time of moral crisis, preserve their neutrality." that is "the story" for thursday, october 26. tucker carlson is coming up next. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening, and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." for months, almost a year, actually, the refrain has sounded, "russia hacked the election, russia colluded with donald trump." it was unprecedented behavior, tracing us. we have been told we need a massive, semipermanent investigation to expose all of these crimes. we might even need to nullify the presidential election. let's say that russia did hack the election. but with that look like? a few thousand dollars spent on lame, ineffective facebook ads? probably not. instead it might look like what was actually going on for years

at the d podesta group, the lobbying firm created by john podesta. according to a source we spoke to who worked for podesta for years, the company received huge sums of money from april russia show group in order to bolster russia's interests in washington, all without declaring itself in agent of a foreign power, which are demonstrably was. it might also look like the infamous and fraudulent trump dossier which was compiled in 2016 and then released this past january abide by his feet as a laughably stupid news story. much of that information, the restaurant sources with ties to the kremlin who paid for this -- who paid for this? at one point, from the democratic national committee, or clinton's campaign, possibly even the fbi. let's say you were looking for a smoke and gum in this story, and many are looking for this smoking gun. we have evidence the democrats literally paid money for russian intelligence as well as prove that the top democratic lobbying

firm in washington was getting rich by advancing russian interests. collusion? if that's not collusion, what is collusion? we put a lot of calls out today, and very few democratic lawmakers were interested in talking about this at all. the rare exception was brad sherman of california, the honorable exception, and he joins us tonight. thanks for coming on. >> thank you. i am here to talk about the tax bill. i mean, this is a drop-killing, deficit-exploding drug bill number, texaco, which is the real >> tucker: we don't have a tax bill. we have no idea what the details are. we have literally nothing. >> have a 12-page -- >> tucker: and you look at it to the senate and become something completely different. i would love to debate that because it's interesting, and we might disagree on parts on the make of it, but i want to ask you about --

>> the tax proposal -- >> tucker: this is clever, and i will have you on any day to talk about an actual tax -- >> no, you want. i've been trying to get on your show again and again and again and you only have mount talk about nonsense. >> tucker: really, the nonsense that the democratic party has hijacked the workings of washington for years over this trump story. >> you have got no defense for trump's impeachment. the man has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, and your only defense is, well, hillary did too. you can't impeach a private citizen and say that is a reason not to impeach a president. >> tucker: i think you have jumped off the rails. let me ask you some factual questions. you can put the bumper stickers away. what do you make of the fact that the podesta group, who i know you are personally familiar with, was taking money from russian interests to advance those in washington? >> would like to take a look at it but it is a irrelevant as to

whether we should impeach donald trump. he is guilty of obstruction of justice. >> you're not even going to engage in that question? what you make of the fact that the democratic national committee give money to the people who wrote the trump dossier, whose information came from russian-connected sources? >> that was funded, first and foremost, by trump's republican opponents. >> tucker: correct, whose names we don't know. >> correct. there is nothing in that dossier that appears to be stolen information. once we have here -- >> tucker: first of all, you don't know that. >> i don't know whether martians have landed on this planet. >> tucker: we know for a fact, because it has been conceded, that didn't make that information, and, some of it came from sources around vladimir around vladimir putin. >> and had no effect until after the election. i don't need an excuse, because whether weight -- whether we impeach the character of a private citizen is an

irrelevancy. whether we impeach a president who is guilty of obstruction of justice -- -- >> tucker: i'm talking, hold on. you don't know if he had an effect on the election. >> how can you affect an election by a document that is released three months after the election? >> tucker: the document was run -- the information went to the hillary clinton campaign. >> information that was of absolutely no use. >> tucker: i am a little bit surprised that you have spent the last year telling us that trump has colluded in some way with the russian government and that he has committed, in effect, treason, which is basically what -- >> i don't accuse him of treason. i accuse him of obstruction of justice. of the felony code -- he has committed obstruction of justice three times. it's not the crime, it's the cover up. we learned that with watergate, and we learned that -- richard nixon could not have

stayed in office. >> tucker: richard nixon? i'm trying to ask you a simple question about the news of today -- >> the news of today is this tax bill that is going to cost us millions of jobs. that's what happens. we do have the trump tax proposal that you can't depend but is the official and most significant economic document released by the trump administration. >> tucker: i am searching back to my mental files to recall an example of greater disingenuousness than the one i am witnessing now. you went bananas over the donald trump jr. meeting. "oh, he met with the russians. this is the end of times." >> i never said that. you have me confused with another good-looking bald guy. >> tucker: you are the guy that did that. i'll get the tape. >> it is the obstruction of justice. >> tucker: why it was so poisonous to american democracy for trump or his campaign to have any contact with the russians -- >> no, you've got me confused with some other good-looking bald guy. >> tucker: i follow this for a living. >> i follow this for a living

too, and i know this is the most significant economic document released by the trump administration. you can't defend it, and you want to talk about nonsense. you want to talk about why hillary clinton is bad instead of why donald trump should be impeached. >> tucker: you filed articles of impeachment the day after that story about trump's son broke. >> that wasn't mean. >> tucker: oh, that was just an accident. >> i circulated those articles of impeachment a month before the date you identified. >> tucker: let me ask you a simple question. trump's connections to russia, you have consistently argued, are a big deal. it's not a fake story -- >> no, i have consistently argued that his obstruction of justice as february, may, and july are violations of sections 1512 are felony code. obstruction of justice applies whether there was collusion or not. >> tucker: your entire party has spent the last year telling us that this is the most important thing that has ever happened.

we never evidence the charges you are making against trump a party your party and candidate candidate -- >> january, may, july, obstruction of justice three times. >> tucker: you're not even -- you know what? honestly, it's hard for me to believe, given everything you've said in the last year, that you are putting on this performance now. why don't you just say, look, what hillary did, her campaign painful or gnomic intelligence for the russians, that's bad, but she's not president. you won't even say that. >> i don't know what hillary did. >> tucker: we know exactly what they did, they admitted it this week. >> they admitted they paid for opposition research. every campaign pays for opposition research. >> tucker: this dossier it came from -- >> no, this dossier came from a research film gnomic from an british individual -- >> tucker: who was the british individual, do you know? >> i believe his name was mr. steele. >> tucker: and why was he

hired? the head of the russian desk at am i six. the information was about his ties to russia. they got this information from the russians and they paid russian sources. >> they paid a man to prepare a memo. >> tucker: to bother you at all? not particularly. >> tucker: has the podesta group at her obviate you for anything? >> i believe they have. i believe you are also a friend -- >> tucker: i'm not a friend, and has never lobbied him. and i'm not a friend of tony podesta, but does it bother you that 20 podesta took money from paul manafort with the russians to carry that -- >> does a body that paul manafort was chair of his committee? >> tucker: yes, it does. does it bother you that podesta for most working up half of the russians? >> if it was true, it would bother me. >> tucker: it is true. >> you are asserting it. >> tucker: i'm not asserting it. it is factual. >> you are saying he failed to file a foreign intelligence reports. >> tucker: i believe that's

true. but i know it's true is that they took money from russian interests to represent those interests here in washington. >> well, when you say russian interests, if human private companies, that is different. >> tucker: no, i mean the russian government, i'm in the russian government. >> why don't you want to talk about impeaching a president, and your answer is, "hey, there is this lobbyist" -- >> tucker: because the predicate for this -- >> no, the predicate for this -- it is a patron to have and you haven't bothered to read it. >> tucker: actually, i have. and i think they're more fatuous now but i did before. >> obstruction of justice is a crime, a felony punishable by up to 20 years -- >> tucker: come back when you got a tax bill you want to shout about. >> the tax bill has been released and you can't defend it. >> tucker: a local corresponded at the "washington examiner" joins us tonight. byron, we are going to use your insight now. you just heard congressman

sherman, saying, in effect, it's not a big deal that the hillary campaign paid for this dossier or that the podesta group is lobbying on behalf of the russians. >> could talk about that -- >> tucker: were going to talk about -- yeah. was it a big deal? >> it was a big deal, but even before he had this revelation from "the washington post" that the dnc and the hillary campaign had paid for the dossier, even before we knew that, i think you saw a shift in tone among democrats away from collusion. >> tucker: and started yelling about the tax bill? >> no, they were talking about russia's active measures and the campaign, and russia did have a campaign to influence our presidential election. no doubt about that. and, indeed, you see what the articles of impeachment are about obstruction of justice, about the firing of james comey. to get to a point where collusion doesn't matter. to prove that, it's just that the president obstructed justice. >> tucker: we have repainted

the slogans on the barn. we have never said that. >> but i think what has happened now is, after an attempt to paint russian involvement as a one-way street where the russians were trying to hurt hillary and to help trump and trump was somehow dealing with them, i think we have seen it is a much more complicated picture, because it is a fact that this foreign agent, the former british spy, christopher steel, did get information from russia's gnomic russians were connected to the kremlin. just look at the dossier. the dossier has sourced a and source b, and source c, and the identified as a former senior russian intelligence official or a senior russian financial official. so it's not a secret that they are dealing with people in the russian government connected to the kremlin. what has changed now is we are seeing these democratic efforts to get dirt on trump from russia, and that does sound

suspiciously like what donald trump jr. thought he was going to get in that june 2016 meeting at trump tower when some russians had approached him and claimed to have had some sort of dirt on hillary clinton. they didn't, and that some of the meeting was about. but it's very similar here. >> tucker: we still have a congressman. would you like to interject? >> my articles of impeachment have always been about obstruction of justice. it's not the crime, it's the cover up. we have three different instances of violation of section 1512. weather trump colluded or didn't collude, he tried to stop the investigation. >> tucker: just tell me you are a little embarrassed by these revelations. >> i'm not embarrassed at all. i'm embarrassed we're not here talking about impeaching a president, the things that are important to the american people, not whether the last candidate for president had a good camping or didn't have a campaign. it is as silly as trying to say that richard nixon should be in office because you have dirt on

george. that's insane. >> tucker: thank you very much. euros to the occasion. given the performance you just saw from brad sherman, if democrats were to take control of the house of representatives and the midterm election a little more than a year from now, how long do you think it will take? >> i think that is a bit of a fuzzy question. go back to 2006. george w. bush's poll numbers are in the tank, and it looks like democrats are going to win the house, which they do, but early on in the election, before the election, john conyers, who stood to become the chairman of the fiduciary committee, was talk about impeaching president bush. there was a lot of talk from the left-wing democratic party about impeaching bush, so much so that prior to the election, nancy pelosi, who stood to become speaker, came out and said, impeachment is off the table. they didn't want the election to be about impeachment. and if you have a lot of talk about these articles of impeachment coming up in the next year, that's a good point.

>> tucker: we are out of time. would you like to read the t's, congressman? >> i'll read the t's. the postweinstein backlash against sexual harassment is consuming a top political analyst at msnbc, but what are the risk of accountability turning into, witch hunts, more right-wing take on this, we'll come up right after the commercial. >> tucker: thank you. you know who likes to be in control? this guy. check it out! self-appendectomy! oh, that's really attached. that's why i rent from national. where i get the control to choose any car in the aisle i want, not some car they choose for me. which makes me one smooth operator.

ah! still a little tender. (vo) go national. go like a pro. 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: in the wake of the harvey weinstein scandal, more and more people are being accused of sexual harassment. the latest target is msnbc political analyst and "game change" author. at least seven accusation has been made, but only two have gone public. hbo has canceled plans to adapt his latest book on the 2016 election into a miniseries. what to make of all of this? we have a radio show host with us tonight. we are not friends, he appears to have admitted some of this obliquely. i am set to weigh in, except one part of it sticks out, in this case, and as and a lot of others, a lot of the accusations are coming anonymously. it doesn't mean they're not true, but one of the key is to american justice, i think, has always been, you get to face your accuser. to get to know who what you're being accused of and who is charging it. that seems to not be enforced anymore.

>> i think mr. halperin does know who is making the accusations. the issue is not that we deserve to know. >> tucker: that's a good point. >> i agree is concerned when you got accusations made that affect someone's future, and we have dealt with this on campus, et cetera, with accusations versus targets. but in the case of someone like halperin, i would argue anyone in that position where you are not dealing with famous actresses, perhaps still women who are in vulnerable positions, where there could be some retaliation, the ability to do this anonymously, especially when they're multiple accusations, now they are saying that it was, just like weinstein, an open secret, that it may, in fact, it still be faced if these particular women to do it in this fashion. and yes, when we are looking at this -- why we know the names n it comes to harvey weinstein, it is perhaps easier because you've got women now who are somewhat established, who have names who americans feel that they know. but i think there is an even higher risk for the unknown,

nonfamous women, frankly, women in hollywood who our own crews, who are behind the camera, ordering technical things. i think it is fair that this but there is an anonymous dynamic as long as internally, over at nbc, in this case, that things are handled fairly for these women. >> tucker: i wandered from her news perspective what our responsibility is. there is no other alleged crime where you would print the name of the accused but not the accuser. we would never say tammy bruce has been accused of embezzling money by an anonymous person. the anonymous person would have to be named. i wonder why news organizations sort of only print half the story. >> consider the context. this now seems like a wave, right? >> tucker: definitely a wave. >> this is a push. this is an environment where each step has encouraged other

women to come forward, whereas they were thinking, maybe it's okay now, a safe time to do it, now some recognition that apparently -- there is a report that nbc, the network, new as these allegations at the time, that these women were not silent. so you have background for other action was taken. >> tucker: that's a different thing right there. if abc network news -- >> again, all of this is going to work out in a certain sense. but as we report these things, we know also that these are accusations, their allegations. and if mr. halperin is going to make certain decisions, as has hbo and his publishers. we have a responsibility to make sure we are talking about the larger issue, the things that are affected, the kinds of women affected, the nature of our responsibility. also, as people in that environment with abc, people who may have known, and certainly in hollywood, that conversation

still happens about the vulnerability of women, but then my point, as a feminist is, the older women, financially secure, who are not at risk, where do those women come in here, and is our feminism responsible? do we have a duty to speak up when we do know? and i think that that is something that is key for all of us at this point. >> tucker: well, yeah, of course. people who say they represent women and keep this information secret -- >> or even act against them, like the lisa bloom case, a lawyer who is using feminism is almost like a slogan and ben is abusing that simply for what might just be personal enrichment or at least the opposite of what -- >> tucker: of course. of course. she is selling -- >> feminism has become a business, and this is something that we need to also take back, i think i'm a little bit. >> tucker: tammy bruce, a clear thinker. thank you. >> thanks, tucker.

>> tucker: yesterday we told you about jesus campos' mysterious visit to mexico. the head of his union is here to answer our questions about that, which is good. next. millions of us suffer from the symptoms of dry eye. theratears® unique electrolyte formula, corrects the salt imbalance that causes dry eye. so your eyes will thank you. more than eye drops, dry eye therapy. theratears®.

>> tucker: last night on the show, we should do a customs documented that indicate that mandalay bay security guard jesus campos made a previously unknown visit to mexico, at 700 miles round trip from vegast days of stephen paddock's mass

shooting, even though campos was a major witness, the major witness to the massacre, and apparently was shot in the leg during it. it raised a lot of questions about the shooting, like whether campos was a licensed security guard, whether he interacted with stephen paddock in the past. in a shooting with so many mysteries, it seemed like a reasonable question, but so far police have stonewalled us, hung up on us, when we asked them. fortunately, the head of campos' union is more forthcoming. david hickey is the president and he joins us tonight. mr. hickey, thank you for coming on. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: resources jesus campos' story is of great interest to his employer, mgm, and they are doing whatever they can to shape it. is that your sense? >> i think mr. campos' story is of great interest to everyone on the tragedy. >> tucker: es. let me ask you a couple of questions. just factual ones, we don't know them. what was his job at the hotel?

>> jesus is a security officer, or was a security officer, at mandalay resorts. >> tucker: is a licensed by the state? how does that work? >> no, security officers that work directly for our company, in-house security, they do not have to be licensed. they don't have to have guard cards, security cards. if they work for a contract agency, then, yes, they do. >> tucker: we tried to get an answer from the clark county sheriff yesterday and he wouldn't reveal that. you were aware that mr. campos went to mexico shortly after the shooting, correct? >> yes, i was. >> tucker: and what was the purpose of that trip? do you know? >> he told me directly that was a preplanned trip. he had planned to go visit family, and after the shooting, he was still capable of doing that, so he went ahead and made that trip on the weekend. i spoke with the local officers.

i was actually going to fly in on that weekend, and because mr. campos was going to be visiting family and returning on monday, then i flew in that monday to meet with mr. campos. >> tucker: huh. no one would begrudge the man a vacation, of course, but because he was a key witness in this investigation that was still ongoing and chaotic at that point, did investigators have qualms about him leaving? >> not to my knowledge. there were no qualms about him leaving, because his plans had been made prior and he intended to return on monday, which he did. >> tucker: by car up and back? >> up and back, yes. >> tucker: can you describe the nature of his injuries? >> mr. campos was wounded in the left thigh. two fragments of a shell hit him in the left thigh, and when i met him for the first time on

that monday, he was recuperating. he was in good spirits and looking to tell his story and move on with his life. >> tucker: had those fragments been removed when he took the trip to mexico? >> you know, i was told one of them had been removed and one had not. they were going to do with that issue at a later date. >> tucker: had mr. campos ever seen stephen paddock before the shooting? >> not to my knowledge. >> tucker: does he still work for mgm? >> he still works for mgm, yes. >> tucker: did they set up the "ellen" interview, his employer? >> i don't know who set up the "ellen" interview. we had five interviews set up prior to that. i know that when i was in town, ellen's interviewer, the person that schedules the interviewers, called mr. campos on his cell phone. he handed me the phone, i took the phone. responded to her that she could

call to arrange an interview if she wanted, and then we didn't hear from her. of course, after that, mr. campos was taken to a clinic on thursday. >> tucker: but why did he skip the interviews? >> i can't speak for mr. campos on that. i've had no contact with him since that time. i think it is mr. campos' story, and i think he has a right to tell it on his own. but as far as we were concerned, we were prepared for the interviewers. we were hours away, five hours away from actually doing the first one. >> tucker: and then he disappeared without explanation. do you know where he went? >> received a text saying that, "we are taking him to the quick care." >> tucker: into his "we?" who was taking him? >> when we left the room, we were having a meeting with three upper level mgm management

people, and when we left the room that we were in, left the living room, it was mr. campos, one other security officer, a fellow member of the union, and then there was a corporate security officer. >> tucker: of course there was. mgm in charge, clearly. thank you very much for all of that. it really interesting. speak all right, thank you. >> tucker: john f. kennedy was shot more than 50 years ago, 54 years ago, actually, get the fbi and cia are still fighting over the release of some the documents related to that case. not that they are hiding anything. we'll talk to two experts on the kennedy assassination and who wl explain why this is happening. stay tuned. tums chewy bites. fast relief in every bite. crunchy outside. chewy inside. tum tum tum tum tums chewy bites.

i have no idea how we're going to get through this. follow me. unitedhealthcare has the people and tools to help guide you through the confusion. well that wasn't so bad at all. that's how we like it. unitedhealthcare. >> tech: so you think this chip is nothing to worry about? well at safelite, we know sooner or later every chip will crack. these friends were on a trip when their windshield got chipped. so they scheduled at safelite.com. they didn't have to change their plans or worry about a thing. i'll see you all in a little bit. and i fixed it right away with a strong repair they can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> tech: being there whenever you need us that's another safelite advantage. >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace.

afi sure had a lot on my mind. my 30-year marriage... ...my 3-month old business... plus...what if this happened again? i was given warfarin in the hospital, but wondered, was this the best treatment for me? so i made a point to talk to my doctor. he told me about eliquis. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots and reduces the risk of them happening again. not only does eliquis treat dvt and pe blood clots. eliquis also had significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. eliquis had both...

...and that turned around my thinking. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. plus had less major bleeding. both made eliquis right for me. ask your doctor if switching to eliquis is right for you. >> tucker: a fox news alert, the most delayed in history. 54 years later, the jfk piles are finally being made public or were supposed to be.

more than 3,000 documents pertaining to the kennedy assassination investigation were supposed to be released today. the president touted that on twitter. many of them, though, are now being withheld yet again as the cia and other agencies make reactions to them. they overruled the president of the united states, evidently, in case you're wondering who is really in charge. why are they doing this? what could they be hiding? the chairman of the house committee forensic pathology panel that investigated jfk's death in the '70 spiritual poster, the author of the celebrated book "case closed to be her bell swelled and the assassination of jfk." they both join us tonight. first to you. i know you have written kind of the premier book arguing for the single shooter and the conspiracies, and he really did a lot of work on it. you can see why, and i have read your book and loved it -- but you can see what it took the cia, 54 years later, basically

telling the president, no, we're not releasing it, we need to redact more. they are hiding something. what could he possibly be hiding? >> tucker, you're absolutely right. it's infuriating, because the longer they hold onto these files, the longer they fight for them, they give people the feeling that they have to be hiding something big. as a matter of fact, i started to look at some of those that have been released now, 54 years later, and they are going to spawn all types of new conspiracy theories because it is very hard to put them in context. you are grabbing one file from 1963 from the central fbi office out to a field office reporting that somebody said, "oh, on kennedy's funeral, there's going to be an assassination plot against earl warren." i guarantee people are going to be going down rabbit holes chasing this. it's going to create a new industry. it's unfortunate. it's what these intelligence agencies do. the over classified documents, the keep them forever, they fight they release, and they are still doing it. >> tucker: how can i trust you if you liked me constantly? doctor, what do you think the cia because you've seen a lot of evidence in this case.

what could they possibly want to hold from public view? >> well, embarrassing information. they didn't do their job right, presumably. the fbi didn't properly deal with oswald, in dallas, complaining to the dallas fbi agents there that he didn't want them to be interviewing his wife, and that it appeared that hoover, the fbi, the cia did things that would be embarrassing for them. not that would reveal anything that would create a conspiracy with anybody. they release the route of kennedy the day before so that oswald happened to see that he is driving by where he happened to be working, and that is why he brought his rifle there. so there was no conspiracy, just bad management by various agencies. >> tucker: that's usually the case. gerald posner, you've seen some of the documents that have been

recently released. what did they tell us? anything interesting? >> it is very hard to draw those conclusions right away. i'm always afraid of cherry picking information, because there's got to be a document behind that that's going to contradict what you just are. very interesting, the size of this investigation. you get that clarity in 1963 in terms of the fbi notices flying back and forth. i think that one of the things we can find is exactly what dr. baden was talking about before, with the cia has always held back. remember, this was an intelligence agency, tucker, that lied to the warren commission when the warren commission was doing its own investigation on who killed kennedy. they didn't want the commission to find out that they were in league with the mafia to kill a head of state -- not kennedy, but castro. that didn't come up for another ten years. they've always been concerned about what we can public from all of the anti-castro work. i think we will find some of that here, but maybe not in this release. according to the cia, they're holding back. they want to redact about 1% of the 18,000 cia documents left.

about 180 documents they would like to redact some of the namet to be every word on every document has to be public. that will be the fight for the next six months. >> tucker: that's insane. the president just overruled. thank you both very much. i appreciate it. speak with thank you, tucker. >> thank you. >> tucker: it is time for "final exam." we have got two fox news hosts to enter the arena. we will find out which of them has been paying more attention to the news in this chaotic week of news. that's next. ♪

...you might be missing to stasomething... ♪ ...your eyes. that's why there's ocuvite. it helps replenish nutrients your eyes can lose as you age. nourish your eyes to help keep them healthy. ocuvite. be good to your eyes. and never lobbied him. for the lowest price on our rooms guaranteed. plus earn free nights and instant rewards at check-in. yeah. like i said. book now at choicehotels.com

♪ >> tucker: time now for "final exam" where we picked two up major figures in the news business against one another to see if they have been paying attention at work. our contestants this week,

shannon bream, a host of "fox news at night," which debuts that monday, this coming monday, going to watch every night, and brian kilmeade, host of "fox & friends," fox news radio, and the author of a fantastic new book called "andrew jackson and the miracle of new orleans. we are honored to have you both. >> i am honored to be here and to see shannon. i heard you are working on a new show. this thing goes on forever. >> tucker: it is cavernous. like a movie studio. >> he is a movie star, so that feels appropriate. >> tucker: i love doing the introduction. see if they are paying attention at work. we're going to find out right now. here are the rules. hands on buzzers. i would ask the questions. the first one of you to boatswain gets to answer the question. you have to wait till i finish asking it though. there is a penalty for earth's economic early buzzing. get it right, get a point, kevin at wrong, it was a point. >> if she gets it wrong, which could happen, can i come in second? >> tucker: that's it.

>> the buzzer is important. >> tucker: ready? >> this is a lot of pressure. >> tucker: ? a popular viral video shows a man soaring high above the plains of southern africa, but in lieu of a plane or helicopter, what is his unusual method of flight? [laughter] [buzzer] >> tucker: brian kilmeade, ladies and gentlemen. >> pass. no. drone. >> tucker: drone. let's go to the tape. >> look at this. strapped himself to a lawn chair, gutsy move, 100 helium balloons, flying over 1500 miles across typical south africa up, reaching heights of 8,000 feet. >> tucker: let me check with the judges. [buzzer] does a lawn chair with leaves count as a drone? no, it doesn't. >> what kind of game is this? that's the show right before me. >> here is what i loved. i thought the video was going to be a video clip of bryant reading the story about the launch.

>> tucker: that would be good! here's a chance at redemption. a wild scene on capitol hill as a tackler ranting about treason threw something at the president of the united states. what did he throw? [buzzer] shannon bream? >> the russian flag. >> tucker: the russian flag says shannon bream feuded to the tape we go >> call it treason, call it treason! >> tucker: what do i know about the russian flag. the score, just for those of you keeping track, 1--negative one. question three. new york city mayor bill de blasio ingrid students when you push for changes to the new york city cafeteria menu. some schools would no longer be serving what?

[buzzer] or until meat? >> pizza. >> tucker: pizza. to the tape ago. pizza. >> these schools, like ps one, will be offering all vegetarian lunch and breakfast menus on mondays. even if you had a bacon egg and cheese this morning, you still should want to see more and more of our diets go to a plant-base. >> tucker: is there anyone procure them bill de blasio? >> i could have had that answer. >> tucker: by the way, you know he sleeps until 11:00, he works out, and then he leaves his door open, lays on his couch with a newspaper over his head. when people walk by, he stays up late at night, gets up, works out, then rests. >> keep reading. you don't know. what if he is nearsighted. what >> tucker: not to rub it i, it is 1 negative 2.

question, amazon, the company, introduced a interesting news service. for a fee, you can have your delivery driver do but with the amazon package? [buzzer] shannon bream? >> put them inside your house. stu and i don't believe it. it's too weird. but we'll see if your right. >> amazon is taking things a few steps farther, literally. delivering those packages not just to your doorstep but inside your home. it's called amazon key. >> tucker: how did you know that? >> i mean, i've been watching news programming. >> tucker: would you let amazon into your home? >> heck to the no. >> tucker: i would say this, what about a a for effort. i just took a guess. you just don't play. >> tucker: if you answer the final question correctly, you could get to it negative one.

if your answer in japanese, you can win. >> domo arigato, mr. robata. can we get an update on the score first? >> tucker: judges that this is a 2-point question. >> i could do as well as lindsey graham did in the primaries. >> tucker: this may, honolulu, the first american city to make it illegal to do what while crossing the street? >> hint? >> tucker: does anyone watch tv here? the buzzer didn't go off. [buzzer] brian kilmeade. >> one more time with the question. >> makes me want to be make it illegal to do while crossing the street in honolulu? >> text. student text. that sounds reasonable. >> no more texting and walking, stating that if you are caught doing this, you will be paying

8:30 five dollars fine. >> ! >> tucker: you are back to par, back to 0. >> i'm not even good at that, but there is no proof that i was here. i came here with the same score i entered with. >> tucker: we are preparing the headline, shannon bream actually reads the news. >> i watch "tucker," i watch "fox & friends," i listen to kilmeade on the radio. i'm dialed in. >> tucker: i'll see you tomorrow night to talk about your new book. brian kilmeade will be back tomorrow. >> same outfit. >> tucker: the same outfit. stay tuned into the news, over the week, you can play along. we'll be back next thursday. prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember.

expestandard.e lexus rx with advanced safety. lease the 2017 rx 350 for $399 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. advil liqui-gels minis. our first concentrated pill

that rushes powerful relief. a small new size that's fast, cause it's liquid. woohoo! you'll ask, what pain? new advil liqui-gels minis. our recent online sales success seems a little... strange?nk na. ever since we switched to fedex ground business has been great. they're affordable and fast... maybe "too affordable and fast." what if... "people" aren't buying these books online, but "they" are buying them to protect their secrets?!?! hi bill. if that is your real name. it's william actually. hmph! affordable, fast fedex ground. yes or no?gin. do you want the same tools and seamless experience across web and tablet? do you want $4.95 commissions for stocks, $0.50 options contracts? $1.50 futures contracts? what about a dedicated service team of trading specialists? did you say yes? good, then it's time for power e*trade.

the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. looks like we have a couple seconds left. let's do some card twirling twirling cards e*trade. the original place to invest online.

a heart transplant... that's a whole different ballgame. i was in shock. i am very proud of the development of drugs that can prevent the rejection and prevent the recurrence of the original disease. i never felt i was going to die. we know so much about transplantation. and we're living longer. you cannot help but be inspired by the opportunities that a transplant would offer. my donor's mom says "you were meant to carry his story". >> tucker: this fbi agent, radicalizing islamic groups in this country. that was dangerous work. when he spoke to us today, he

hid his identity. a prosthetic nose, chin, forehead. amazing. here's part of what he had to say. in your book, you describe -- i don't think you are bragging. how completely fooled the extremists you lived among were by her cover. how did you convince you are one of them? >> i studied them. how do you make friends, tucker? day-to-day. naturally. proper evolution of a relationship. you try to inject yourself, create the proper persona, we call that a legend. into the individual. i studied a pattern of life. what they do, what they don't do. what they eat and what they don't like to eat. where they go, what they do when they're not being jihadists. once i have that, it's not hard

to crack that legend. >> tucker: if you need a prosthetic to come and tell your story, your life has got to be very weird at this point. you have to take a lot of precautions to keep from getting killed and also your family. what is not like? >> it's a bit of conundrum. here i am, talking to you. if the message i believe very strongly. for people who don't have a voice but also for the men and women of the fbi who combat terrorism everyday to keep our country safe. i'm hoping americans know there is muslims and non-muslims at the tip of the sphere in the global war of to back on terror. hoping this message gets out. speak >> you can catch part oner full interview tomorrow at 8:00. check out tamer elnoury's book. "american radical." really an amazing story. that's it for us tonight. tune in every night at eight for

the show that it's a sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness and especially groupthink. it's really hurting this country. "hannity" takes over an hour from new york city. sean. >> sean: you are not going to want to miss any minute of this show. fox news alert, things are breaking very fast on three big major news stories we are covering tonight. we have new developments in the uranium one scandal. the phony russian propaganda dossier story. the clinton campaign paid for all of this. a huge win. the irs now admitting they were targeted by the obama administration. tea party groups. these massive scandals can no longer be ignored. we will demand answers from all of the people directly involved and that means it's time for hillary clinton and yes, president obama, to come clean about colluding with the russians and explain