election right here at 11:00. we'll have resulted in analysis. most-watched, most trusted, and was grateful that you spent this evening with us. good night from washington. i am shannon bream. we will see you at 11:00 p.m. eastern right here tomorrow. ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." terror has struck at the heartlc of new york city as it now does with disturbing frequency. an isis-inspired suspect detonated a bomb in a crowded subway passage right in the middle of morning rush hour. the explosion sent commuter fleeing. thankfully only a few people were hurt. most severely the bomber himself. that man has been identified. akayed ullah, a 27-year-old bangladeshi immigrants. he came to this country in 2011 through a chain migration visa. rick leventhal joins us with more. i u >> the investigation aggressively underway. a law enforcement source tells me they don't believe the suspect had any coconspirators.n in other words, they believe that he did in fact act alone.

they say that he made the device at work. he told them that he made the device at work. he was employed by an electrical company. and i'm told that he had extensive travel overseas since arriving here in the u.s. in february 2011. akayed ullah, 27, lived in brooklyn, but from bangladesh. the department of homeland security confirming that he alive to a writer on an f43 family immigrant visa. he was a lawful permanent resident. as you mentioned, benefiting from the extended family chain migration.ma there are questions about whether he was inspired by isis. he told investigators apparentlt that his attack was revenge for u.s. attacks overseas. but if his goal was to inflict damage and death, he failed miserably. authorities saying he had a low-tech pipe bomb strapped to his body with velcro and zip ties and when he detonated in an underground passageway between the port authority and times square, the bomber was the only one seriously injured. with lacerations and burns to his hands and abdomen. three other people were hurt and

complaining of headaches and ringing ears, but not serious injuries at this point. the port authority police were first on scene to contain the suspect, but there was a massive response by the nypd, mpa, state police, and the fbi, now investigating the suspect's home. a his family's home, the social media accounts, and any devices he might have been connected to or had access to for any clues to his inspiration and possible accomplices. the city was lucky. more people could have been hurt and clearly new york city remains a top target for terrorists. >> tucker: apparently so. thank you for that, rick leventhal. so what type of bomb was the attacker using, and what could we do to block attacks like this in the future, if anything? those questions for our next two guests. an expert on terror in thens middle east and has been for a long time. jones served as a bomb disposal expert in the marine corps in both iraq and afghanistan. they both join us tonight. first to you, walid, the question we always ask, how do

we prevent attacks like this in the future? >> i am not concerned aboutal te investigation. they will get a lot of information about him. his network, where he is coming from. i am concerned about the fact that we were not able to a detet him and therefore vetting him before. the real battle is going to be the vetting system. >> tucker: but with the scale of our immigration in this country, how could you possibly vet all of those people? >> you have a problem of immigration that we need to respond to, regardless of terrorism. then you have a problem of terrorism connecting to these loopholes inside that immigration system. we need to be smart, making sure that we have a government ability to detect on the one hand, and disconnects that threat from the windows they are using to get into the space. >> tucker: this attack seems like it could have been far worse. why wasn't it? >> yes, it absolutely could have been far worse because he made it to that place with a bomb on his body.be more than likely there are two scenarios here on why it didn't work well. b

either he attempted to make a high explosive like ammonium nitrate or catv or some of the things you've heard of and failed in the chemistry, the o actual mixture of the component, in which, when he went to detonated, the blasting cap went off but the actual high explosive didn't, or he did what i believed to more common option. he tried to use a lower explosive like black powder, almost like gunpowder, and when you do that, the container you put it in has to stay contained. that's why they use pressure cookers and threaded pipe. it has to stay contained and allow for enough time for that lower explosive to actually turn into an explosive, or to actually explode. when that happens, if you don't do it right, then that container has any weak spots, they will do what is called venting where itt actually just sucks in oxygen and starts to burn instead of explode. i think more than likely, with the very little information, thx video, the picture, and what we hear, more than likely it probably was a low explosive powder.keatre

a lot easier, you can buy it off the shelf. there's no chemistry involved. >> tucker: he apparently told investigators from his hospital bed this afternoon but he got the instructions for this bomb and the internet. is that plausible? >> absolutely. if you think of two things when it comes to making a bomb. the thing that goes boom is your main charge. that's a chemical that you have to make or acquire.g and then the apparatus, the whatever it is. anything in walmart that turns a light bulb on or makes a noise can be used to trigger a bomb. any battery can be used to set it off. there are two things you may care. what is the electronic circuit that sets it off, the other is the actual explosion that explodes. usually both are homemade in afghanistan or iraq and usually both have opportunities to go wrong. i can tell you i'm sitting here today alive because dozens of them just weren't made right.o >> tucker: good news for you, and for commuters this morning. walid, the thing that may be most troublesome about this is that this guy was basically succeeding in the united states. he came over, he had a license to drive professionally in new york city, working for an

electrical contractor apparently. been here for a while, and yet he tried to detonate a suicide bomb this morning. how do you get from one tohi the other? >> that's a great point, tucker. what has happened now and what will be happening is that an unsuccessful operation will do what? it will teach the next wave of jihad. what we discuss right now, we are telling the other side that you have the successful bomb will need to do it in another way.ve but that's the system ofca democracy. why he actually came here basically -- what we don't know was he an already indoctrinated overseas? where did it happen? that's my concern. >> tucker: what's terrifying is he wasn't an outcast. he was doing what immigrants are supposed to do. he had a house, here living with his family. a series of jobs. >> that is the response to the previous eight years of the obama administration where we were told they don't have a job, they areat frustrated. that's a successful guy.

that's exactly the point you're making right now. >> tucker: which is terrifying. >> which is terrifying because they can use success if they are indoctrinated..ct >> tucker: scary, thank you both very much. >> thank you. >> tucker: islamic terror isn't just menacing new york city of course, a greater problem in europe or decades of slow immigration have accelerated to become a wave of migrants that has completely changed the demographic mix of that continent, not to mention theng daily lives of the people live there. pull up your mental image of sweden, pacifism, socialism, blond people, mandatory politeness. lilting accents, saunas, you know the cliche. if that's what you are picturing, you haven't been there recently. here's the scene in malmo just the other day. the country's third largest cit city. [chanting] >> tucker: it may look like

karachi or cairo, but again that is sweden. it has changed quite a bit. a generation ago you would'veng been hard pressed to find swedes marching in support of religiously motivated massll murder. now it's all but normal thanks to mass immigration that has brought tens of thousands of immigrants into the country from north africa and the middle east. malmo has been called europe's most anti-semitic city with dozens of verbal and physical attacks. targeting the few hundred jews there.ll live just 75 years ago sweden was a haven for those fleeing the holocaust. today those same jews fear their own neighbors again. thanks to the swedish government's decision to bring in a population that hates them. just two days ago a synagogue in sweden was firebombed.io it wasn't the first such attack and unfortunately likely will not be the last. meanwhile, in paris, muslim immigrants have taken over the city streets on some part of the capital. residents of one neighborhood are threatening a hunger strike if camping migrants aren't moved by the end of the year. they say trash is everywhere and worse, women are being harassed regularly on the street.

mark steyn is an author and columnist who has followed what's happening in europe for some time, and he joins us tonight. you see videos like that from sweden and you realize that this is not the continent that you pictured, that it really ist completely different because of immigration trends. are the authorities in europe -- i know you spent a lot of time over there -- aware of this? do they care? is there a public conversation about this? >> tony blair was asked by the late christopher hitchens about? my book and whether the demographic trends in europe were part of what he called the public conversation, the european conversation with his fellow prime ministers. tony blair gave a very revealing answer. he said it's part of the subterranean conversation. in other words, europe's leaders haven't figured out a way to talk about this in public. i know malmo very well. i've been there once or twice a year for the last 15 years. the reason i go to malmo is because it was the first christian city in what was then

denmark, and it's now going to be the first muslim city in g sweden. i do something that i first did at the suggestion of a couple of those swedish blondes you were mentioning, at the abba girls, those kinds of girls who you were talking about earlier. they made one evening to me as i was sitting in a coffee shop. at twilight i walked from downtown malmo to rosengard, big muslim in the rosengard, big muslim area, the swedish blondes fan out and the covered women and the bearded men come towards you until eventually you are in a part of sweden in which there are no uncovered women, and in which muslim women who come from muslim countries where they didn't have to go covered, such as bosnia, suddenly find they have to go covered when they immigrate to sweden.

that walk, as the blondes thin out and the big bearded men come towards you in ever greater numbers. that is europe's future walkingg towards you. it's the biggest story of our time. christendom is being transformed at an extraordinary level to the point where swedes will be an ethnic minority in their own country by mid century. >> tucker: what i don't understand, why is no one allowed to talk about it? if swedes or danes or finns were flooding into jordan and displacing the native population and forcing people to follow their christian practices and obey their cultural imperatives and mores, i think liberals here would say you can't do that, it's their country. why is it different when it happens in europe or the united states? >> you actually see it in the united states when they talk about new orleans no longer being a chocolate city because too many white people have moved in. that was one of the headlines a few years ago. >> tucker: i do remember.

>> and i think the problem of course is the minute you raise it you get accused of being racist. the minute you talk about it with any degree of honesty, that deputy leader of britain first that you mentioned a couple of days ago, the police in belfast flew all the way to london to arrest her, put her on a plane, take her back to belfast for something she said in a speech at belfast city hall. swedes are particularly dishonest about it. the wealthy swedes, the minutet their area gets like those scenes you were showing in paris where there's too many migrants and the neighborhood starts to change, they move out to all-white suburbs and all-white villages, and the moment they are there, they vote evermore enthusiastically in polls about how wonderful multiculturalism is. the more they move away from it, the more they are in favor of it. >> tucker: of course, because it doesn't affect them. if you intentionally set out tou

create an environment in which violent nationalism would flower, wouldn't this be it? >> absolutely. the first duty of the political class is prudence, and you don't extinguish prudence for utopian delusions. the reality is that as people know in all most any part of the world, the minute you have islam as 15-20% of your population, the mediation of relations between islam and the rest of society becomes your principal domestic consideration, as is happening in front of our eyes in sweden, in the netherlands, in france, in germany, in the united kingdom. >> tucker: and it will happen here. the first duty of the political class is prudence. i'm getting that tattooed and i'm giving you credit when i get it. mark steyn, it's great to see you. >> it's a great tramp stamp to get. i recommend that. >> tucker: it's true. cnn, abc, and "the washington post" all went

above and beyond in an effort to win the president's fake news contest. who won? we will tell you next. ♪ ♪

do you want clean, stain free dentures? try polident. the four in one cleaning system kills 99.99% of odor causing bacteria, cleans where brushing may miss. helps remove stains and prevent stain build up. use polident daily.

♪ >> tucker: a couple of weeks ago president trump made the following, pretty amusing proposal and twitter. "we should have a contest as to which >> tucker: a couple of weeks ago president trump made the following, pretty amusing proposal on twitter. "we should have a contest as to which of the networks, plus cnn, not including fox, is the most honest or corrupt in its political coverage of your favorite president. they areng all bad. winner to receive the

fake news story trophy!" it seems like a joke, but apparently the other networks took it seriously. cnn hyped the wikileaks bombshell that went absolutely nowhere. abc had to suspend brian ross after he falsely claimed evidence of pre-election collusion between trump and russia, even dave weikel of "the washington post," who now has a mustache got involveda using a misleading photo to suggest trumps rally in pensacola was empty, rather than packed. it was quite a week for the press but instead of pausing for self reflection david frum of the atlantic said these bungle stories prove the importance of trusting the media. >> the mistakes are precisely the reason people should trust the media. astronomers make mistakes all the time because science is a process of discovery of truth. astrologers never make mistakes, or at least they never own up to them because what they are offering is a closed system of ideology and propaganda. a >> tucker: so the mistakes arere the reason you ought to trust the accuracy. is it brilliantly

counterintuitive or just stupid? that's the question. joe concha writes about mediaa for "the hill." mollie hemingway is a senior editor at "the federalist" and they both join us tonight. mollie, first to you. i i don't begrudge anybody the right to make a mistake once in a while, i've made a ton of them for sure. i just can't help but notice that all the mistakes that the different channels are making are in the same direction. all the mistakes seem to be kind of solidifying liberal views on things. >> just in this last week alone, you mentioned a few of the stories, but you didn't even get all of the stories that there were mistakes. a false report about deutsche bank subpoenaing trump financial accounts. there's many, and "the new york times" said that k.t. mcfarland admitted collusion. she did not admit collusion. all the stories go in the same ways. if they want us to believe that these errors are just routine

and they are something that happens occasionally. why are they all going in the same direction? if they truly were just accidents and things that happened as part of the job, you would expect to see errors going different directions.el errors that make trump look good as well as bad. or you would've expected to see the same level of erroneous reporting on barack obama. we did not see that. t >> tucker: i don't remember seeing that at all. joe, again, people make mistakes, but if you are consistently wrong and way out over your skis making predictions that don't match reality, in any other business you would be demoted or at least asked to take some time off. you would be fired from the military. no one ever gets fired in the media except for groping others at christmas parties. f have you noticed that? >> brian ross did get a four-week suspension. let's be clear about that. the cnn case there were no suspensions or reprimands in that particular instance. i keep hearing, and iep saw the story in the press briefing today, reporters are saying we just made mistakes, we're just trying to get to the truth. the problem is there is a rush a to get to that every time and to cnn example is perfect with the wikileaks story because remember, the network went ahead with information that was read to them and inad

"the washington post" did thee right thing. they actually got the document that showed that the informatiot was false and that donald trump jr. and trump associates received that information ten days later. in other words, they took aas little more effort, took a little more time, and actually got the document. one more point, by the way, in terms of we hear about unnamed sources. these aren't innocent whistle-blowers.ab these are political operatives. they may even be lawmakers themselves. they realize now they can weaponize false information because you have reporters that are like that, jim comey analogy, seagulls at the beach that will eat anything and gobble it up regardless of the quality or even know what they are eating. jim, foreign affairs correspondent for cnn, he pusher out the story like everybody does when their network gets a big exclusive.s that got 2300 retweets and 3300 likes on twitter. he then sends out the correction saying we got it wrong and this is what the story actually says. you know how many retweets that got? 52.

only 148 likes. i'm not very good at math, but i believe that's about 2%. even when the correction is done, the allegation always trumps the exoneration. >> tucker: mollie, the substance of the stories, the ridiculous russia story or how many people went to some trump rally, in the end, who cares. but if we were in a war where there were an actual crisis in this country and no one trusted media outlets, what with that due to our society? w >> it's a very dangerous thing to not be able to trust a media outlet or have a generall confidence that the media will get a story right. but i actually think the substance is key here. what we have seen for the last year is an obsession with a story about treasonous collusion with russia to steal an election. the substance of that is so important. it has undermined are legitimately elected president and it has been something the media have been hammering on day after day.me multiple stories a day. what if the real scandal is that that itself was an information

operation and that it was weaponized and it was distributed through the media and our media people either willingly fell for it, or unwittingly fell for it. either of those scenarios is extremely dangerous and it doesn't feel like we have a media complex capable of really digging into the significance of that story. >> tucker: they're incapable of self reflection. i actually start to think that's exact when it was. i wish we had more time. thank you both. >> thank you. >> tucker: it's been a turbulent contest to put it mildly, but alabama senate racea finally ends tomorrow. democrats are making the contest all about race, weirdly. one african-american jones voter disagrees with that. he's from birmingham, alabama, and he's here to explain what's going on with that next. ♪ m is this where you typically shop? is this where anyone typically shops? it's time to switch to the capital one venture card. with venture, you earn unlimited double miles

on every purchase, everywhere, every day... not just airline purchases. seriously... double miles... everywhere! what's in your wallet?

>> live from america's news had a gorgeous, i caroline shively. a pipe bomb attack shaking the heart of new york city. the suspect inspired by isis set off the device in a crowded subway passageway at the height of the morning rush hour. authorities say the bomb was packed with explosive powder but failed to turn the pipe into shrapnel. the suspect, 27-year-old, the u.s. on a visa, the only one who suffered serious injuries. a massive wildfire burning in the foothill towns in santa barbara exploding in size. the fifth largest fire in california history.

the flames forcing tens of thousands of people from their homes. so far more than 750 buildings have been destroyed but the strong santa ana winds have died down a little bit allowing firefighters to get the upper hand on other fires burning in southern california. i am caroline shively, now, back to "tucker carlson t tonight" ." >> tucker: we are just a day away from what seems like the longest political contest in human history. the alabama special senate election race. democratic senate candidate doug jones facing blowback over mailers his campaign sent out last week. those flyers showed an image of an incredulous black man and asked "if a black man went afteo high school girls, anyone would try to make him a senator?" eric guster is a lawyer from alabama. he is a doug jones supporter, voted for him, an absentee ballot, he joins us tonight. it seems to me there are a lot of reasons the democrats might want to vote against roy moore. but why these flyers telling black voters he's a racist? why not go after him on the issues? i >> actually doug jones has gone against roy moore on the issues

such as roy moore's, his civil rights history and some of the things, such as he wanted to keep segregational language in the constitution. those are issues that doug jones has brought out on the flyer, i did not like that flyer, but he has promoted his campaign and he has marketed to african-american communities as well as otherer democratic bases to get them ou to vote. >> tucker: what i find i guess insulting about this, and i'm not african-american nor a democrat, so i'm just sort of watching from the outside. >> no, i don't think you are. >> tucker: it seems insulting, kind of, if someone tried to get my vote by making it all about someone who is against white people, i would say, okay, but where is he on tax rates? do you know i mean? it seems like this is a very tired way to campaign, you see it a lot. why do it in this race? >> oh, god. everybody's doing it. luther strange, when luther strange got beat down by royy moore, luther strange was one of the most race baiting campaigns i've ever seen. roy moore has done it in a way in which he talked about immigration and building a wall.

he has all these brown people on camera to say we don't like them. that is what his campaign is based upon. >> tucker: luther strange is not running for anything now. >> i'm telling you -- >> tucker: ran a racist campaign against roy moore in a primary that doesn't even make sense given the demographics of alabama. i don't even know what you're talking about. >> and that's what he did! it didn't make sense. that's the beauty of it. he's trying to create racially charged -- he was trying to create the campaign to make it racially charged and that's what he did and he got whipped.ig however, now we have roy moore who is doing something similar. >> tucker: i don't buy your premise. here is the point -- >> i am trying to educate you about it. >> tucker: there are a lot of reasons that you might be against roy moore. i think you could take his accusers seriously, you might t not like his position on x, y, or z, but he's not trying to bring segregation back to alabama and

you would have to be dumb to think that he is. let's be honest. >> i did not say that. >> tucker: i didn't say you said that. >> i said, segregation like language. i didn't say that. >> tucker: the jones campaign. >> i'm making sure. >> tucker: absolutely. >> jones is not thing he wanted to bring back segregation, that's not what he said. doug jones is bring out the fact that roy moore wanted to keep segregational language in the alabama constitution. that's a major issue for so many people including blacks and whites because we want to get rid of that language and roy moore supported it.s >> tucker: no one is trying to bring back -- that's a debate about language. but its real-life implications are pretty much zero. no one is trying to bring segregation back to the state of alabama. no one in this race. no noncrazy person is trying to do that. so it's not really about that. this is about trying to scare people and it doesn't seem like it's necessary, and it leads to lasting wounds that don't go away. why do that, and why do it in every single race?

vote for me because the other guy hatesyi you. >> i don't know why roy moore is [laughs] trying to scare people into voting for him. i don't know why roy moore is trying to scare people into voting for him. that's what his ads are portraying. they are trying to scare people about immigrants, trying to make the immigration -- the people who need immigration, the immigration bogeyman. but both sides have gone low bar with their mailers and their ads.gr i do say that. but i do support jones.ir >> tucker: here's the difference. you should be afraid of our immigration policy, because of what happened this morning in new york, what happened last week in sweden. it's not a racial question. you can be terrified of our immigration policy and not a racist. >> why are you saying we should be terrified about it? >> tucker: we are not fitting people we are letting in here r:and it's making the country poorer and more dangerous. it's not a race attack, it's a statement of fact and you are not a bigot for saying that.. >> that's not true. no, it's not. i appreciate you saying that, but it's not true. >> tucker: you appreciate me saying that? air coaster, i appreciate you coming on.

richard goodsteinin advised both of hillary clinton's presidential campaigns and he joins us now. i guess what bugs me -- and i'm not taking up the cudgel on behalf of roy moore, i'm just pointing out that like you don't need to do this. you could run a series of ads against roy moore about himm being impeached as a judge or about the accusations against him. you don't have to pretend that he some kind of klansman or george wallace replica, because he's not. why are they doing this? >> ask richard shelby why he said not only could he not vote for roy moore, but hed didn't think other people should and he didn't think roy moore represented what alabama should. and he's not talking about race. doug jones -- >> tucker: you're making my point for me. why did doug jones do that? >> he said the mailer speaks for itself. in an odd way, roy moore is the one who introduced race by talking about when america was great again, it's one there wasm labor because families were together. roy moore said we should abolish all amendments after the tenth, which would mean no abolition of slavery.

no 15th, no right to vote dependent on race. no 19th amendment giving womenen the right to vote. et cetera, et cetera. if anybody is kind of putting race in, it's roy moore. nobody is suggesting we go back to these things. >> tucker: that's kind of the point. you can agree or disagree with moore on a whole bunch of things but to compare him to george wallace or to suggest, as this flyer does, that he wants to bring segregation back. he hasn't suggested that, there's no evidence he wants that. whenever you say something like that, it makes people more afraid, it divides the country in ways that areun permanent. i don't know why democrats insist on campaigning that way every single campaign. >> all i am saying, i don't think a statement in 2011, doing away with any amendment after the tenth, this is not history, this is relatively recent. >> tucker: wouldn't it be easier to ask roy moore about how he feels about rights?

>> he's lying about these women. what you say asking? he can't level with people about what he did with these women. >> tucker: on a policy question, it's really simple. i've never thought people persist in assuming what other people think when you can just ask. roy moore, whatever you think about them, is pretty upfrontou about what he believes. on his beliefs, he is willing to say the most unfashionable things. people should say, roy moore, should everyone over the age of 18 with a felony record be allowed to vote? he would say yes. >> richard shelby, the other senator, has as much at stake and who that other position would be including donald trump. and even he couldn't bring himself to root vote for roy moore. >> tucker: my point is notou that every decent person should vote to roy moore, i don't think that.e. i'm saying, in campaign after campaign after campaign,n, democrats have only one pitch to o african-american voters, and that is the other side hates you because of your race. i just think over time that divides the country, i think in a lot of cases it's totally untrue. it's the sleaziest way to campaign. l why keep doing it?

>> could you blame a black voter looking at roy moore's record -- he is not even in the state to campaign. the fact that roy moore can't bring himself to speak to black voters and that he takes theset positions that are so antithetical, saying slavery was the time we want to make america great back to. >> tucker: look, you are not going to get me in a position where i'm defending everything roy moore says. he didn't actually endorse slavery. >> i'm not saying he did. >> tucker: why not attack his views on, i don't know, tax rates, or something real? >> but the question was when america great again, and what does he go to? he goes to the time of slavery. it's not just jones. >> tucker: you think roy moore is for slavery? >> i think roy moore has this fantasized view that yes that's when america was at its best. we had slavery, but in his adult view, families were close, which is hideous. h >> tucker: do you think roy moore -- you don't think he's for slavery?er you don't have the evidence he is a racist. >> i'm looking at what roy moore

said. >> tucker: let's be real for a second. you have evidence he's a racist? you don't. he's never said anything that's racist. he said a lot of things that many people may disagree with, but why call him a racist, that's all i'm asking. >> i think people of color find it deeply offensive when he says when we had america great again was at a time of slavery. is that racist?in yes, fundamentally. >> tucker: do you think black voters at all feel patronized by white liberals -- the only pitch they ever make is that the other side is racist. don't you think some black voters say, why don't you just treat me like a normal person and tell me about how you're going to make the schools betten or make the roads better or lower my taxes, some normal issue. do you ever think they feel patronized by that? >> i don't think that's the message. it's about health care, it's about jobs. it's about pay, it's about income equality. i >> tucker: those are real issues. those are real messages. i never hear them, but maybe they are out there. >> i think they are, but time will tell. >> tucker: thank you.

after years of calling the stori a sham, planned parenthood is now facing a federal investigation for possibly selling baby parts, which they appear to have been doing. the man who first exposed this, horrifying scandal joins us next. ♪ ♪ what i want, you've got, ♪ ♪ but it might be hard to handle ♪ ♪ like the flame that burns the candle ♪ ♪ the candle feeds the flame ♪ topped steak & twisted potatoes at applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

this ♪s electricity. this is a power plant. this is tim barckholtz. that's me! this is something he is researching at exxonmobil: using fuel cells to capture carbon emissions at power plants. this is the potential. reducing co2 emissions by up to 90%... while also producing more power. this could be big. energy lives here.

i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424.

here's the story of green mountain coffee roasters sumatra reserve. let's go to sumatra. the coffee here is amazing. because the volcanic soil is amazing. so we give farmers like win more plants. to grow more delicious coffee. which helps provide for win's family. all, for a smoother tasting cup of coffee. green mountain coffee roasters.

♪ >> tucker: america's largest abortion provider, planned parenthood, is now under federal investigation by the department of justice for selling fetal body parts. allegations against the group first surfaced when the center for medical progress, nd antiabortion organization, published footage of planned parenthood employees discussing the trade in fetal body parts. it was nauseating. if this is the first time you have heard of the story, it could be because the rest of the press is not interested in covering it, so they don't. we spoke to david gladden, who leads the center for medical progress on the subject.

>> tucker: david, thanks for joining us. what exactly is the doj looking into, what are the allegations? >> sure.at the doj is just doing their job and doing exactly what they should be doing, which is following up on two very good comprehensive investigations that were done by the senate judiciary committee and by the house select investigative panel into planned parenthood's participation in the harvesting and sale of aborted baby body parts with multiple for-profit companies that they were engaged with for about five years, sometimes even longer. >> tucker: so planned parenthood was involved in the sale of human parts, that's illegal.ol we've known this for a long time, and yet as far as i know, the only people to face legal consequences so far have been members of your group, which brought this to light, is that correct? >> so far planned parenthood's political allies in california have brought a series of totally bogus charges against myself and one of my investigative b colleagues. those are being litigated inel

california right now. but now planned parenthood is going to have to face the wheels of justice themselves because the justice department is doing their job. they are following up on some very damning evidence, documents and other kinds of evidence uncovered by the investigations. planned parenthood will have to answer very serious questions about why their medical directors are in those documents endorsing advertisements from companies like stem expressde promising a financial profit to abortion clinics when they provide body parts. why they are signing contracts that value planned parenthood's abortion body parts inventory up to the millions of dollars. there is a lot of very damning, incriminating evidence in those documents that now the justice department will have access to. planned parenthood is going to have to face the consequences for that under the law. >> tucker: presumably, you could be for roe v. wade and thd

still horrified by the idea of selling bb parts. has any permanent democrat denounced this that you have seen? >> i think the pro-lifera democrats need to speak out pretty loudly now and those who are pro-choice and pro-abortion rights and need to differentiate themselves from the radical abortion extremists there.e. who think that pro-choice means any abortion, anytime, anywhere, up to nine months. knowing the body parts afterwards using partial-birth abortions to get intact body parts. that's the face of planned parenthood today that is funded by taxpayers. >> tucker: committing abortions for selection, which they specifically allow their clinics. has any prominent democrat denounced this? any? >> you would have to ask them. i just saw my own senator dianne feinstein from the state of california, just issued a statement today in support of planned parenthood.

even in the face of them facing an investigation, a federalem investigation, from the department of justice now for their years long scheme with companies like stem express and advanced bioscience resources, and other laboratories to harvest and sell tiny baby hearts, lungs, livers, and brains from their late-term abortions. unfortunately the most prominent people who were in planned parenthood's corner still seem to be with them. and it's really a problem in the evidence is not going to be ablh to be kept under wraps to be kept covered up forever. planned parenthood's allies in high places like judge orrick. the federal judge in san francisco, overseeing their lawsuits. he has a long history of affiliation with planned parenthood. he helped open and run and fund a planned parenthood clinic in san francisco that is now part of the affiliate that is suing me in his courtroom. he needs to recuse himself, hehe still hasn't on that. he's the one trying to keep the remaining videotapes under wraph

which are now going to be all the more relevant in light of the federal doj investigation. >> tucker: 50 years from now his ancestors will be ashamed and so will dianne feinstein's of what they're doing right now. i appreciate everything you're doing. thank you. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: u.s. tech companies are more powerful than any corporations in history. what's the best way to rein them and if they should be at all? the chairman of the fcc joins u- next. ♪

♪ >> tucker: you think of the fcc as kind of an obscure federal body, not anymore ♪ >> tucker: you think of the fcc as kind of an obscure federal body, not anymore. it's under attack now for its plans to repeal an obama era regulation known as net

neutrality. a lot of people, a lot of famous people, have very strong opinions about net neutrality. they warn if it is repealed the handful of tech companies will have total control over the internet. wait, doesn't that already describe the status quo? ajit pai is the chairman of the fcc, he's been at the center of a lot of criticism recently and he joins us tonight. great to see you. >> great to see you, too. >> tucker: i don't actually know what i think this, but here's the line. if net neutrality is rolled back, a handful of companies will be able to control content and if they don't like what they are seeing they can shut it down. should we be worried about that? >> no, i think what net neutrality repealed would. actually mean is we once again have a free and open internet. they should not be saying how anybody manages the network. we had that free market approach for 20 years, starting in president clinton's time all the way through 2015. the internet wasn't broken when the obama fcc tried to fix it and we've seen the effects of these regulations over the last

two years, it's made for worse infrastructure investments, less innovation, and i think that's part of the reason why these regulations need to be repealed. >> tucker: those changes were in the middle of the biggest witch hunt in american history. corporations are complicit in that. what would happen if this was repealed in the southern poverty law center said i saw fox news the other night, that's hate speech, internet service provider, shut them down. what would prevent the service provider from doing that? >> one thing is that the fccld requires transparency. if any isp engaged in that kind of conduct they would have to disclose it. additionally the federal trade commission would have control of it. you put your finger at something very important that i talked about.oncoab where is the real threat to the free and open internet? one of the things that people have suggested, it is not internet service providers, it some of the content companies that decide what you see on the internet and more importantly, what you don't see. where is the transparency there? should we have a conversation that involves them as well? >> tucker: why don't we?

you have two companies, google t and facebook, that control 90% of all digital ad dollars. that means that basically control all news on the internet. nobody ever says anything about it, nobody appears worried it. why is that? >> i'm not sure why. what you do see rumblings on capitol hill, members of both parties in both houses are a little bit worried about what's going on in the internet in terms of transparency and how some of these decisions are being made. i have some of these concerns, when twitter restricted congresswoman martha blackburn's video announcing her run for the senate. in part because of her pro-life views. the same thing with youtube the monetizing trump supporters. dennis prager's videos. a lot of these decisions impinge on the free expression online that we've all come to cherish, but there's no real transparence into how these decisions are made.. >> tucker: and there's never any outcry, as there is with net neutrality. i'm not even sure what i think of it, but it does seem like someone is spending a lot of money to lobby public opinion on the subject, the opinions of famous people. is it the big tech companieshe

lobbying against? >> i'm not sure who exactly is funding all of these things, but what i can say is that hysteria has reached a pitch which is completely disproportionate to the facts. we weren't living in the broken internet in 2015. all of these harms that this liberties are talking about are all hypothetical. there's no market failure. internet service providers are not, and have not, blocked content willy-nilly. we are confident going forward that, given the robust rules that we have and the federal trade commission has, they won't going forward. >> tucker: we know facebook, google, and twitter have blocked content willy-nilly and continue to and nobody does anything about it. mr. pai, thank you for coming on.. great to see you. >> thanks, good to see you too. >> tucker: we will be back in just a minute. ♪

if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach.

♪ ♪

>> tucker: hard to believe an hour passed already.y. we enjoyed it. tune in each night at 8:00 to the show that is the sworn enemy to lying, pomposity, and groupthink. j dvr if you can figure that out and above all, join us tomorrow. "hannity" starts right now. ♪ ♪ >> sean: this is a fox news alert. welcome to "hannity." tonight, the destroy-trump media is spiraling out of control by manufacturing made up stories, spreading lies like we have never seen before.es fake news cnn, conspiracy tv msnbc, and other so-called news outlets have created what is an informational crisis that affects every american. it is so egregious, so damaging, and so dangerous to you, the american people. president trump is now callingam it a "stain on america." we are going to dissect the anatomy of these fake news smears meant to damage and destroy the president youst elected e.