let's hope so. and let's hope with all that's going on in this country with regard to sexism and harassment that we can move to that place of mutual respect. you can read my full piece on facebook or twitter. that's my story, good night, everybody, . ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight" ." maxine is at it again because she never stopped. congresswoman maxine waters of california was honored recently at the glamour's women of the year award show. you didn't get an invite. and at that event she decided to what the crowd into a demagogic frenzy, here's a selection. >> for those who say to mate you are asking for something to soon and too early, be careful, don't jeopardize yourself, don't say what you are saying right now, but i continue to say impeach him! [cheers and applause]

>> impeach 45! impeach 45! i didn't hear you! impeach 45! thank you! >> tucker: the ruling class loves it. not surprised. it statements like this fit into a long pattern for maxine waters from cheering on race riots in los angeles at 25 years ago to praising the fidel castro regime in cuba. we've got some recent highlights from maxine waters, here are a few. >> certainly the overvaluation is a way of welcoming somebody into the presidency and honoring them, and respecting them. i don't honor him, i don't respect him, and i don't want to be involved with him. i'm questioning the patriotism of all those republicans were allowing this president to side with putin. >> i believe that jeff sessions is very dangerous. i think he's racist. >> this is a bunch of scumbags, that's what they are. >> tucker: marc stein is a writer and a columnist and a

connoisseur of this kind of stuff, and he joins us tonight. great to see you in the studio. >> good to be with you, and congratulations on the start of her second year. >> tucker: thank you very much. you are in washington, d.c., the most democratic state in america. a lot of the democrats, some of them are kind of smart and impressive at some of them are good people. maxine waters is the least impressive by far, the most corrupt, the least knowledgeable, the most extreme, the shallowest. how did she wind up the folk hero? >> i don't get that because as you say, she's one of those -- obviously a democratic party politics is not yet quite as lucrative as it is in, say, zimbabwe, but she's one of those people who has been a full-time public servant and has managed to do very nicely at it. i'm not sure what other people get out of it. she is shouting impeach 45. okay, you have to be a congressman to file articles of impeachment, that's you.

we can't do it, we can sing along, but we can't actually do it. so go ahead, make my day. >> tucker: what scares me is if republicans on the hill continue to not delivering anything, it may be possible that they lose, maybe likely that they lose control of the house, at which point they said they will impeach the president, they probably will. then you have democrats in control. does it worry you that these are not reasonable people? this is a group that considers maxine waters a hero. >> i think at some point people have to actually call their bluff, because the other guy, al green, is threatening impeachment -- to fire mike file articles of impeachment before christmas. i think someone else that they will do it before thanksgiving. i don't know if there's a public holiday between now and thanksgiving, but if there is, the incontinence holiday coming up between now and then, someone will file. go ahead.

>> tucker: the actually filed today, i believe. it's toothless, but i just wonder how many people in the resistance have thought through, what does it mean if these people to control? even if you don't like drum, you really want to put maxine waters in control? >> exactly. the point here is you can only push things to extremes so far -- it's a 50/50 nation, give or take, and a tiny number of people in a handful of states decide the national elections and who controls the white house and who controls the legislature. if you push politics to the extreme at both ends, you actually make politics impossible. you make it impossible to have a functioning legislature, and you put yourself in a situation, as we see, were tiny little things like one senate seat or a couple of house seats actually render

government totally nonfunctioning. the dysfunctional is him of the political process is what led to term, so go ahead, make it more dysfunctional, see where it gets you. >> tucker: your critique of charm, if your complaint with trump is he's emotionally incontinent, he's a responsible, tweets too much, doesn't behave in a dignified way, they are always saying that, i get it. why wouldn't your response be to be the responsible person? >> right. >> tucker: they're doing the opposite! >> the thing about it is they are not -- tweeting isn't grounds for impeachment. there is no tweeting amendment to the united states constitution saying that tweeting -- you would have to pass a tweeting amendment, two-thirds of the state to signed on to the tweeting amendment, and there might be grounds for a tweeting amendment. it might be a great cause to say that if you run for national office you have to give up your twitter feed. it might be something maxine could get on board with, but as

things stand, the fact that she is good at chances, doesn't lead to the end of the trump presidency. >> tucker: to find it odd the leadership of the democratic party, the party of the young, is elderly to put it mildly? joe biden is now saying he's deeply considering running for president, which would be hilarious for him to do it again. he ran 30 years ago, as you remember, in '88. he, upon inauguration, if he were elected, would be older than reagan was when he retired after two terms. how ironic that the young party is so old. why is that? >> you are looking out at the wrong way, tucker. i mentioned zimbabwe. robert gabi is 93 and they only put him under house arrest toda. if you are biden or bernie or hilary or nancy pelosi or elizabeth warren you are thinking look at old bob, i've got another two decades before they put me under house arrest. as far as they look at it --

>> tucker: by that standard they are just getting started? >> right. and actually, taking this seriously, bernie sanders is an old, crazy guy, but he was a romance for the young, and the problem for me with these people is not that they are -- one of the things that makes politics dysfunctional, particularly in washington, is that everyone is mired in 1930s social programs that are actually irrelevant to every social indicator of the early 21st century. who are the people likely to be most attached to those 1930s social programs? people who in kindergarten when they were still fresh. >> tucker: that is a deep point. i wish we had more time to explore it. thank you, mark stein. good to see you. >> i may move in here. >> [laughs] we would love that. robert zimmerman is a democratic national committee man and he joins us tonight. thanks for coming on.

>> good to be with you. >> tucker: before i ask about maxine waters in the future your party, let me ask about news we have from capitol hill tonight. glenn kidd simpson, who runs fusion gps, who commissioned the dossier that undergirds a lot of this russia investigation, spent seven hours talking to the house yesterday and conceded during that testimony that the dossier was comprised of rumors that he never really checked out. he never traced them to their sources, he never traveled to russia. there were things that he heard and threw them in the dossier, which was then disseminated throughout the media and the democratic party, often the same thing. it does that bother you that rumors are the core of this. >> what bothers me is your partisan spin. >> tucker: i'm being serious. >> the only one who printed anything about that a dossier it was the election was mother jones. the other media -- it's the media's job to check out those

reports. the reality here is the right wing is trying to spend that russia was trying to help -- >> tucker: wait a second. >> hold on, tucker. here we go. >> tucker: let me correct a factual error. i don't mean in any way to contradict "the washington post" reporting, but didn't buzz feed run the entire thing? >> not according to "the washington post" tax to my fax checker. as a factual matter, as a news reader, i i read the whole thing presented as news by busby. >> the reality is that nothing was printed according to "the washington post" fact-checker by the media, but here's the point -- >> tucker: i'm not making that case. i'm not saying trump lost the popular vote because of the dossier. i'm saying that we have a russia investigation ongoing for the last year, and that the fbi took this dossier, they may have actually paid the source of the dossier, we don't know for sure.

we we will find out. >> know before you tell everybody to possibility. >> tucker: that has been reported, i don't know if it's true or not. here's the proof, robert. slow down a little bit. >> i'm fine. >> tucker: we know for a fact that the dossier is one of the reasons that there was a justice department investigation into russia's meddling in the election in the first place. i'm asking you a factual question, so put aside your lunatic out for a second and answer me straight. does it bother you that the guy who wrote the dossier didn't check out any of the so-called facts and their? >> we do know that bob mueller, a war hero, a republican, and was appointed by the deputy attorney is running a very thorough and fair investigation. at the republican and congress is conducting an investigation based upon the facts. before you start spinning your rumors and theories, with the professionals do the evaluation.

>> tucker: this is information derived from the investigation you just referred to. listen carefully. this is coming off the hill yesterday. one simpson, head of this country, set for seven hours and this is what he said. the investigation produced this set of facts in mind for the fifth time trying to get your response to the set of facts. are you going to respond or not? >> i'm not going to respond to your theories and gossip. i believe the investigation to the professionals. the republican leaders in congress and the special counsel. >> tucker: i don't know if this is your native language, let me speak slowly. this is the in the investigation, this is what we just learned, and i'm hitting you with the facts that come from congressional investigator investigators, republicans and democrats, and i want to know if you think this stuff is okay to turn into? >> the bottom line is you are repeating those reports that are not substantiated, as opposed to letting the investigators make the reports on what congress.

>> tucker: we are off into performance art. let me ask you a political question, we will do better with that. i'm starting to have my doubts. do you think that it is wise politics, the democrats did really well in the elections in virginia and new jersey, to lead with impeachment? the last time a party try this with the republican party in '99, they impeached the president and in that midterm election they got pounded for doing it. do you it's smart for democrats to have their publicist, maxine waters, talking about impeachment? >> limit corrective on the facts, the last time the republican party led with us was when republican members of congress who advocated impeaching president obama over his birth certificate and many republican members of congress did that. you don't have the democratic party. >> tucker: which republican member said?

>> congressman blake. >> tucker: 1 out of 435, i don't even remember, was there another one? >> do i have to give you an exercise on how to use google? you can easily check the facts on your own, hopefully your viewers will too. maxine waters is not leading the democratic party on this issue. quite frankly, -- >> tucker: articles of impeachment were filed today in the house. >> i will a barrow where i'm wl aware of it. what it does tell me is that the republican investigations that are going on in the special counsel investigations demonstrate that they are giving her good material to work with. >> tucker: one up to answer a question straightforwardly? just answer the question. you had steve cohen from memphis just today, today, said, and filed it officially, president ought to be impeached. i'm not saying nancy pelosi told him to say that, she's probably constant. but there's a movement, a bunch of guys doing that, what you

think of that? is that smart politics? don't give me a stupid hack answer, just give me real answer. >> the point simply is this: because the fact that donald trump jr. and jared kushner and general flynn in so many others keep changing their stories because of the indictments, there is a real discussion here about what the investigation will be too. right now, the democratic leadership is not advocating impeachment and in fact we have to let more facts come out. >> tucker: you just had it filed today, are you not going to say whether you think it's a good idea or not? you're making me nervous, because i think there's a good chance democrats can take over the house in the next election, and if they are going to have people like you speaking for them and making their strategy, i'm actually really concerned. why don't you just give me an adult answer and respond to the news today? are not making it up, it just happen. >> i know what happened, but the reality is the democratic party is now moving towards impeachment. members of congress are advocating it and frankly the fact that the trump administration keeps getting

caught in one lie after another gives good material for them to talk about it. >> tucker: he's driven you guys crazy. wow. you make me nervous. i'm serious, you make me nervous. thank you, robert. roy moore and countless hollywood celebrities are being brought down by sexual misconduct allegations. we've seen this before, but the last time a famous person was accused of sexual harassment, 20 years ago, he was protected by many of the people making these allegations now. the feminist machine, one writer calls it. we will go through the details on that coming up next. ♪ when you have a cold stuff happens. shut down cold symptoms fast with maximum strength alka seltzer plus liquid gels.

>> tucker: this roy moore story continues, he's the alabama senate candidate. he's now refusing refusing to back down under rising condemnation from his own party. just minutes ago, a report of more women coming for forward with allegation against him. trace gallagher is here with the latest. >> hi, tucker, the number is now seven women who have come forward to accuse republican candidate roy moore of sexual misconduct. one of them is beverly young nelson, who alleges roy moore attempted to rape her when she was 16. the woman also to try to prove she had contact with moore back in 1977 by showing her yearbook that he allegedly signed. but moore's attorney is now calling for a handwriting expert, watch. >> right now, our attorney has sent a letter, or is sending a letter, to gloria allred demanding that the yearbook be released. we will send it to a neutral

custodian, we will keep chain of custody, and our professional expert will examine it, and we will find out if it's genuine, or is it a fraud? >> gloria allred said her client will testify under oath. meanwhile, ivanka trump appears to be firmly against roy moore, issues a statement that reads "there's a special place in hell to prey on children. i have yet to see a valid expiration i have no reason to doubt the victims' accounts. the president dodged questions about whether he thinks moore should drop out of the race, that is despite a report in "politico" that says senate majority leader mitch mcconnell called the president while he was overseas asking for help in pushing moore out. mcconnell says if moore wins on december 12 and is sworn into the senate, he would face an immediate investigation by the ethics committee and could lead to expulsion. roy moore is showing no sign of dropping out. in fact, he appears to be

digging in, including threatening legal action against media outlets that have published allegations of sexual misconduct. roy moore is currently trailing in the polls by 12 points, a big drop since before the allegations, when he led the democrat doug jones by nine points. >> tucker: trace gallagher, out on the west coast, thanks. the rising condemnation of moore and numerous hollywood celebrities has many people asking where this outrage was 20 years ago. bill clinton was the president then. a ton of people hit him with sexual misconduct allegations. a lot of them seemed believable then and now. clinton survived in a big way because democrats and feminists rallied to his defense. juanita brodrick was dismissed as bimbos and floozy's and liars and white ringers, which they weren't. bill clinton was defended as a supporter. she joins us tonight. you are not going to hear me say

that only liberals are sexually harassed, or only conservatives, sin is a human problem. but the difference is, roy moore is accused of this stuff, i don't know the truth of it, but i know a lot of republicans, including the president's daughter are attacking him, flat out attacking him. some were defending him. when bill clinton got accused 20 years ago, and i think a much more credible way, much worse things, including forcible rape. he was defended in "the new york times" by gloria steinem and the entire feminist establishment. that seems a meaningful difference to me, and i wonder if in retrospect that is regrettable. >> i do think it is regrettable. i think you look back at what happened 25 years ago with the hindsight that we have now, this national collective moment that we are having where women are coming out of the woodwork to finally be able to tell their stories of being sexually harassed, assaulted even raped. i think that we would see his story and behavior for women a lot differently than we did at

the time. but again, we have this benefit of putting it in a different light. >> tucker: i'm pretty old, so i remember it really well. that was 30 years after the feminist revolution. that was after we got like a two year long lecture about sexual harassment with anita hill and clarence thomas, were no physical contact was even alleged. people were exquisitely sensitive about it then. but no means no thing, i was in college. i remember it really well. that's not what he got a pass. he got a pass because he vetoed abortion bills. >> it was also 25 years ago. i think there is a very big difference right now. you have mitch mcconnell coming out and saying i believe these women about roy moore. that's not something you would have seen, i want to say, even a year ago, five years ago. if there's going to be a difference, i think it's that there are still people who rally around these republicans who have committed multiple -- have

been accused of multiple sexual assaults. donald trump is the president, roy moore is still his party's nominee. we look at a more contemporary example on the democratic side, anthony weiner, he's in jail. >> tucker: ted kennedy, the lion of the senate, killed a woman and left her to drown into cars. cars. no one disputes he was drunk driving and went off the bridge, he never even reported it. when he died it was only 2009, "huffington post" ran a story. "why ted kennedy -- what would she have thought of ted's career? "answer, maybe she would feel it was worth it. that was 2009. >> talking about an incident that was happening in the '60s. we are talking about these very, very different times. >> tucker: he killed a woman and served until 2009. that hole. mackey got adulation from feminists because he was for abortion and they ignored the fact that he actually killed somebody. >> tucker: roy moore is on the ballot today in 2017. i think we can go back and talk

about how people did bad things in the past. >> tucker: my only point is -- and i said it last night on the show, i think there are people who are willing to make excuses for moore for political reasons. i just think that's wrong. i think you should assess things on the facts. i'm accused of something, don't -- i don't want my kids dealing with that, just answer the question. we have a decades long history of the left putting politics ahead of women and i don't want to have to pretend that is okay, because it's not okay. >> it's not okay and it's not okay when the right does it as well. i think we should be able to have an honest, adult conversation about the fact that right now sexual harassment and sexual assault are pervasive in america, that women have been hurt by it for very long time and continue to be. in many men as well. absolutely. >> tucker: why do we have anything in america named after ted kennedy? >> really? [laughs] >> tucker: harvey weinstein's name has been stripped out of

the director's guild. >> that's right. >> tucker: you kill someone, a woman who you are taking advantage of, do you get to have your name on things now? >> i think you are seeing men face very different consequences today than they did even five, ten, 15, 20 years ago for the same sorts of behavior. i think that's a great thing for women. i think that it is a hugely positive step that now women feel comfortable to say i expect better behavior from my politicians, from my boss, for my friends. and again, i think that something more democrats and republicans are certainly guilty of this behavior, and can come together and have an honest conversation. >> tucker: last question, you obviously i'm sure believe in due process. i keep thinking about it recently. is it okay to anonymously accuse someone of a crime? and a crime is it fair for me to say you have been accused of bank robbery, i'm not going to say which bank is accusing you? >> you talking specifically -- >> tucker: be when you read these where people are accused

anonymously of things and it just seems like that's not what justice is. justice is getting to face your accuser. >> that hasn't happened here. it's been what you've seen this in the last couple of months, is that okay with you? i'm just wondering. >> i think you need to look at the reason why someone would accuse someone anonymously. it would probably be because they are afraid of the retribution that they might face in coming forward. >> tucker: i actually understand that, but why would a media company print the name of the accused, but not of the accuser before it has even gone to court? we don't know actually what happened, but we are basically declaring one person guilty and shielding the other from public view, why would we do that? >> again, are we talking about roy moore? >> tucker: not talk about roy moore, but that's a lot of people to which this is happening. is that okay with you? >> you are a media person, so i think you know how these stories when they get to print -- there's a fairly extensive process by which reputable news

organizations go through before they actually put something in print. >> tucker: the reputable ones are the most corrupt, i've seen it firsthand. thank you for that. >> thank you. >> tucker: attorney general jeff sessions has signaled that the uranium one deal could get its own special prosecutor. democrats say all of this uranium one stuff is nonsense made up, it's not a real story. up next we will talk to someone who has been pretty impartial. looked at it carefully. stay tuned. ♪ when it comes to heartburn

trust the brand doctors trust for themselves. nexium 24hr is the number one choice of doctors and pharmacists for their own frequent heartburn. and all day all night protection. when it comes to frequent heartburn, trust nexium 24hr.

big australia is back. our biggest sirloin. our biggest bloom. our biggest entrees ever. outback steakhouse. aussie rules. and now, get a free $10 bonus card with every $50 in gift cards.

>> tucker: there is no talking point taken around washington, point taken around washington, you may have heard it in the last few days, the uranium one story isn't real. it's fake news made up by republicans. republicans. it's a fever dream concocted by people who hate hillary clinton and are desperate to creating false equivalence between donald trump's presidential campaign and the clinton machin machine. hillary's reputation is being protected by the usual defenders, they say that she has nothing to do with uranium one and it wouldn't matter if she was involved, but she wasn't involved in any got it? interesting question, what is the truth about a? guy benson is an editor at townhall.com, a definitive explanation of the story, which seems fair to us and he joins us tonight. thanks a lot for coming on. >> congrats on one year, by the way. >> tucker: rings a lot.

i will concede, and i hope that i've always conceded every time we talked about it on the show that there is a lot that we don't know about this story and i hope that we have an overhyped it, but it does seem like there is a story at the bottom of it. you've assessed it may be a little more coldly than i have, what have you found? is this a real story? >> i think it's a question that is interesting, because the story that is being told a lot by republicans, there is a former white house advisor who is talking about this as if it was treasonous on behalf of mrs. clinton. i think there's maybe a mythical side to this where people have a lot of misconceptions about especially the tail end of the uranium one story and mrs. clinton's involvement in that. and because this came up recently in a story in the hill about how the fbi had been investigating russia's efforts on that whole front involving the clintons a few weeks ago, republicans have i think seized

on not to try and draw some sort of equivalency on the broader russian matter, and that has prompted a bunch of fact checks and i think some of these fact checks have been really solid and good, clearing up some of the laziness or deliberately wrong characterizations of what happened with uranium one. that all being said, there are elements of the entire saga which started back in 2005 that i don't think are threats to national security, certainly not treasonous, maybe not criminal, but at least stink to high heaven when it comes to the clintons and lots and lots of money flowing to their foundation on behalf of people connected to uranium one who needed favors and got them. >> tucker: you made, i thought, really good point and it's worth reminding our viewers of it, that the story wasn't concocted in the basement of the rnc or by andrew breitbart, but this was originally broken by "the new york times" and a detailed former president

clinton's trip to kazakhstan. it's complicated and actually worth googling if you're watching at home. the bottom line i think is this. we know that uranium one hired the podesta group to lobby the obama administration on this. there was lobbying by this company on behalf of russian interests. that's not really disputed. you've got to sort of wonder why at the same time that money is flowing not just to the clinton foundation but to the clinton family. i can't connect every dot, but i don't think you can just dismiss that as like insane conspiracy theorizing, can you? >> no. if "the new york times" story that you just referenced from 2015, there was also a "new york times" story that revealed that bill clinton and his team, his entourage at first had lied about a meeting that occurred at the clinton's home in chappaqua with officials from kazakhstan, and on they were told actually there is photo evidence that this occurred and they changed their story. that initial "new york times" story was very extensive, very

exhaustive, got into a lot of detail about this, including the former president going over there and striking this very lucrative deal with a man who ended up donating tens of millions of dollars to the clinton foundation. so that i think, to make -- later on i should add, there was some jeopardy in one of these deals involving uranium one with the government of kazakhstan. there was a request for intervention from the u.s. government and right away the u.s. state department and the embassy got involved and, wouldn't you know it, the issue got resolved. hillary clinton was running the state department at that time. >> tucker: exactly. >> after lots of money had exchanged hands. there are, to me, some questions about this that not just people like me were asking them. at "the new york times" and other journalists have been asking them for years, that look like influence peddling and money trading. that may not get up to the hyperpartisan level of hyperventilation that we've seen

from some republicans about this saying oh, my gosh, hillary clinton sold out our nuclear program. >> tucker: we are almost out of time, let me ask you one question. you notice that the same people who are telling us the single greatest threat to the american is the russian government, the same people telling us that are now dismissing russian attempts to move uranium out of this country to other countries like no big deal. you are some kind of all right wacko if you think that's a big deal. both of those things can't be true. >> it was more about the russian government controlling mining interests in the u.s., not taking uranium out of the u.s. into russia. >> tucker: the u.s. government has considered admitted they ht out of the country. >> if we are going to talk about the democrats in the russia situation, i think the more fertile ground, uranium one, an interesting thing to discover and talk about. to me it's fusion gps. let the peace of this puzzle

that i think is the most strange, or we cut in the fewest answer so far with more and more coincidences popping up. i think that's the approach republicans should take. >> tucker: we try to the beginning of the show with the democrat who started screeching at me. that's where you know. >> that tends to happen. >> tucker: [laughs] , great to see you. >> thanks. >> tucker: california wants to promote pro-life against abortion. does free speech exist anymore? next. ♪

♪

♪ohhhhhh, ou! guess what i just got? uh! ♪i used to be spellbound hello again. ♪i used to be spellbound hi. ♪i used to be spellbound that's a big phone. ♪in your arms. [screams] ah, my phone. ♪you built the flame ♪that warms my heart, ♪but lying and cheating ♪has torn us apart ♪and i'm moving on.

the uncertainties of hep c. wondering, what if? 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.

so we know how to cover almost we've anything.st everything even a "red-hot mascot." [mascot] hey-oooo! whoop, whoop! [crowd 1] hey, you're on fire! [mascot] you bet i am! [crowd 2] dude, you're on fire! [mascot] oh, yeah! [crowd 3] no, you're on fire! look behind you. [mascot] i'm cool. i'm cool. [burke] that's one way to fire up the crowd. but we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ >> tucker: that was fast. just this monday night we told about how the army was quietly planning to grant waivers so that individuals with a history of drug abuse, mental illness, self-mutilation, people who in some cases would not be allowed to buy firearms legally, would still be allowed to enlist in the armed forces. today, in an unprompted news conference, army leaders announced this new policy was dumped. tuesday night, less than a day after we covered it.

army chief of staff said that policy change was originally "unauthorized." a little bit of good news from washington. doesn't happen very often. in a state of california, there is a new law recently passed that requires antiabortion pregnancy centers, places that help women who are pregnant, set them up with help for adoption, it's forcing these groups to provide information on how to get a state subsidized abortion. these are groups who think that abortion is evil. tough, says california coming up to promote it anyway. pro-life groups sued and this week the supreme court announced it will hear the case in the near future. president and founder of the national institute of family and life advocates, and he joins us tonight. tom, thanks for coming on. >> great honor to be here. >> tucker: i read the story and thought you don't even have to be opposed to abortion, you could be completely in favor of abortion and still have real concerns about a government forcing people to say things they don't believe. >> what's good for the goose is

good for the gander. the issue before the court is can the government be empowered to force charitable, state-based nonprofit, for that matter in a group, to speak a message with which they fundamentally disagree, and if they fail to comply, find them, issue penalties and even close them down, because that's what they're trying to do in california. >> tucker: the freedom accountability apprehensive transparency act. it would force pro-life centers to literally advertise and tell people who come in there is a free abortion if you want one. >> it requires them to post a number to get the process started. this is before we were ever able to talk to them. >> tucker: why would the california legislators -- or you have these float so my pro-life groups, they are not hurting anybody, so why would the statet to do this? hassle them, force them to violate their beliefs?

>> the far left, which is in control in california, is so in love with abortion, they cannot tolerate anybody with opposing view, and they want to mandate that they support and speak and promote their state-sponsored abortion agenda. that's the bottom line. >> tucker: for the california beef producers force hindu temples to serve hamburgers? >> how about the government forcing alcoholics anonymous to post signs advising their members where the local liquor store is? >> tucker: if anheuser-busch pays enough. >> exactly. >> tucker: this is about an industry trying to shut down its opponents. >> it's about a multimillion dollar industry, actually may be a billion-dollar industry, planned parenthood gets 500 million of federal funds, imposing their will on small, charitable, life-affirming agencies that have very little money, staffed primarily by volunteers. shame on them, this is just bullying tactics!

>> tucker: the whole safe, legal and rare thing is no longer in operation. they are not even pretending. >> it's never safe. there's one dead victim in every abortion. the case in philadelphia showed women die from abortions too. >> tucker: i have to say that people you think would be staying up late protecting our freedom of speech, where are they in this? how can the aclu would not way on the weigh in on this? >> the aclu supports freedom of speech for nazis, communist. they won't touch it for abortion because it's a right to these people, are-i-t-e to these people. >> tucker: if you're watching and people don't agree with their politics or your views on abortion, you don't have to because it's not about that, it's about the freedom to say what you think. >> absolutely. >> tucker: thanks. >> thank you. >> tucker: google might be the world's most powerful company --

of course it is, it's the most powerful in the history of the world in fact. a state attorney general, neither one of our biggest states, is taking them on directly, challenging them in court. we'll describe to us why he's doing this, and what it may mean for you, next. ♪ that's the new man, huh? yup. getting kinda' close to my ride. wow... now, that's how you make a first impression. they're going to love you... that's ford, america's best-selling brand. hurry in today for 0% financing for 72 months across the full line of ford cars, trucks and suvs! and just announced...get 0% apr for 72 months plus $1000 cash back! take advantage of these exclusive holiday offers during the ford year end sales event. ...has grown into an enterprise. that's why i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. now, i'm earning unlimited 2% cash back on every purchase i make. everything.

what's in your wallet? whstuff happens. old shut down cold symptoms fast with maximum strength alka seltzer plus liquid gels.

firstthen you put yourselfareer. through school. got the degree. you've given it your all, to reach the goals you've set. don't let student debt hold you back. refinancing student loans with sofi can save thousands. so you can get where you've always been headed... sooner. see how much you can save with sofi. the leader in student loan refinancing. ♪ >> tucker: google dominates the internet, the single biggest company on the internet, but more important, it entirely shapes the way we understand the world itself, may be the way understand ourselves. the most powerful company in the history of the world. you don't want to mess with them and politicians never do, they suck up, they sniff the throne, but not missouri attorney general josh holly. he's taking them on directly.

amazingly, his office just announced they are investigating google for possible violations of consumer protection and antitrust laws. he says google may be illegally collecting the personal information of residents in missouri and could be using referencing, favored companies in its search results. the attorney general of the state of missouri joins us tonight. thanks for coming on. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: why would you want to mess with the most powerful company in the history of the world? >> so that he has to. somebody has to stand up and ask what is it that google is doing? one of our personal information are they collecting? the truth is when you use of google search engine or google product, google flights are google mail or google shopping, they collect an enormous amount of personal, private, confidential data, and are more they are not telling consumers exactly what it is they are collecting, and then they are selling that information to third parties, so i want the facts, i want to know what they are collecting from consumers. i want to know if they are telling us what they are collecting, and i want to know who they are selling it to. >> tucker: why do we know the answers to those questions

already? >> because no one is asking. it's amazing to think that google, which has near monopoly power, monopoly power of the search engine market, has not been thoroughly investigated before. ftc gave him a slap on the wrist under president obama back in 2012, but it's time some he stepped up and said look, what are the facts are exactly? one of our information are you taking, and what you doing with it? because as you know, and this information age, our personal information, there's nothing more important for protecting our personal identity and the way we live our lives, so we have to find out. >> tucker: let's say google were omitting facts from its search, which is actually doing, that would shape the way we understand the world. you could make whole events disappear, couldn't you? >> one of the things we are concerned about, google may be altering its algorithms under its search in order to privilege its own websites or products. this is something we want to get to the bottom of. what is google doing, how was it using its search algorithm, is it trying to benefit its own companies?

they say the search results are based on relevance, but are they really? and then again, what of our personal information of the taking, and what are they doing with it? >> tucker: 's nobody in washington is asking these questions, no one holding elective office. i think is a travesty, and my conclusion is not because they are afraid of google, everyone is afraid of google. you are running for senate in missouri. are you worried about the consequences of doing this to the biggest company in the world? >> i took an oath of office as attorney general of the state of maturity to protect the state of missouri and to be their advocate, and that's what i'm d. millions of missourians use of google every day like millions and no company in the history of the world has collected more information, more personal within google, so we need to know. >> tucker: people will be googling you, your name, to learn who you are and whether or not to support you. google will control that information. and you are taking google to task on television, that doesn't worry you? >> it's worth the risk.

this is my job. my job is to enforce the law and protect the people of my state, and that's what we will do. >> tucker: i never say this to politicians, but i'm writing to you. >> tucker: thank you. we will be right back. ♪

do you need the most trusted batmaybe not.holiday? (screaming) maybe you could trust the world would be just as happy without them. maybe you could trust you wouldn't be replaced. have your sleigh repossessed. and end up living in the middle of nowhere with the only friend you have left in the entire world. no! or you could just trust duracell. ♪

and when you switch to esurance, in the modern world, it pays to switch things up. you can save time, worry, hassle, and yup, money. in fact, drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved hundreds. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call.

♪ >> tucker: hard to believe another hour has passed. hosting a tv show, it's been fun. tune in every night at 8:00 to the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness and groupthink. dvr you can figure out how that works. tomorrow we will figure out about justus' attempt to crack down on thanks mercedes. we will ask a defender why sanctuary cities deserve your tax dollars as they defy the laws he voted for. if they can ignore that, what else can they ignore? also get to the bottom of this tax bill, the republican tax bill. they've been talk about it for weeks. is it a good plan?

it's coming into crisper focus. we will get us another on that tomorrow might be able to settle it for us. good night from washington, sean hannity up next, have a great night. >> sean: thanks tucker. welcome to "hannity." judge roy moore writes an open letter to me after i demanded answers. we will share that with you. three more accusers down in alabama. my response is coming up later in the show. plus, democrats, liberals and the media, they're finally now today having their day of reckoning when it comes to bill clinton and his wife hillary, and the many allegations of the sexual misconduct, the mistreatment of women. for decades these accusations, they have dodged and then dismissed and downplayed the left in this country, by the media in this country, and even worse, was accusers were smeared, slander, besmirched, including by hillary clinton herself, and what is so inexcusable is that the democrats and the media for 30 years did nothing to stop this