most-watched, most trusted, most grateful that you spend the evening with us. good night from washington for "fox news @ night"! i am shannon bream. ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." the attorney general jeff sessions spent five hours on capitol hill today talking about russia and its alleged influence on donald trump's presidential campaign. that's not the only big story that involves russia and the attorney general. yesterday sessions announced in the letter that he has directed the department of justice to take a closer look at the obama era and uranium one deal, something we have covered a lot on the show. in that letter the attorney general signaled he was open to appointing a special counsel to investigate that deal, and any involvement by hillary clinton. richard is a lawyer, he has advised both of hillary clinton's presidential campaigns

and he joins us tonight. richard, things were coming on. >> good to be back, thanks for having me. >> tucker: i want to start on a totally apolitical note, american to american, does itke bother you at all that the obama administration allowed russia, given all you now believe about russia, access to a pretty large percentage of our uranium reserves? >> no. let me give you three facts as to why not. first, it uranium is dear commodity. t the price has come down by three quarters over the past ten years. d kazakhstan is the biggest source of uranium on the planet. russia basically has good control over that. russia has its own uranium, okay? and the uranium that russia ended up controlling thanks to uranium one, which incidentally, hillary clinton had zero role in to the extent that it went out of the country at all, most of it won't, it went to canada, got reprocessed and came back to the

u.s.s. >> tucker: hold on, just as a factual matter, some of it went beyond canada. it left without an export. i'm a little confused and we will get to hillary in just a second, but i'm a little confused given that you come on the show so many say that russia is our primary adversary on the global stage and they seek to undermine the u.s. government. we are at war with them, that you would be comfortable with giving them control of some of our uranium. what would be the strategic benefit to the united states in doing that? why would we do that? >> again, there's a commodity that has come down by three quarters in price over the past ten years. that tells you it's not a very dear commodity. what you are suggesting is the person who owns that land out in wyoming or wherever should be made to sit on it rather than capitalizing on it. >> tucker: no, i'm saying that if you believe the russia is a threat to the united states you probably wouldn't want to give

them control over it.f and if that uranium was w meaningless, answer this if you what, why did the clinton foundation encourage uranium one to hire the podesta group to lobby the clinton state department for this deal approval? d if it was not a big deal, why would they go to the trouble off hiring the brother of hillary's campaign manager to lobby forer the deal? i'm confused. >> you will have to ask them, i have no idea.se because of the fact that hillary clinton had no role of herself under the committee for the foreign investment in the united states, there's nine agencies, the treasury is the lead agency. it never reached hillary's desk. so you have to ask them why. >> tucker: hold on, i'm a little bit confused because we know from the last campaign that hillary clinton was the most successful and best informed secretary of state in the history of this republic.. >> that's true. >> tucker: given that, why wouldn't she be involved in the transfer of ownership of an essential natural resource like uranium to our primary political

adversary? it seems negligent, i'm serious. >> the premise is its use mainly in nuclear power plants, which are not economic thanks to the low price of natural gas. that's the problem with this story. >> tucker: hold on, wait a second. if that's true, then why was the russian government so anxious to get this done that they hired the podesta group in order to lobby hillary?an what do you know that they didn't know? why would they spend that moneyy trying to lobby her if it was not a big deal and she had no role? i >> we know that the russian economy is in the tank. it is smaller than italy or something like that. >> tucker: i thought there were a huge threat to us. a i'm confused. >> my point is we don't exactly look to the russians to make smart economic decisions. so whoever they hired to do this, you have to ask them. >> tucker: they are irrational, but hold on, there are a lot of questions to which i don't know the answer, i'm not going to pretend that i do.

i don't have the full story line here. but typically in washington where you live, and you know well, when people hire a lobbyist to lobby someone, they are spending their own money to do that, they are expecting something in return. you are saying it was totally accidental, it was irrational, and hillary didn't -- okay. why would they hire the podesta group? >> the process is a complicated process. any entity that wants to go i through it needs to actually have its ducks in a row, and whether it's the podesta group or any other law firm throughoum the city that makes big money helping companies get through. in this case it was podesta, the next day will be somebody else. this is not that big a deal and the core issue is that uranium is just not that treasured. >> tucker: it's not that big a deal.t would you recommend handing over more of our uranium surprise for -- supplies to the russian government? >> first of all, we are not handing over -- >> tucker: we are allowing the

country that is seeking our destruction to have control of some of our uranium. would you recommend the trumpou administration pursue that same policy? is that a wise policy? >> the amount of uranium --he >> tucker: would you be happier if the trump people did that? >> it would be a problem to relinquish uranium if we started building tons of nuclear power plants, but with our demand for nuclear weapons, it's not. that's the fantasy underlying this. >> tucker: is that the only use for uranium? i can't really tell. on some topics you seem to think russia is a disorganized impoverished state that poses no threat to us. and in others they are a supers, villains that "hacked our election." >> the only thing it has going for it is its villainy. its economy is not strong, but the fact of the matter is, kazakhstan has 39% of the worlds uranium. russia's neighbor. russians have control over that. they don't really need to come here to steal our resource. c >> tucker: but for some reason they did. i wonder why.

richard, thank you for joining us. fascinating. despite supposedly being a russian operation, for somend reason the trump white house has cracked down on russia today. the kremlin news outlet was informed yesterday by doj that it must now register as a foreign agent. a lot of journalists in washington are applauding this, why is that? watching carefully, a seniorgt editor, and he joins us tonight. max, it's no defense of the content of rt to wonder why journalists were rightly concerned about and a government to regulate their product are applauding the regulation of this cable channel, why is that? >> "the washington post" has said democracy dies in darkness, but they have been pushing this campaign against rt on what i would consider a shoddy basis. we are watching them fall apart and other mainstream outlets or bring in the darknessd with silence.

the aclu is silent on this matter. rt was threatened with the arrest of its news director. and the seizure of its assets. we are witnessing the rebirth of the kind of knew mccarthyism in my opinion. let me talk about why i think this is happening. i go on rt fairly regularly and the reason i do so is while the three major cable networks are promoting bombing and sanctioning half the world, at least the noncompliant nations, rt is questioning that, they let me talk about for example with the real sources of foreign influence are in this town, including the israel lobby, and organizations like aipac, which have been promoting a humanitarian catastrophe in the, gaza strip, war on lebanon, war on iran, and which is not required for some reason to register as a foreign agent, and i don't know why that is. >> tucker: are there other news organizations that have been required to register as foreign agents other than this one? >> i think there are three, and

they did so voluntarily, so this is an unprecedented step and another indication of why it happened was the january odni report which accused rt of such horrible sins as hosting a third party debate, presenting an antiwar view in syria where the u.s. and its allies have been waging a proxy war to promote regime change. and promoting radical discontent. so that means giving a platform to voices like myself, or abbys martin, the former host of v "breaking the set," or chris hedges, who hosts anst emmy-nominated show for rt. the former middle east bureau chief of "the new york times." this is an unprecedented step, an attack on press freedom, and we are hearing complete silence from the mainstream media, which is pushing this campaign ofte hysteria. >> tucker: to me that is the remarkable part of this, because reporters have, and i think it's noble most of the time, this

reflective instinct to defend the right of news organizations to say what they want. but not in this case.ti i just don't understand, where was the committee to protect journalism on this? >> during the obama era, i think it was robert gibbs, his press secretary, he said fox news is not a real news organization. jake tapper stood up in the white house press gallery and said no, fox news is our sisterp organization, we must defend it, but jake tapper has been driving the campaign against rt america, basically inciting against itsr american employees and we see this from cnn and msnbc with no content analysis.l let's talk about the real foreign influence in washington from, for example, the saudi and uae monarchies, which are responsible for the worst humanitarian catastrophe in the world in yemen. why do we never hear about that on any news network except forwo rt? that speaks to why there is so much hostility towards rt. they are exposing the real sources of influence in this

town. >> tucker: max, thank you, appreciate that analysis. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: joined now by fox senior political analyst brit hume to help unravel part of what happened today with the attorney general. as you saw, the attorney general came under what seemed like fire from republicans on the hill who are anxious to see an independent counsel investigation of the clintons and uranium one. explain that if you would. >> republicans want an independent counsel investigation of the clintons and uranium one for much the same reason the democrats wanted special counsel investigation of russian meddling in the election. because they think it will reflect badly on the other side. and sessions, i think to his credit, resisted saying that he was going to do that. he said he would have the appropriate people under the manual that governs the behavior of people in the department of justice look at it and see if

the facts of the case met the standard for the appointment of a special counsel. that's where the matter was left. >> tucker: so what do you think is likely to happen? do you think there will be an independent counsel or a couple of them? >> i don't know. that will depend on what lawyers in the department say. i know some conservatives who want this to happen veryat pessimistic because they think the career lawyers left over from the obama years will be the ones who make the call and it will never happen. my own view, for what it's worth, is the speciall counsel's are always and everywhere a bad idea, and the reason is not that they are not honorable people who conduct these investigations. the reason is that you are carving out a certain case for i investigation by a largely unaccountable prosecutor who has but one case that he or she must deal with. there is ostensibly a grant of what is called a measure of

independence, but as a practical matter it is nearly total independence with a virtually unlimited budget for the special counsel to go forward. it amounts to a roving commission. we see that illustrated, we've seen it time and time again, offenses that were never -- one would never have contemplated when an investigation is undertaken and of being prosecuted. the manafort case is one example. the activities that were charged in that case occurred, nearly all of them, before the trump campaign was even born and had nothing so far as we know whatever to do with the trump campaign and its relations with russia, which were a part of the investigation. but once these things get started, they can metastasize in any direction. it's not as if the department of justice can look at this and say we've got a long list of things we need to investigate and can possibly prosecute. this particular matter does not rank high enough to warrant the commission of resources to it.

it would be a lower priority matter. once you put the special counsel on the case it is priority one and he can go wherever he wants, he can use such fbi resources as he needs, and on and on it goes. i just think as a constitutional matter i think there is an accountability issue that these things raise that have not been satisfactorily answered. i >> tucker: next thing you have fbi agents pulling out of the shower, which just happened. thank you very much.ke >> and come into your home in the wee hours of the morning for some federal criminal financial offense. really. >> tucker: wouldn't want that! thank you. >> you bet. >> tucker: a national hero may have been eaten by giant crabs. when? who? that's next. with the investigation well under way, we will ask the republican congressman wide the

party's leading democrats take the driver's seat on that issue. puzzling. next. ♪ can i give it to you straight? that airline credit card you have... it could be better. it's time to shake things up. with the capital one venture card, you get double miles on everything you buy, not just airline purchases. seriously, think of all the things you buy. great...is this why you asked me to coffee? well yeah... but also to catch-up. what's in your wallet?

we're on a mission to show drip coffee drinkers, it's time to wake up to keurig. wakey! wakey! rise and shine! oh my gosh! how are you? well watch this. i pop that in there. press brew. that's it. so rich. i love it. that's why you should be a keurig man! full-bodied. are you sure you're describing the coffee and not me?

♪ ♪ >> tucker: last fall, republicans took over all levels of government.ve you may remember when that happened. it was a campaign defined by the issue of immigration. a lot of issues, but it's fair to say that was the biggest one. donald trump unequivocally for protection of the border and for reshaping immigration policy to serve the interests of americans, ordinary americans, not just big donors who want cheap housekeepers. democrats meanwhile moved in the opposite direction. they created sanctuary cities, demanded amnesty for people here illegally.

they attacked the very idea of citizenship as bigoted. in the end, trump won. democrats lost. in part because of their relative positions on this issue. given all of that, it was just a year ago, it was bewildering to read a piece just two days ago with this title. "democrats in the driver's seat on daca."go according to that story, congressional democrats are confident they can get republicans to concede to a full amnesty for all daca recipients with no concessions. not a concession unlimited chain migration, not one to block another even bigger amnesty a decade down the road. unnamed democrats in this piece were quoted openly boasting then can do whatever they want and immigration. they can move the country as far left as they care to because they believe the president has given up on the issue, doesn't want to fight it. republicans in congress of course don't care about enforcing immigration law, a lot of them anyway.

can this be true? sadly, it might be true. on immigration many republican lawmakers actively despise the abuse of their own voters. they are happy to let just abouv anyone into this country illegally and hand them citizenship even though they know for a fact that virtually everyone will vote democrat. is it reckless? is it self destructive? is a terrible for america? yes, it is, it is all those things and yet it is happening. the president shouldn't fall for this trick. he was elected by american citizens not by daca recipients. it turns out in polling this week less than 30% of americans think giving giving illegal immigrants citizenship is a low priority. a lot of other things, like a drug epidemic that is paralyzing regions. middle class is shrinking and getting poorer. republicans were elected to fix those problems, maybe they should start there. congressman from arizona joins us tonight.ey thanks for coming on. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: this piece was t surprising to those who were

paying attention to the last election's signature issue, i think it's fair to say of the trump campaign was immigration and tightening the border. this piece suggests that the republicans are unwilling to demand real concessions in exchange for legalizing people here illegally, is that true? >> i think there is a struggle there. i think the democrats and the left in general have been very capable of using some of these children as almost like human policy shields. i've seen over the years -- my life has been about children's issues, and primarily children's issues and national security is what i do in congress, and it has been especially difficult c for me to see the policies of the left.nd they use this notion it's for the children that they're doing it, but many times that ends up being the worst thing for the children. i've seen it so many times and i think this is another example where they use the leverage of m making it sound like republicans don't care about children. and they work on it psychologically better ways and are that are pretty effective,

but if you really look at it c carefully, some of thehe immigration policies used in the obama administration put a lot of children from south of the border at risk because it encouraged them to come over the border. >> tucker: i think that's right. but then why not fix it, why not say everybody feels sorry for people brought here as children stateless without citizenship, of course.t it's not a matter of being made to the children, but why should the united states, at a time when so many people don't have jobs and wages are stagnant, allow people who get citizenship to bring all the relatives with them? chain migration to continue? why can't republicans say we are not doing this unless you can see that that's not part of the deal? i don't understand.es >> i obviously agree with you completely.an the chain migration thing. the terrorists that shot so many people up brought 23 people over with him. i know that's a common understanding among a lot of folks, but the bottom line is, one of the greatest things thatn america can do for the world's

children is to make sure we protect the foundational policies in this flagship of freedom called america so we can continue to be the example in the beacon of freedom for the whole world, so the people whole never get a chance to come here, which is by far the vast majority of children in the world, that they have a chance to be the beneficiaries of the leadership this country provides to the world. >> tucker: here is what confuses me, i thought one of the lessonr of the last election was american voters would like their government to pay attention to things that matter to them. and not put people from other countries ahead of them in lineh and yet i keep reading story after story saying republicans in the congress -- it quotes a lot of them -- saying we've got to deal with this. really because 60,000 people died of drug ods. i don't see american, i don't see the same anxiousness to deal with that problem, why? >> i do think that, like i say, the left has tried to portray republicans as uncaring towards

children. and we just have to be strong enough to say we know who we are. like i said, i used to head the governor's office for children. i chair the orphans and vulnerable children's caucus, the adoption caucus, the foster youth congress and i cochair the pro-life caucus in congress. these issues are extremely important to me and i'm a little tired of the left, who stands up and supports killing children moments before they are born, most of the democrats in the house voted against protecting born, alive children, and i'm tired of them telling me that we don't care about children. in using it as leverage. >> tucker: they will keep saying it no matter what. congressman, thank you for that. >> thank you, sir. >> tucker: feminists help save bill clinton's first presidency 20 years ago after he faced a wave of sexual misconduct allegations, is it time to hold them to account? why do professional feminists always ride to the rescue of sexual harassers they agree with? coming up. let's begin.

yes or no? 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.

♪ of thoughts and ♪ wdreams that scatter ♪k ♪ you pull them all together ♪ and how, i can't explain ♪ oh yeah, well well well youuuu ♪ ♪ you make my dreams come true ♪ well, well, well youuuu topped steak & twisted potatoes at applebee's. eatin' good in the neighborhood. >> tucker: alabama senate candidate roy moore remains in the news tonight, embattled is the cliche we use.r: more allegations have emerged about his behavior in the 1970s and '80s. one woman says moore sexually assaulted her at the age of 16. as evidence that that that you actually know each other she pulled out a high school yearbook that he apparently signed.ea others have accused moore of being banned from a local shopping mall because he kept trying to pick up young women

who were hanging around orange julius. moore has vehemently denied all of this. who is telling the truth? at this point it's impossible to know for sure. here's what we do know for sure, roy moore should respond to specific allegations with specific explanations.e, it's not enough to say people don't like him for what he believes. in a recent tweet, moore declared that "the forces of evil will lie, cheat, steal, even inflict physical harm if they believe it will silence and shut up christian conservatives." in the interview, moore said the allegations against him areve smeared by people who "don't want to hear the truths about god and about the constitution." there is some truth in that, of course there are people who hate roy moore because of his beliefs, his christian beliefs. the entire american left, for example. that's not exactly the point here. the point is that moore has been accused of appalling behavior on the record by a number of women, not all of them liberals. at least one of them a trump

voter. moore's response? he's claiming to be the victim of bigotry. that's what demagogues do when they are cornered. that's what al sharpton does. not everyone accused of something is guilty of it, obviously, and we have to keep that in mind, not just in moore's case, but in all of these cases. roy moore has every right to protest his innocence, and maybe he is innocent.evno what he's not allowed to do is drag god into all of this. god is not accused of trolling for teenagers and shopping malls. this is not about christianity, it's about roy moore, and it discredits christianity when christians allow moore to use his faith as a shield. it's offensive to real believers. tammy moore is a radio host and he joins us tonight. i guess what bothers me --rs lo, i almost hate to weigh in on this because it's one of those stories where everybody i disagree with who hates roy moore for all the wrong reasons, which is to say because of his beliefs, is weighing in on one side of it. but i don't think that

conservatives ought to follow the script that al sharpton wrote and practices, infuriatingly, which is caught not paying his taxes, claims bias. it looks to me like roy moore is doing the same thing with christianity, a faith i happen to believe in. so there's something really wrong about that, i think. >> it's like we've all been trained, isn't it? it's like we've all been educated about how to respond to this. and the problem is that we've a seen it work. we've seen at work on the left. this is where you got -- it's kind of a conflation of all the awful things that we heard and the problems from teddy kennedy, who left a woman to drown in the bottom of a lake and became the lion of the senate, to bill clinton. now you have a man who is facing, i think at this point, some credible allegations, and there is now this resistance, understandably, by people to accept that, or at least to put up with the accusation. on the point of the matter, the principle of the matter of that we are not going to be folding like a cheap suit or we are not

going to be bullied out of a race, or out of being able to help this country, as many people, of course, in alabama want to do with the election of whoever will be there senator. it's more of this conflation in this resistance to the establishment, and now you have mcconnell and others of course who also were funding his opposition saying he shouldn'tf be there. combined with, tucker, the efforts to what people think is the effort to nullify the presidential election. now it looks like they want to nullify the primary that occurred. this is all coming together perhaps in the midst of someone like andy griffith's fabulous character of lonesome road or elmer gantry as an example. this is problematic across the board and i don't know if anyone is a winner at this point. >> tucker: you just go back to how you live your life and howju you want your children to live theirs.

or i will say for myself, if one of my kids got caught cheating, was accused of cheating by the school and i said did you cheat he said the school just doesn't like me because of my politics, i would spank him. o i would say that's a non sequitur, maybe they don't like you because of your politics or whatever, but the question is did you cheat or not, man up and answer the question directly, don't hide behind some non sequitur. answer the question. and i don't know why we would ever allow anybody on either side to get away with that dodge. >> at the same time, we've also seen where there have been cheats on the other side, if you will. a lot of people think of the duke lacrosse -- like the duke lacrosse, people think of that, they think of -- if they think of environments where there has been false accusations where the media has perpetrated falseon allegations or protected those who was accused and now we have this general rejection of any of that. i don't know what's going to happen in alabama, i do know that most of us are disgusted

with the entire process. at the same time, those women, there are more of them, critical, this seems to be very serious and right now the people of alabama will want a decent alternative if they want one, but the more that this seems like it's the establishment trying to manipulate or to punish people, the more they will push back against it. >> tucker: very smart analysis. i covered the duke lacrosse case and i knew those guys, i still know them and when they were accused, they didn't claim bias, though there was bias, they said this didn't happen and here's why and they were in their denials.s. that's how you know who was telling the truth. great to see you, give her yourr clarity as always. we are celebrating our one-year anniversary on the air tonight, amazing how fast it went. a special guest on our very first show in the friend zone tonight. stay tuned. ♪ the uncertainties of hep c. wondering, what if? the uncertainties of hep c. i let go of all those feelings.

because i am cured with harvoni. harvoni is a revolutionary treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni, your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b, which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni. it's ok that everybody ignores me when i drive. it's fine, 'cause i get a safe driving bonus check every six months i'm accident-free. and i don't share it with mom. right, mom?

right. safe driving bonus checks, only from allstate. switching to allstate is worth it.

we create machines that make every experience more intense and real. with intel core processors

and geforce gtx graphics so powerful they can redefine reality. because the best feature of a gaming machine is the power to make you forget it's there. ( ♪ ) shop our lowest prices ever at dell.com. ( ♪ ) ♪

>> tucker: time now for the friend zone. we welcome one of our friends from here at fox news on to the show. the show has no older friend than maria, she host morning with maria on fox business. she was the very first person ws booked when we started a year ago. thanks in part to the republican tax overhaul bill, maria joins us tonight. thanks a lot for coming on. i want to run this by you. we talked to the chairman of the house ways and means committee, kevin brady of texas and we ask, this bill seems to give tax cut to all corporations but maybe raise taxes on some americans. is that true? here's what he said. >> your pledge as chairman ofs the house ways and means committee is nobody is going to wind up with less money if this pass..ea >> in my beliefs between these tax cuts and higher paychecks growth, whether you are that worker on main street or that small business on main street, you were going to see more in your paycheck. you will see more in your pocketbook.n

>> tucker: nobody loses, do you think that is true? >> well, he sort of put in there the word growth, and i do think that this is a growth tax plan. however, it's very hard for me to say -- look at you and say people are not going to see a tax increase.e. there are some people here whobe are seeing a tax increase. the bulk and the beauty of this plan is about the corporate rate. taking the corporate rate down to 20%, you would think has legs. in other words, it is going to have impact because companies will be doing better, they will be investing in their businesses, they will use that extra savings to hire more people. so overall the economy, youll would expect, will get better. having said that, there are winners and losers here. it feels like they are raising taxes on a portion of the people, millionaires for example, if you make a million dollars or more you will probably -- and you are from new york or california or new jersey or illinois, you will probably see higher taxes as a way to pay

for a 20% corporate tax rate. there's no other way to look at it. there are also winners and losers and other things, like the family tax credit. spending $650 billion on the family tax credit, that is great for families. if you don't have kids, you don't get that benefit. depending on where you work, where you live, whether or not you have children will all dictate what your tax return looks like. the truth is is this is a $1.5 trillion plan. they have $1.5 trillion dollars to work with to cut taxes and $900 billion of that is for the business cuts. it's very easy to see that they have to raise taxes on some people by eliminating certain sy deductions, like eliminating the state and local to pay for the b lower corporate tax rate. >> tucker: can you sell that plan? the idea that investors will benefit at the expense of regular people? it seems like it would be pretty hard to sell that, given where

the economy is right now. >> it's the rules in the senate and reconciliation that are forcing them to only stand by $1.5 trillion in tax cuts, because if they didn't have these rules, they could cut taxes on everybody. the truth is is this plan is largely about cutting corporate taxes to create an environment for business so that businesss puts their money back in the c economy and hires more people. but when you eliminate that deduction in state and local, you are certainly going to losen a big -- you will have a big impact if you are from new york and you use that deduction and you will see higher taxes. having said that, i do believe a lower corporate tax rate will have legs and will have impact in growing the economy. >> tucker: i want that to be true, absolutely. and i understand the reasoning behind it, but a lot of people i know who work at the top end of american industry are doing

really, really, really well, better than anyone has ever done in the history of the world. and they are all flying private, and yet we still have stagnant wage growth and a ton of unemployed people, so if they make more, are we sure that that's going to wind up helping the middle class? >> that's a good question, because the question being asked the lawmakers know is how do we know that businesses are going to use that savings to actually hire more people and invest in the business? maybe they will just buy back stocks. and he was asked that question, and he said fine, buying back stock is okay. the bottom line is this: the top 10% of earners pay 71% of all the tax. what i've been saying a lotl recently is it feels like you're cutting taxes on people who don't pay taxes. how about cutting taxes on the top 10% that pay the taxes? but again, you know, something has to give, we have $20 trillion in debt. you have the left saying that this is a tax cut for the rich and in some cases i feel like they did get bullied by being forced -- bullied by these talking points by being forcedts

to raise taxes on some people, but something has to give and it does have to be paid for.e i don't think you can count on growth paying for everything. >> tucker: thank you, maria. i knew you would explain it better than anyone else could,nk and thank you for coming back a year later. don't miss mornings with maria from 6:00-9:00 eastern. it's the best fox business, maria. thank you. did giant crabs with claws as powerful as a lion's jaws kill an american hero? it is a bizarre story, but it is a story, and it is next. ♪ whoooo.

i enjoy the fresher things in life. fresh towels. fresh soaps. and of course, tripadvisor's freshest, lowest... ...prices. so if you're anything like me... ...you'll want to check tripadvisor. we now instantly compare prices... ...from over 200 booking sites... ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. go on, try something fresh. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices.

eight hundred dollars whenlmost we switched our auto and home insurance. liberty did what? yeah, they saved us a ton, which gave us a little wiggle room in our budget. wish our insurance did that. then we could get a real babysitter instead of your brother. hey, welcome back. this guy... right? yes. ellen. that's my robe. you could save seven hundred eighty two dollars when liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance.

♪ ♪ >> tucker: of course you will be shocked to learn this, but there's an awful lot of dumb analysis from the press swirling around the attack two weeks ago on senator rand paul. journalists at "the washington

post," business insider and many other places have described that assault, which left him badly injured, as "mysterious." cnn called it a case so mysterious that it borders on the preposterous. okay, so here are some clues. the guy who attacked rand paul, a doctor was a left wing nut with extremist views. in may he posted his piece on facebook. "may robert mueller fry trump's gonads." it turns out he was a full-fledged member of the resistance, not a guy into compromise. maybe the kind of guy who might attack you on your front lawn if he disagreed with her politics. but no, say geniuses in the media, it must have been a landscaping dispute. just like the san bernardino terrorist attack was workplace violence. b just like the kennedy assassination, carried out by a defected to the soviet union was somehow a right-wing plot. tell us more, all-knowing journalists.th ho actually just be quiet for once if you would. earlier this year, we told you

about new photographs that possibly showed amelia earhartt was possibly captured by the japanese after crashing on her famous final flight. not clear that happen, but today there's another even less pleasant theory about what happened to the great aviator, amelia earhart. she may have been eaten by man eating -- in this case 1-eating, 10 pounds 3-foot long coconut crabs. they do exist.t. a british aviator discovered a skeleton matching ehrhardt's frame in the 1940s on the isle of nikumaroro. i mispronounced it a question. they are named coconut crabs because they can crush coconuts, or bones with their immense clause. c it took us a while to find someone who has met a coconut crab and survived to tell the tale, but jeff, the famous wildlife expert is such a man, and he joins us tonight to describe the experience. jeff, are we overstating the power of the coconut crab?

>> they are incredibly powerful. they have a crusher claw that is nothing to mince with. it has thousands of pounds of pressure, and they use those claws to peel back the husk of a coconut. these amazing animals. they use their claws to get at the pulpy flesh of a coconut. >> tucker: that's horrifying. do people coexist with these crustacean predators? >> it's horrifying if you are a coconut, but if you are not a coconut -- the truth is that these animals have become so big and so supreme, almost like the apex predator of the island because they don't have competition with mammals, they live in islands where they are numero uno, because they're not competing with other creatures, and that's how it gets to the top level of the food chain of the ecosystem.

people do live with them and they are considered a delicacy and marlon brando, when he took over his island in polynesia pacific ocean, -- the regional population of coconut crab to extinction. >> tucker: he ate them to death. that is not surprising somehow. but would they pose a threat to the remains of a hapless crashed aviator? >> here's the thing, as with r many crustaceans, just think about it, i'm sure you have seen blue crabs. what do you catch them with? use bait like old bits of chicken or mackerel -- that can't be cracked --[indistinct]

but essentially, what a coconut crab is a mega version of a hermit crab. they would eat -- sea turtles and birds and fish and stuff like that, but it's not improbable to make it there was an animal, memo carcass that they could potentially feed off of. >> tucker: i don't know if we any closer to solving the mystery, but i appreciate the perspective.e. judging by the connection, i think you might be on assignment surrounded by monsters somewhere, and appreciate you you taking the time to tell us. thank you. i can't hear you, but i want to wish you luck, wherever you are. it's been an amazing year here on the show.r look back at our very first show and we will tell you what is in store ahead, in the many years ahead, we hope. stay tuned. ♪ this is what it's all about, jamie --

helping small businesses. damage your vehicle? we got you covered. [ glass shatters ] property damage? that's what general liability's for. what?! -injured employee? -ow. workers' comp helps you pay for a replacement. what's happening? this is carla. how's it going? and if anything comes up, our experts are standing by. ♪ boo!

we're on a mission to show drip coffee drinkers, it's time to wake up to keurig. wakey! wakey! rise and shine! oh my gosh! how are you? well watch this. i pop that in there. press brew. that's it. so rich. i love it. that's why you should be a keurig man! full-bodied. are you sure you're describing the coffee and not me? full-bodied. 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.

>> tucker: a year ago tonight we launched the show. 7:00 p.m. eastern then, a few months later we find ourselves at 9:00 p.m. and then in april at 8:00 p.m. e you followed us off and on the clock, and we are grateful for that. the show was changed a lot in the year, and we hope we stay true to what we set out to do in the beginning. we hope we remain true in the next year and beyond. here's a flashback to our first night on the air a year ago. >> welcome to the first edition of the eponymously-named "tucker carlson tonight" show. i got a hair cut.n we are glad you are here. >> it probably wasn't smart for all of these national security experts -- >> not just some actors, but the entire establishment. >> they made all the right -- >> is there a group that was wrong more consistently? >> no, other than the press corps. >> tucker: who's going to believe "the new york times"? "washington post" art nbc, isn't

that the beginning of their collapse of their era in media? >> i think it was a fearful response from the times editors. oh, my gosh, we really missed something here., >> tucker: the democrats don't talk about middle-class economic issues. they talk about global warming or esoteric social issues like who should use what bathroom. these are not issues that the average person making 40 going average person making 40 going care is all about, because why would he? >> donald trump, as you know, tapped into the working men and women. he spent the time in wisconsin and michigan and really understood what was the underbelly of what this was all about, jobs and the economy. >> tucker: people in power tend to live, not that they want to, but because they can't help themselves. that's human nature.heo, the more power people have the bigger the temptation to misuse it. the press is supposed to be the watchdog against all of this, and it worked fine for a couple of centuries, democrats decided they had more in common with certain politicians than readers or viewers, and that's when it fell apart. back to basics, hold the powerful accountable.i

in mock smugness and barbecue nonsense, every night. hope you will watch. >> tucker: it's been a fun year, and more than anything, i want to thank the people who produced the shown, the staff, the producers behind the scenes, the best ever. thank you for tuning in every night. we promise to continue to be the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and especially groupthink. have a great night, here is sean hannity. >> sean: you only took ten seconds of my time.ig i only get an hour. i'm kidding. we do work with the best people, congratulations. welcome to "hannity," we have a ton of breaking news to tell you about. the attorney general jeff sessions testified on capitol hill earlier today. if you are hillary clinton and you are on the left side of the aisle, you should be very worried tonight. it is becoming very clear an investigation to the clinton foundation, uranium one andst other issues are happening. also tonight, we will explain "hannity" investigation into hillary clinton's crooked web of corruption. information you will not get