administration needs and was promised to the american people. we'll see if they get that done and we'll watch all my government funding. in the meantime, most-watched, most trusted, most grateful you spent the evening with us. good night from washington. i am shannon bream. >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." with two weeks to gogo before the end of the year, congressional republicans our price to mark their very first legislative victory of the session. tonight or early tomorrow the senate is expected to pass the final version of a major tax overhaul bill which is already approved by the house earlier today. the bill would radically cut the corporate tax rate, increase the standard deduction for individuals, repeal the obamacare individual mandate penalty and a lot of other things. fox chief news correspondent ed henry has the latest details. >> the left is howling about this tonight which can mean only one thing. president trump on the verge of a aly major victory. over 80% of taxpayers will see a reduction despite all

the democratic claims that this is for the rich and notoc the middle class.s we have seen the stock market already on fire.av economic growth steadily climbing in year one of the trump administration. but now, it may be about to really take off. and republicans are poised to get credit for that in a next year's midterms. because not a single democrat in either chamber has signaled they are voting for this.. in fairness, though, republicans will own this if it fails to have the desired effect. democrats noting public polls have suggested this package is deeply unpopular in part. some people in states like new york, new jersey, california will see their taxes going up. this could end up increasing our national debt and the president is breaking a campaign promise by not eliminating the loophole on carried interest which makes hedge fund managers richer and big part of "drain the swamp" mantra during the campaign. this is a desperately needed win for the president. after failure to repeal and replace obamacare. remember this tax package includes, as you noted, elimination of the individual mandate within

obamacare so it dismantles at least a key plank of the last administration's legacy. quickly, here's what is in it. it cuts the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. still going to have seven individual tax brackets but many drop down to a range of 10% to 37%. the child tax credit doubling to 2,000 a year. standard deduction doubling to 12,000 for individuals, 24,000 for married couples and deduct up to $10,000 of property or state and local taxes to deal with some those concerns i mentioned. take a look at how speaker paul ryan celebrated with a video showing just how long he has been working on tax reform, so long you might want to look at this boy's face that he flashed on c-span so many years ago and he utters a phrase that suggests he is maybe more on board with the president than the critics think. >> our tax system is punishing all those qualities that make america great. >> make america great uttered by paul ryan some years ago. senate about to vote tonight 11:30 eastern with mike pence presiding as the

president of the senate.rn the house had already voted because of a procedural snafu they will have to vote a second time tomorrow. bottom line, this tax cut so many naysayers said was going nowhere is actually going to the president's desk for a signature. tucker. >> tucker: what's the time table on this, ed? >> to get to the president? it could be by the end of the week. some at the white house say it might hold it over after the holidays to start the year off with a bang. >> it would be done and take effect in the tax year 2018. >> tucker: ed henry, thank you for that summary. representing the state of south dakota, congresswoman, thanks for coming on. >> absolutely. >> tucker: is this the tax bill you wanted? >> it is a very good bill. a a compromise between the house and senate. i was on the g conference committee that negotiated the differences. this will benefit the american people. it prioritizes families and this country again. >> tucker: telling people their taxes are going down is good news and everyone would support that.he >> absolutely.on >> tucker: why hasn't it

broken 50% in popularity? >> i think a lot what the democrats are saying out there is just lacking the facts.e and they are spinning a lot of shameful claims about this bill that we just as republicans need to get out there and tell the truth. in my state of south dakota, thg average household income is $54,000 per calendar year. for our families that are in that situation, they are paying over $800 in taxes now. they are going to get a tax reimbursement now of $730. that's almost $1,600 difference for those families. and when you are making $54,000 a year, that's life changing. >> that seems a pretty simple message. why is so hard to sell that? i don't understand. >> i don't know. i think that we have been, as a member of ways and means committee i have been in the room working on the policy. making sure that it works very well. and the politics of divide and scaring people has been effective in this country and it's time that we start offering them real change that makes a difference in their pocketbooks.

>> tucker: the average family in your state gets 1600 extra bucks a year. >> that's not counting the growth in our economy. >> tucker: that's kind of hard to project. >> it's hard to project. >> tucker: but 14% corporate tax cut, people look at this and say, well, gee, you know, dow is at record highs, do companies which are posting record profits really need this tax cut? >> absolutely. the reason they are posting record profits is because of the expectation that the tax reform would happen. if you look what happened under the obama administration, our growth stagnated. we did not seat stock market doing well. i think the status quo we have proven is unacceptable. that's why this tax package is necessary. you not only need to cut rates for individuals, but get companies coming back to this country. get them hiring folks. putting them into higherth paying jobs.g that's what is going to turn it around. >> tucker: the carrieded interest loophole, a small a thing by the numbers. but it is symbolically powerful. the president ran on it again and again, drain the swamp by getting rid of this

private equity people to pay half the tax. hedge fund managers. richest people in the society still there, why? >> we certainly had that debate back and forth between the house and the senate. we did not want to discourage growth in this country. so we made sure we changed our international tax. made sure we changed our corporate tax to make us competitive and allow that reinvestment of dollars into our economy that's going to actually create the jobs. >> tucker: hedge fund managers don't create jobs, that i'm aware of, may be outside and greenwich. they have gotten really rich during a period of economic stagnation for a lot of other people.e who is for this specifically? i mean, look, you got to argue it's a small thing but it's a thing and contrary to what the president promised. i think it would be interesting to know who lobbied to keep this in. >> i don't think anybody really lobbied to keep it in specifically to me or my office as a member of the ways and means committee. i focused on the child tax credit. worked with ivanka and marco

rubio on that extensively. worked a lot on the small business provision. i worked on interestst deductibility expensing. i worked on things that were important for small businesses and farmers and ranchers, which i am one. eliminating the death tax. those are all provisions that i focused on making sure we were going to get our tax policy straight and reform done. >> tucker: so to close that out, it's not clear how this wound up there but it's there. >> all of these had debates. and when the decision was made, you know, so impressive was how chairman brady handled this process. he is the chairman of ways and means and also the chairman of this conference committee. we would put forward proposals. the entire republican conference would give feedback on. we would put in place those provisions that helped uss with the growth numbers, helped us bring relief to families. and then the bill would change. i think one of the reasons r that we are sitting here on this historic day with tax reform being done for the first time in over 30 years, it's because of that givee and take process that we have. so there was debate between

members of the conference and bipartisan committee hearings held even bipartisan discussions at the white house that was -- this bill was the result of. >> tucker: these are both >> tucker: these are both process questions, but because they were things that i republicans said 8 or 9 years ago about obamacare, i think they were worth asking. this basically going through on party line vote, no democrats supporting it and at least some republicans have conceded they didn't read it before voting on it. you kind of want to avoid those if you would juste because republicans always said and i said about obamacare you didn't even read it, you couldn't get a single republican. how did we get to that? >> you know, we honestly did have a lot of bipartisan discussions on this. i have been on ways and means for several years. we have had many, many bipartisan hearings on tax reform proposals. economists come before the committee. we had a farmer from south dakota come and talk about what would be important provisions to have in this tax reform bill. the fact that the democratshi stand on tv and say they weren't consulted is absolutely not true. i sat in the white house with president trump while we had bipartisan discussions on tax reform. >> tucker: i believe that.

>> that can be simply proven to be not true. they were consulted. they didn't want to play ball. they didn't want to help the american people. that is why this is a republican bill. americans will see benefits out of this bill next year. that's my question. if you are scoring at home -- >> um-huh. >> tucker: how do you know if this works and when will you know? >> in january, your paycheck will be bigger. less withholding taken out of your paycheck. you will see that result immediately. even small businesses that have payroll, they will see more money that they have to reinvest in their businessf and increase wages. they will take advantage of standard deduction. increased child tax credit. they will see interest deductibility available. new small business tax deduction that is in place that has never been there before. we really prioritize those that are the job creators in this country. recognizing that would what we need to see is thist economy turn around. >> tucker: kristi noem, thank you. >> thank you, tucker. i appreciate. >> tucker: a new report

details how the obama administration allowed the terror group hezbollah to import narcotics into the united states in the middle of the worst drug act epidemic in our history.ha how does that happen exactly? an obama foreign policy advisor tries to answer that question 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?

(hard exhalation) honey? can we do this tomorrow? (grunts of effort) can we do this tomorrow? if you have heart failure symptoms, your risk of hospitalization could increase, making tomorrow uncertain. but entresto is a medicine that was proven, in the largest heart failure study ever, to help more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine, don't take entresto.

the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high potassium in your blood. ♪ tomorrow, tomorrow... ♪ when can we do this again, grandpa? well, how about tomorrow? ask your doctor about entresto and help make tomorrow possible.

running a small business is demanding. ask your doctor about entresto and that's why small business owners need more. like internet that's up to the challenge. the gig-speed network from comcast business gives you more. with speeds up to 20 times faster than the average. that means powering more devices, more video conferencing, and more downloads in seconds, not minutes. get fast internet and add phone and tv for only $34.90 more per month. comcast is building america's largest gig-speed network to give small businesses more. call 1-800-501-6000 today. ♪ >> tucker: i hate to promote political, but they had a remarkable piece a couple days ago, we have to concede that. they explained how the obama administration dressed in an

departments deliberately undercut efforts to bring down a billion-dollar drug cartel linked to hezbollah, the terror group. it all happened in secret, apparently with the goal of getting a nuclear deal with iran. how did this happen? eli lake is a columnist at bloomberg, he wrote about national security and foreign policy for many years and joins us now. eli, first question, is the story from your reporting essentially true? >> well, it fits a pattern with what i would call the increasing price of the iran deal, we keep learning later that there were other concessions that were made that were not part of the explanation of video to the american public. i also heard a more general concern that as a general rule the obama administration went softer on, you know, lots of kind of iran's regional per accommodations. the specifics of this particular story, i think, i know the reporter josh meyer, i think it's solid. >> tucker: it's one thing to say look, we are not going to hassle iranian diplomats or we're going to look the other way at nonsense going on in lebanon.

but hezbollah teaming up with the mexican drug cartel to import tons of cocaine into the united states in the middle of a drug epidemic seems like a pretty big thing to overlook. >> it's not just that and you are right, that is a big deal from a drug enforcement perspective -- >> tucker: yeah. >> it's also an illicit stream of income to the main arm of iran's foreign policy. >> tucker: explain to the viewers who didn't read the piece. >> basically, it was a two way operation. it laundered money back to hezbollah but it also was a drug trafficking network. one of the things that it means is it's also a way for hezbollah to sort of have a revenue stream to then support their activities in syria and iraq and other places in the region where they are causing a lot of mayhem on iran's behalf. >> tucker: so there is no question that the obama people knew this was going on and overlooked it because they felt the iran deal was so important. i know you are probably not i know you are probably not a fan of the iran deal, but is there any way you think ethically to justify that

decision? >> well, there are decisions that are made all the time between law enforcement and intelligence gathering. >> tucker: yes. >> that is a real thing. and you can, i think, proponents of the deal would say that it's very important to do what you can to try to disarm as much as you can for the 10 to 15 years that the iran deal lasts. my issue in particular is that all of these sorts of concessions that the obama administration made should have been told to the american people up front when congress was voting on it in 2015 and selling it to the american people. >> tucker: is there any indication that members of congress knew this was going on, that the d.e.a. was being prevented from interdicting drug trafficking on behalf of the d.e.a.? >> that did i a little bit of reporting on. i can tell that you republican members are shocked at this point. there has been pushback from obama alumni. they haven't really addressed the central claims of the article. >> tucker: and the pushback consists of? >> it consists of seeing the on the record sources were from think tanks.

i think that's pretty weak. the on the record search one of them was no this task force telling his story and anonymous sources as well. so it was sort of, you know, if you can't dispute the facts, dispute the sources. >> tucker: of course, that's always the way. >> thank you. >> tucker: david is a former state department official. he advised the campaign on foreign policy questions. 65,000 people died of drug ods. beyond the point there is not massive. obama administration as that crisis was ramping up in effect allow you had tons of narcotics to come into the country knowingly. that seems jaw-dropping to me. >> this is really a story about terrorism and about our iran policy. we can agree on a couple things. first of all, that hezbollah does support terrorism. that hezbollah is an arm of iran and it carries out iran anti-american, anti-western agenda. so we should be using law enforcement to confront hezbollah. and we have been doing that. this story suggests,

however, that the obama administration pulled back on a major law enforcement investigation in order to support the iran deal. that is troubling if true. however, this story is thinly supported. and eli lake noted some of the ways in which it's thinly supported, basically based on two former dea agents who have an agenda. there is -- i have a contact. he just left the treasury department last summer. he says that this is a disgusting hit job by a can cabal of people with an agenda. so there are two sides to this story. >> tucker: that's not a side, actually. that's an ad hominem attack on the reporting without offering counters veiling evidence. let me stipulate that all stories in washington come with agenda, explicit or not, of course there are agendas. but is he saying that it's untrue? that the obama people knew that hezbollah was partnering with the mexico cartel to import cocaine into the united

states with terror money. they did know that, correct? >> if you look at his tweets, he is saying that's not true. that the interagency process involves the intelligence community, state department treasury, folks like him on the sanctions policy group were monitoring this very closely. and they did not agree that the obama administration suddenly changed its policy. now, if the obama administration did, that is problematic. but the problem is this 50-page plus story with lots of details is really just based on the testimony of just two people. and that's problematic. so it needs further investigation before you indict the entire obama administration. >> tucker: i don't know that's true. i'm not indicting the entire obama administration. the show is not long enough to do that. i am merely saying that this piece purportedly is based on interviews with dozens of people, it says, directly involved in this. there is an on the record piece of written testimony before congress, an obama treasury official saying that a specific d.e.a. operation, cassandra, meant to interdict cocaine

shipments here, was stymied on purpose. so is that true or not? it sounds like it is true. how is that not true? >> there are plenty of quotes in the article that also, from people in the obama administration who said no, that's not true. the obama administration did not provide -- >> tucker: i read the piece carefully. >> the white house did not attempt to curb the dea efforts because of the iran deal. that's a direct quote. >> tucker: because of the iran deal. there is not one line in that piece that says the facts are not true. it's a question of motive. they are saying, look, this is complex. by the way, there is truth in this. this is complex, as eli just noted. there is often debate between intel people and law enforcement people. i get it, there are a lot of priorities at stake. at no part of that piece does it say that the administration didn't lean on dea to stop being so aggressive with hezbollah. no one denying that. >> you highlighted an important thing. which is there were a lot of different objectives at work here. and there was another

objective, which was to reach the iran deal in order to curb iran's effort to develop nuclear weapons that was actually important. we should have been doing both. and i would hope that we were able to do both. this report suggests we weren't. but it is, again, based on just a couple of people's testimony. >> tucker: no, it's not actually. it's based, again, on the testimony firsthand of dozens of people, but let's get to the point that eli made. which is that congress voted on this. had no idea this was going on. how exactly does that work? why should the democratically elected congress of the united states, whose constitutional duty is to approve or disapprove a deal like this? why shouldn't they have all the facts before doing that? why did the administration lie to them? i don't understand. >> congress definitely should have had all of the facts. >> tucker: but they didn't. >> there is plenty of legislation in congress right now that is anti-hezbollah that would help with the effort to confront hezbollah. and congress has the opportunity now, based on these facts and others, to vote in favor of that legislation. >> tucker: slow down, slow down. the deal is done, okay. first of all, all those narcotics came into this

country and, again, 60,000 people died last year. so, you can't argue that it's not shaking american society to its foundation, it's drug addiction. it is. this is part of the problem. more than that, the iran deal is in place and decertifying it, undoing it, pulling out of it, has all kinds of other ramifications. like obamacare. once you are in, it's kind of hard to get out actually. why didn't congress know before approving this the whole story? >> we don't know everything that congress knew. i mean -- >> tucker: members of congress say -- >> the intelligence committees on congress, they get classified information and they were probably getting some of this information. >> tucker: so treasury called over and said, but just so you know in order to kind of sweeten the deal, we are letting hezbollah, which we designating a hezbollah organization, to partner with the mexican drug war to import tons of cocaine into the country. you are cool with that? >> you are overlooking some of this some of this was public knowledge.

one of the people arrested was hezbollah person arrested in prague. that was public information. there was some information that was publicly out there. >> tucker: what wasn't public was that parts of the u.s. government tried to extradite that hezbollah official from prague and were stymied in their efforts by the obama administration, which didn't want to rock the boat with iran. that's a perfect example as outlined in the piece. they let the guy sit there. and now he is back in beirut selling arms to people who shouldn't have them. >> that's the position this article takes. we don't know if that's true or not. i also want to talk about something else. >> tucker: [laughs] >> the trump administration has not changed the policy towards hezbollah one iota. for instance, the trump administration has looked the other way as hezbollah linked militias in iraq have taken back territory. in fact, some of them are using u.s. arms that were supplied to the iraqi army and the iraqi army gave it to -- which is basically hezbollah linked militia. >> tucker: one of the

reasons. >> are you upset about that as well? >> tucker: i think the iraq war empowered hezbollah and iran, its client. >> we agree on that. >> tucker: the point i am making is, you can debate hezbollah and its role on world stage. bad idea to allow terror group to import cocaine in your country. >> we both agree on that. >> tucker: thank you. >> thank you. >> tucker: taylor swift got on the cover of "time" magazine for accusing a man of groping. the man she accused saying she was able to destroy his life and reputation and get him fired before he could even respond to the charges. we are giving him a chance to do that next. ♪ i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424.

>> only >> only under the threat of lawsuit did they agree to sit with me. in that three hour conversation i was never told what the accusations were. who the accusers were. i was never allowed to provide any data or evidence n to debunk anything that perhaps i could have debunked if i knew what we were talking about anyway. they wouldn't allow me to present any evidence and frankly didn't give me due process. >> tucker: tavis smiley told us on this show yesterday that his career has been unjustifiably ruined by anonymous and unproven allegations. he is not the only one who feels his reputation hasas been destroyed in this moment. this 2013 photo from tmz shows pop star taylor swift with a radio show host called david muller. swift accused mueller of groping her in the picture. he was fired almost immediately.

and this month taylor swift who is on the cover of "time" magazine as a so-called silence breaker. mueller says he was neversi give the fans to defend himself before he was tanned and destroyed. david mueller joins us now. david, thanks for coming on. >> good evening, tucker.r. thanks for having me on. >> tucker: we have the picture.e it looks like you are guilty.ke what about this are we misreading? >> well, i have always said the picture was awkward. i wasn't ready. my girlfriend was talking to taylor just prior to the photo being snapped and i was several feet away. i tried slide into the photo as best as i could and that was the result. but my hand was never under her skirt.wa i never grabbed her and my hand wasn't each open. >> tucker: huh, did she say anything to you at the moment?? >> no. nobody did, tucker. >> tucker: she didn't whip hands off me" or anything like that? >> no.ke and her body guard was right there, five feet away and he didn't do anything.

>> tucker: your girlfriend was there, too. she was in the picture, as well. >> that's right. >> tucker: when did you first learn she accused you of touching her? >> we left the back stage area. i left the arena. a half an hour later we were on the main floor and i was approached by a large british bodyguard. and he wanted to talk to me. and that was when i found out that i was being accused. >> tucker: what did he say? >> he said, do you want to tell me what happened earlier? and i said, i would love to. i don't know what you are talking about. and then he proceeded to tell me that i grabbed taylor swift's rear end. and i said i did not. i didn't grab anybody. and then i asked for the police. i asked him to get my boss. my direct supervisor from the radio station. i knew he was there. and my girlfriend tried to interject because she was in the photo tent. and they told her to be quiet. next thing you know, we got thrown out.

we were told we would never be allowed at a taylor swift concert for life. that was a lifetime banay and we were on the curb. i never got to talk to my w boss or the denver police department. >> tucker: you asked for your boss and the police right then and there. what happened next? >> i asked for the police several times. and the next day i had to go in and talk to my bosses at the radio station, kygo. and i had a talent agent. i contacted my talent agent. i talked to my girlfriend's family because they were really the only people i was close to in denver at the time. and i went in and talked to my bosses and i told them i didn't do anything. and that -- and they said well why would she say that? i said i don't know. ask her. >> tucker: do you know? you were fired. she has become a kind of living symbol of the

resistance to boorish behavior like this, a survivor. you say it's all made up. why would she make it up? >> that's a good question. the short answer is a business decision. you know, my bosses never talked to taylor swift or anyone else who was in the photo tent other than my girlfriend and me. and my girlfriend and i told my bosses at kygo nothing happened. and they talked to one person from her group, from team taylor. they never talked to taylor. the only -- the first time i heard that taylor swift actually was accusing me was when she filed a counterclaim to my lawsuit. that's the first time. i didn't even know that she had said it because when i was there, you would think she would have slapped me or said, dude, get your hand off me. she never said a word to me. i had no idea there was a problem because there wasn't a problem. >> tucker: how has this affected your life?

>> well, the biggest thing it's done to me is put me in a position where i have to prove that i'm innocent which is almost impossible. but i have done the best i can. i sat down for two independent polygraphs. i passed them both. i'm willing to do another one. i've talked to all my friends in radio. i have tried to recover from this careerwise. and so far i don't have many promising leads. i have a chance to get back in radio. i won't be at the level i was at. i don't have a girlfriend. my girlfriend stayed with me for a while but it was hard. and when she knew that i was going to file a lawsuit, she, you know, that was a bit much for her to handle. but i didn't have any recourse. i had to. because i asked them to give me something in writing saying there was a misunderstanding. and there was nothing else i could do.

i had to file a lawsuit. >> tucker: i don't know anything other than what you just told us but it's clear your life has been basically destroyed by this. >> in a sense. >> tucker: david, thank you for coming on. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: the senate thinks it may have found another russian agent in this country. let me give you three guesses. you will never guess it. it's green party presidential candidate jill stein. she is the secret agent. we will tell what you crime she apparently committed next. ♪ ror penguin migration. trekking a hundred miles inland to their breeding grounds. except for these two fellows. this time next year, we're gonna be sitting on an egg. i think we're getting close! make a u-turn... u-turn? recalculating... man, we are never gonna breed. just give it a second. you will arrive in 92 days. nah, nuh-uh. nope, nope, nope. you know who i'm gonna follow? my instincts. as long as gps can still get you lost, you can count on geico saving folks money.

i'm breeding, man. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

looking for a hotel that fits... whoooo. ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over... ...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor. at bass pro shops for great last minute gift ideas. like savings of 50% on all redhead men's and natural reflections ladies' slippers. and save 30% on this butterball oil free electric turkey fryer. >> tucker: ufo sightings. they are for crazy people. everybody knows that everybody has known that for decades. maybe time to reassess what we think of ufos the past weekend the pentagon confirmed the existence of a 22-million-dollar a year program that investigated unidentified flying objects

did it from 2007 to 2012. commander david fraffer worked as navy pilot for 18 years. in an interview yesterday, he described his encounter. it happened in 2003. he came across an aircraft that he says was quote, "not something from earth." it was shaped like a tic tac. it had no wings. it could hover in place. moved faster than anything ever he'd seen pilot. appeared to defy the laws of physics as we understand them. he doesn't seem like a crazy man, we entrusted him with a plane in the u.s. navy military. if he is not crazy, then what he saw deserves serious consideration. he will be on this show tomorrow to tell us what he saw and we'll discuss the implications of it, don't miss that. well, anti-russia hysteria in washington has gotten to such a place that it's not just conservatives being swept up in it anymore. the senate intelligence committee is now investigating jill stein of the far left, not pejorative but accurate in this case, the

far left green party for, you guessed it, alleged collusion with russia. what did stein do getting all this attention? in 2015, she had the gall to attend a dinner in moscow with vladimir putin himself that was sponsored by the television network russia today which, of course, makes her ethel rosenberg. joe concha writes for the "hill" and he joins us tonight. joe, here is what struck me about this story, many things. but, one, here you have a political candidate, a politician, going to a dinner sponsored by news organization. i don't watch r.t. okay. i don't agree with r.t., but it is a news organization. it's no crazier than others ones out there. that's for sure. she is being investigated by the congress. there is no media outcry at all. everyone acts like this is totally normal. where are reporters in defending the freedom of the press they often say they believe in, in this case? >> well, because they are distracted by the "blame anybody but hillary clinton for losing the 2016

election," i mean, let's think about this now. we have had bernie sanders, james comey, matt lauer, sexism, white resentment, all blamed for hillary clinton's loss. jill stein is now part of that equation as well. and the calculus is that if all of stein's votes in wisconsin, pennsylvania, michigan, all went to hillary clinton, magically and not for the libertarian ticket or donald trump, then she would have won those states and therefore the electoral college. so now a dinner that she had in russia is being called into question before one vote in the primary was cast, a trip that she paid for on her own. she only brought one aide and now she is happy to answer any questions. again, when you are obsessed with russia this much, you have to bring in as many actors as possible. even ones that have no business being there. >> tucker: somehow nobody in the media has noticed this is a terrifying witch-hunt that's gotten so ludicrous it's sweeping up jill stein as a secret russian agent? i mean, remember studying the mccarthy era when you

were in school? and the idea was that people who stood up and sort of ripped the mask off and called it ludicrous, like ted morrow, they were heroes. where are those people now? >> you mentioned aliens before. i think aliens are laughing at us now when we start including these things and obviously the bob mueller investigation, if you call that into question as well, then it's considered dangerous or treasonous. and "the hill" highlighted a poll from last week, it was from harvard and harris. and 54%, a majority, said that they think that bob mueller is compromised in this investigation because of his prior relationship with jim comey. and you look back at the coverage of ken starr and that investigation in 1998 when he was investigating president clinton. let me share with you the "new york times" from 1998. headline, "white house is all out attack on starr is paying off with his help." they talk about in glowing

terms, james carville who was the campaign manager for clinton saying, "there is going to be a war." there is another clinton official who says this is all part of our continuing campaign to destroy ken starr. here is one paragraph from this and have you got to hear this. given the white house state of the art public relations machine, it is not a surprise that the president has appeared to enjoy the upperhand. still mr. clinton's partisan says they are amaze with the the ease of which they have made mr. starr's tactics and not the president's relationship with ms. lewinski the most scrutinized topic. in other words, this was cheered back in 1998. >> tucker: i covered that, i remember. >> i came across a story you wrote actually and i think it was "the weekly standard" where you talked about that as well. so, yeah, now criticize mueller, dangerous. then, cheers. >> tucker: look, we have never attacked mueller as a man on this show. i'm not judging him as a man. but i think all journalists ought to be skeptic call of what their government is doing at all levels. but i'm watching journalists on other channels say, anybody who asks questions

is disloyal, inciting violence, basically unpatriotic. when did that change? when did journalists become cheerleaders for prosecutions? >> apparently it changed somewhere between 1998 and today. look, is it fair to ask why bob mueller has 17 attorneys that are on this investigation, a majority of which donated to the clinton campaign? one actually worked in the -- >> this is a fox news alert. i'm kelly wright in washington. you are looking live at live pictures right now from capitol hill. that is where the senate is wrapping up a vote on sweeping tax reform. from what we have seen, excuse me, i'm listening to it on my phone, i will turn it off. what we have seen it has passed 51-48. they have made a couple of changes from the bill passed earlier tuesday in the house. now that the senate bill has passed, it will be sent back to the house for a final vote before president trump can sign it into law.

the sergeant of arms had to restore order several times in a senate gallery after protesters disrupted the vote with vigorous chance of "kill the bill" "you are wrong for doing this." democrats overall immunity against it. on the floor earlier today this vote was cast, senate minority leader chuck schumer wanted to say what it is, that's what this bill is. an absolute disgrace. he went on to add, "it is something dramatically opposite of what americans need. you want to help the middle class, give them a real tax break. it's irrefutable fact that the rich will get more breaks than the middle class. it will hurt medicare and medicaid." that coming from senate minority leader charles schumer on the senate floor moments before this historic passage of this bill in the senate. while most republicans are supporting the bill, let's listen.

>> i ask unanimous consent of the senate be in a period of morning business with the senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each. his begin without objection. -- >> without objection. >> taking place in the reagan administration, also president trump's first major legislative victory. tuesday, the house members roared and applauded as their chamber passed the $1.5 trillion package. it was approved largely along party lines there. 227-203. the vote could be closer, as we have seen, and the senate come over vice president pence was on hand, as well, to pass the tie-breaking vote. he did not. let's bring in the man of the

hour, chad pergram, following the details, all things related to capitol hill, particularly the senate and house. what can you tell us about this historic moment for the senate in g.o.p.? >> this is in fact a big win for president trump. they stumbled badly in the summer and spring to repeal and replace obamacare. they could never quite get there but don't forget there is a major provision in this bill that gets rid of the individual mandate, the requirement that you have to purchase health insurance under obamacare. that is a major provision of this bill. it was included in the senate package. it was not of the original house package. here's the lay of the land. they passed this bill tonight, 51-48. it was a party-line vote. there was one absence, john mccain, the republican from arizona. the only boat we weren't sure about, kelly, going into the roll call, was jeff flake, the republican from arizona. he was aghast when they vote in november. there was some concern about whether or not he had gotten the assurances he needed on daca.

he said we need to address this in january. he told several of us the other night that he was in a meeting and hoping to get there but he ultimately was a vote today. there were five distinct breaks during the roll call vote where vice president pence presiding in his capacity as president of the senate had to instruct the sergeant at arms to restore order and remove protesters. they were chanting "kill the bill, don't kill us." in fact, one very vocal protester called out senator flake from a gallery, said "jeff flake, have you know shame, have you know sense of decency." they did, just before this will call tonight, they had to take out some provisions in the bill. house and senate budget rules are different. the house passed this bill earlier today. he moved to the senate and because the senate was using the special process to avoid filibusters, they have to comply with certain budget rules. otherwise they would have faced a filibuster and they never would have gotten to pass the bill. so that means that provisions in this bill have to be physical in

nature. democrat said, wait a minute, there are problems we see in the bill, they are dealing with policy. one included the title of the bill that says it was "the jobs act," that doesn't comply with budgetary rules. you can overcome that if you can get 60 votes and overrule the senate budget rules. they couldn't get that. they got 51 votes on the roll call tally taken just before this. so that means that the house bill is different from the bill that the senate just approved a few moments ago. what we get into here, kelly, is ping-pong. the house passed the bill, said annette over to the senate, the senate had to make minor changes, and they will pong it back to the house of representatives tomorrow. this is really just bookkeeping. this was not a catastrophic problem. remember, they have to keep the government opened by the end of the week by the government is funded until 11:59:59 friday and that is just one more roll call vote that they weren't expecting to have to take for you to speak of chad, on that note,

senator majority leader mitch mcconnell, on "special report" earlier today, said he would be able to get it through, keep the government running, that it wouldn't shut down before christmas. but every one for my bipartisan standpoint to absolutely make sure that the government would continue to run. are you hearing anything else about that? >> that is what is so confusing. it is now almost one in the morning, wednesday in washington, d.c. the government is monday through friday night. i talked to a senior house republican leadership aide, they said it is up in the air. they don't know the plan. the house of representatives will move a bill tomorrow which will fund most of the federal government just through the 19th of january, fund the pentagon for the entire fiscal year, september 30th, including adding money for the pentagon. but that dog won't hunt to the united states senate, those are the words of the republican senator from louisiana, john kennedy. that is not going to pass in the senate. the senate will change the bill as an capacity.

one thing they're talking about in the house of representatives, is adding on this disaster funding. the trump administration set a supplemental budget request, additional to the usable budget spending here in washington, d.c. covering disasters, hurricanes, wild fires. he came in pretty low, much to the dismay of democrats and republicans. $44 billion. house republicans of democrats have lost that up to $81 billion, a lot of money, including the california wildfires, which were left out of the original package. we have not mention puerto rico and the u.s. virgin islands. it is possible, kelly, they could tack that on to that bill at one point. again, we are back to table tennis. picking and pawning bills back and forth when they don't have a lot of time picked for friday night. that is when some people here on capitol hill wonder if they could stumble into a government shutdown at christmas time but that is very dangerous because then republicans, who controlled the house and senate, will have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory come right when they get

the tax bill, the indoor a shutdown. >> that is what a lot of people are watching, and you stated it very well. i want to get back to the actual tax bill itself, though. you were talking about the individual mandate. according to senate minority leader chuck schumer, that is going to impact 13 million people, may leave them without any adequate health care coverage or in effect, raise their premiums. to that end, will the republicans, while they can have a legislative victory come have to sell this during the christmas break and their christmas recess in order to get the american people solidly behind that? >> they will sell it during christmas, they will sell it during new years, they will sell it during memorial day, flag day, for the july, 2018 is in fact an election year. i had a long conversation with steve scalise, the republican rep yesterday afternoon, and he indicated that they have to market this. a lot of people believe that

these boats in the house and senate will be the seminal vote coming into the 2018 election. republicans think this is a winner, they get things done, they can run on it. democrats think it's a real problem for them, especially for members in the house of representatives from swing states, congressman from new jersey, looking at tom macarthur from new jersey. some other people in california. it's notable who voted against us in the house of representatives. darrell issa, republican from california, usually a pretty reliable republican vote. he had a bit of a reelection scare last year, won by a small margin. chuck schumer put it just before they had to vote on the seventh floor -- senate floor, he said that republicans will rue the day. >> he also wanted to say that ignoring those who have too little is a bad idea, and then he added, the american people do not believe in trickle down. give the corporations more mone money, and they will hire more people, and he says that they

have seen no effect like that. in fact, he went on to mention at&t, how they had an 8% tax break, and went on to actually let go of 80,000 employees. so to that end, the republicans have a hard sell, do they not? >> absolutely. one of the most basic cells, what some folks call the postcard test, they say they will give it the five year taxes on a postcard, maybe, maybe not. >> finally, getting back to something else. you mentioned that this was like creating a wine more than sausage. explain to me what you mean by the senate and the house g.o.p. creating a wine, as you know, one has to be aged, it has to be tested to see if it is really good or if it is something that, as you mentioned, was a spoiled. >> they want to do tax reform for 31 years. you don't always get good legislative weather. it is a theme for a ventnor.

you can make a nice table one but you only get the good weather, the rain comes of the right time, and you can make really robust cabernet sauvignon's. republicans believe that they have made a robust tax bill but you don't know what that wind is going to taste i can you put it in the bottle, put it on the shelf, put it in your basement or your wine rack for a couple of years and open it in 2020, 2021, and you get a whiff of it and see what it taste like, and see what the bouquet is like, and maybe it is what you need in 2020 or 2021 and maybe not. you don't really know. tonight, they put the wine into the bottle. we'll open it up in about three or four years. >> earlier on the house floor after the house g.o.p. passed the bill, we heard a very euphoric speaker of the house paul ryan state this. "what this achievement marks as a promise that this majority made that is a promise that this

majority has kept." this is something he has wanted to do for a very long time and as we await a news conference from the senate, chad, the opposite, of course, was that nancy pelosi, who is the head of the democratic party on the house side, wanted to say that this is a bad bill. >> absolutely. that just shows how diametrically opposed the two sides r. paul ryan, this is one of his crowning achievements in his time as speaker of the house, a little more than two years. he was the chair of the ways and means committee. kevin brady from texas is now the chair. that is a tax-writing committee and the house of representatives. he wasn't able to pull this off as chair of the ways and means committee, he was able to pull it off as speaker. that is a big jewel in the crown of paul ryan as speaker of the house. they tried to do this for years. i can mention the ways and means chairs over the past almost 20 years. bill archer from texas. dave camp from michigan, all who wanted to reform taxes and they

could never quite get there. bill thomas from california, who was kevin mccarthy's product predecessor. they never quite got a bill this massive. you have to go back to 1986. the difference, however, is that that bill was done in a bipartisan fashion. this bill is clearly done in a partisan fashion and one wonders, back to the wind, what will it taste like in three or four years? what will it taste like in the midterm election in 2018? >> that is a very, very salient point that you just talked abou about. 1986 was bipartisan. tip o'neill, president -- all of them got together, said we have to do this for the american people. this particular case, as senator mitch mcconnell said, he said democrats had their chance to work with the republicans, but as you know, the democrats have come back and said, wait a minute, no one listened to us on the republican side and tonight, as we get ready for the news

conference, we see mitch mcconnell approaching. let's take a break for a moment and listen as mitch mcconnell takes the podium now. >> after eight straight years of slow growth and underperformance, america is ready to take off. coupled with the regulatory reforms that have already been implemented by the administration, we now add conference of tax reform, major middle class tax relief, and making our businesses both large and small more competitive around the world.

we don't want to read too much into the quarterly growth rate, but it's worth noticing, we have had two quarters in a row of 3% growth. stock market is up. optimism is high. coupled with his tax reform, america is ready to start performing as it should have for a number of years. a large share of the credit goes to every single member of this conference, who voted for the bill. i want to turn out to over chairman. first, the finance committee. >> thank you, leader. i have to say that this is a historic night. the democrats have said that the american people will remember this night. i hope they do. we passed one of the most important tax breaks in this country's history. and these folks here behind us all have contributed and made this a possibility.

and a reality. so i am just very grateful for my colleagues and for those who were willing to stand up and do this for the american people and for the american families. >> lisa? >> this is a historic night and it was a historic effort. i have never seen so many people work together so much to look at so many numbers and to make sure that they come out right. as there has been in this effort. and that is important for the american people. they will notice the difference and they will notice it soon and this country will be moving forward again. >> 31 years for tax reform, 38 years, 38 years to get to this point where we will be able to