there is a lot of pr machinations going on you may not be aware of. up next we want to tell you about the bizarre way at the

mandalay bay security guard, jesus campos, was apparently manipulated by mgm and ellen degenerates. ♪ look how beautiful it is... honey, we need to talk. we do? i took the trash out. i know - and thank you so much for that. i think we should get a medicare supplement insurance plan. right now? whether you're new to medicare or not, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. it's up to you to pay the difference. so think about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. i did a little research. with a medicare supplement plan, you'll be able to stay with your doctor... oh you know i love that guy. mmmmhmmm. these types of plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients.

and, there are no networks. is this a one-size fits all kind of thing? no. there are lots of plan options. it all depends on what we need. and how much we want to spend. call now to request your free [decision guide]. it could help you find an aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. what happens when we travel? the plans go with us. anywhere in the country. i like that. you know what else? unitedhealthcare insurance company has years and years of experience. what do you say? i'm in. join the millions already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance... plans endorsed by aarp. remember, all medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could really save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you'll be able to choose your own doctor or hospital as long as they accept medicare patients. and with these plans, there could be low or no copays. you do your push-ups today?

prepare to be amazed. don't wait. call today to request your free [decision guide], and find the aarp medicare supplement plan to go the distance with you. go long.

>> tucker: we still don't have answers to even basic questions about the massacre in las vegas, but we do have a lot of questions. questions. jesus campos emerged publicly for the first time this week. he was the only eyewitness, certainly the first to the shooting at the hotel from within the building.

he gave an interview on the " "ellen degeneres show," part of a marketing push by mgm horns mandalay bay and operates several ellen-themed slot machines pittsburgh i have a brand-new slot machine, it is from igt and has new bonuses that are so much fun. i was in vegas on to the mgm grand and surprise some people that were playing my machine, and here's what happened. wow, come on! >> oh, my god! oh, my god, oh, my god! >> tucker: so now the "daily mail" is reporting that mgm, the company that makes those slot machines, insisted that campos appear only on ellen degeneres show insisting that any others could alter the position of the shooting timeline. chris bargo is a "daily mail"

reporter and he joins us tonight. chris, this sounds like part of, i don't know cover-up is too strong or not, parker of a marketing effort that sounds designed to spin rather than explain the facts to the public. >> that's exactly it. we heard last week that jesus campos was going to give five interviews on thursday, and after two and a half weeks, we were all looking for answers paid so many things to lingering but the shooting. then a few days before, he just disappears and we don't hear anything at all. they may learn in tuesday night, that he is going to do "alan degeneres" of all shows. they confirmed that this is all mgm. they were concerned about the timeline, which keeps changing in this case and that jesus would not be able to keep it straight if he was put on hard talk shows or news organizations and put under pressure about it. >> tucker: look, i feel for campos. he didn't do anything wrong. he was walking by, shot or hit by a ricochet -- still not clear what happened. i'm just asking an honest question when i ask you, why is

he a hero exactly? ellen degeneres did this thing, you're a hero, we're celebrating you, where does the hero thing, end. i'm confused. what does that mean? >> the original time and had him showing up at 10:14, a minute before the shooting stopped. then the second time and came out, which is when he was heralded as a hero, said he arrived at nine, 59, 6 minutes before it started. that is the time and that cause these problems were people are saying, if he was here 6 minutes before and it took the place this time to get to the room, there is clearly sinless communication. did mgm not tell the police? what is going on here? not have victims, victims 'families, thinking if you can call the police for 6 minutes, what could have been saved? >> tucker: have we settled on a timeline exactly or have authorities given us a definitive timeline that makes sense? >> here's it apart, jesus' injuries were going to be thursday. on friday, after they were canceled, we get a third

timeline, has him arriving as the shooting starts, the police arriving at 10:17, a reasonable amount of time. everyone seems to have worked in proper ways and through protocol. >> tucker: okay. and we're certain that's real? i mean, there are federal investigators, presumably, at the heart of this investigation, they introduced themselves to us in on television a couple of weeks ago. what are they saying? has anybody said, there is a lot of confusion, we are saying, definitively, we know that make this. >> you can't see anything definitively. so much has changed. so many questions about this and every single version keeps changing. no one is really saying a lot right now, but as a party, that is what they are saying. >> tucker: has law enforcement said anything about the fact that mgm, a for-profit company and in whose hotel this tragedy took place, is controlling the narrative here? >> we could get any response and we asked about that. "why are you changing the timeline? the way it is happening is weird, the time and a suspect" no response whatsoever. >> tucker: there is a huge

crime, biggest shooting in modern american history. let's let a casino company tell us what happened. chris, thank you. i appreciate it. puerto rico still having a very tough time after hurricane maria. is that because the island is badly run, poorly prepared? the storm was terrible? because president trump is a racist? a lot of politics around that hurricane. we'll get to the bottom of all of it coming up next.

>> tucker: hurricane maria hit puerto rico a month ago pretty hard, but the political battle over rebuilding the island continues prior to a meeting with the first to rican governor, ricardo rossello today, president trump rated the american response to the disaster perfect 10 attention. at a lot of people not only disagree, they say the relief effort is subpar, since physically because trump is racist again puerto ricans. watch. >> there is a double standard, which i really believe is

picketed in terms of the response that he has to puerto ricans. >> he is talking to his electoral base. he is showing us that he is just racist. let's call it by its name. >> you have hispanics in puerto rico. he sees them as the others, not his white supporters. these are people that do not look like the overwhelming majority of his donors. >> tucker: god, there are a lot of dumb people on tv. is trump actually bundling my bungling the hurricane response just because he is a racist goon? we have an attorney and democratic commentary. thanks for coming on. if you're going to make the case that the federal government is growing up in response to a hurricane -- i'm absolutely willing to believe that. this group a lot of things. i just don't understand the evidence for racism in this. that seems like an entirely different category. why is this racist? >> to the people who make that argument, they have seen his tweets, the tweets and find the

puerto ricans were lazy, they weren't helping one another, they were lying on the federal government to help them when they could've done these things themselves -- which was impossible. and today, when he spoke with governor rossello, he admitted it. this is an unprecedented situation, it's worse than katrina -- those words from preposterous words exactly. so the tweets, the throwing of the paper rolls, that made people there feel like, what, do you to nature? why are we getting this treatment? there are some people to think the delay occurred because puerto ricans are different somewhat culturally -- different surnames, speak a different language -- because they are removed, and because he does not see them as a state and they don't have the political power and pull electoral votes. maybe if they had electoral votes that would have received a different response. >> tucker: but they are actually not a state. it's not a state, it's a calling, it's a territory. that's a whole separate conversation. i'm not sure why the left suddenly sports colonialism. whatever, you'd do.

as a factual matter, puerto rico is 75% white, according to the u.s. census. i'm not sure how it's -- i'm reading the census numbers. i'm not sure how that's racist. maybe he does not puerto ricans or maybe -- >> tucker, that's a great point that you bring up. a lot of people don't understand that, in puerto rico, you have the mixture of the african culture, the indian culture, and european culture. so there are many people such as myself -- look at my back on. i have asian, chinese and me. there is a mixture of people, ethnicities, races. you really can't say, i'm white, and black, i'm other. it's very complex. >> tucker: you're sorta making my point. it's very complex. the census is self-reported. 79% of the people on puerto rico said, i'm white. >> that is self reporting. that is on the census. >> tucker: that is what people say they are. i'm only saying -- look, i'm not defending the federal response to anything. i would never do that. i always assume it is going to be lame and played, although, by the way, dod and fema were there

before the storm, just say no. but the race angle bothers me because it is unfounded, it makes people hate each other, and it's just stupid. this is a place that is more white than many u.s. states, including our biggest state, california. >> i agree disagree with you on that. >> tucker: what is the difference question marks because they are hispanic, they are latino, they speak a different language. >> tucker: is not a race. >> it's not a race, language is a language. the issue here is that many people feel that the response was delayed. >> tucker: you can explain what you're saying is what you are saying. >> and they are people who speak to relatives of people in puerto rico and people in puerto rico. depending on who you ask -- code no electricity, contaminated water -- >> tucker: i get it. it's not it's a surprise. houston, katrina, there are a lot of responses the government

is laid on. it's when you start alleging a conspiracy based on racism that scares the hell out of people, it divides people, and there is no evidence on it, you presented none. >> that is not my argument. i did not say it was based on race. that is not my argument. you asked me about people making this argument and i explain why some people felt that way. maybe some people should use the term "bigotry." i did not say that was my response. >> tucker: but am wondering why, if we are against colonialism, that we maintain puerto rico as a colony, why can't puerto rico become a country. i don't really understand that. what is the justification for keeping a country in this weird half -- no, i'm serious -- in this weird half-life we don't pay federal income taxes but you are american citizens for example when you're on the island. >> in the last election, tucker -- pardon me, but in the last election, they voted to become a state. many people there voted for puerto rico to become a part of the united states. and that is exactly the reality right now. and that something that should

be discussed. a reportedly brought up that can't know my question to trump and he said he couldn't speak to it because it was political. but these are conversations that should be going on. they are americans. they are u.s. citizens. >> tucker: they don't pay income taxes, it's a little complicated, as reported. evangeline, thank you. >> thank you, tucker, you have a great night. >> tucker: time for "final exam." who will triumph? if you're mad at the media, you might want to watch this

>> tucker: if you are mad at the media, this is your catharsis. it's time for "final exam," where we test which of our news experts actually reads the news. joining us this week, catherine

lyons, managing editor, as well as fox correspondent peter doocy. are you ready? >> no. >> tucker: good. speak or the news? >> tucker: not simply reported but read it. we're going to find out if you have. put your hands on the buzzers, i'm going to ask a series of questions. the first one of you who buzzes and gets to answer first. you must wait until i finish asking the question to do that. every correct answer is worth one point. if you lose get it wrong, you a point. best-of-five wins. are you prepared? >> not really. >> tucker: that is how we like it. despite speculation of a 2020 presidential run, which media mogul said this week she had zero interest in becoming the next president. >> it's oprah. >> tucker: oprah says peter doocy. to the tape we go. >> i'm wondering if you'd narrowed down your short list of vp candidates? >> there will be no running for office of any kind for me.

>> tucker: but still going to be on the cover of her magazine every week, just a guess. peter doocy, the question goes to you. >> i didn't know you are finished. >> tucker: i'm going to be more definitive with the period this time. there was a four-legged animal on the loose in brooklyn, new york, this week after escaping a slaughterhouse. what kind of animal was it? peter doocy again the first buzz in. >> it was a bowl. >> tucker: it was a bowl? were going to go to the tape and tell you if you're right. >> will tell you about another ten to outrun the cops. it is a bull versus the cops in brooklyn. the bull got cut loose from a slaughterhouse, chased him through prospect park. a bunch of people stopped to watch. course, it's brooklyn, so a bunch of didn't notice. >> tucker: by the way, slaughterhouse is a tip-off. this was not a horse. this is not france. >> this is bull. i think my buzzer is broken. >> tucker: a little faster this time, kathryn. question three. a barely recognizable christian

bale, who is an actor, was spotted this week filming his new movie where he is playing which former vice president of the united states, go. [buzzer] peter doocy again >> if your buzzer is not working, because if you're buzzers not working -- >> i'm thinking there's a delayed reaction. i'm going to say is not working. >> richard cheney. >> tucker: richard cheney, richard b cheney. >> christian bale spotted in foam makeup to play former vice president dick cheney. >> that is good. >> tucker: [laughs] that's pretty good. kathryn, this looks like your waterloo, but i think it is at least mathematically possible for you to still win if peter messes up and do prevail. be quick on that. question four, this is multiple-choice. "national geographic" has released its list of the happiest cities in america. the winner this year is which

city in colorado? a, denver, b, aspen, c, boulder. [buzzer] kathryn liens. >> >> boulder. >> tucker: boulder, colorado, says kathryn lyons. >> the streets are made for humans and not just for cars. there's no billboards, and it also happens to be the place that produces argue with the most olympic athletes in the country. >> the answer, boulder, colorado. >> yes, finally. >> no bulls in the streets. >> they said that the streets are billed for humans as opposed to what? >> it would be aspen, but apparently nobody can live there. final question, you ready? it is a war on halloween. people are enraged over an immigration-themed costume being sold at party city. which controversial costume are people -- people being the left -- most upset about.

[buzzer] peter doocy? >> the wall. >> tucker: the wall? there's a wall costume. can i just ask, do you agree with that? the wall? >> i don't disagree. >> tucker: i don't disagree. safe answer. you are a natural washingtonian. >> party city is being called for a party fouled for selling a costume of donald trump's controversial borders wall. men have complained it's insensitive and women are complaining because there is no way to make a slutty border wall. >> tucker: [laughs] by the way, there probably is. the wall, you write party peter doocy. how did you know that? >> it's almost halloween and i investigating all costumes. >> match kennedy over on fox business. i appreciate it. peter, you win. consolation prize goes to you. >> that's all i want. >> tucker: will give it to you

when we do. that's it for this week's "final exam." pay attention to the news over the next week.

>> >> tucker: ann arbor, michigan, is famous for a lot of things. smug liberals too terrified to live in detroit or chicago. the state's second best football program. and now the city is famous for one more thing, bizarre virtue signaling. four, city council members showed solidarity with embattled nfl millionaires, perhaps theeee most entitled class on planet earth by kneeling during the pledge of allegiance during a council meeting. it wasn't about disrespecting the flag or police officers but of course that the entire point of the campaign. on the plus side, it means ann arbor has literally no other

problems. so, congratulations. that is it for us tonight. every night at 8:00, the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. sean hannity is in new york. >> sean: welcome to "hannity." we are broadcasting from the great city of las vegas for a very important reason. we are going to tell you why later in the show. we have major breaking news development in the real russia collusion scandal. weighing in heavily on this scandal, take a look. >> if the mainstream media will cover the uranium scandal and that russia has 20% of our uranium for whatever reason and a lot of people understand what those reasons may be, i think that is your russia story. that is your real russia story. >> sean: we will have the president's full remarks all coming up tonight. meanwhile, the left-wing mainstream m