everybody. good to have you on the story. tucker carlson in d.c. is coming up next. we will see you back here tomorrow night in new york with more on the story. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to tucker carlson tonight. today congressional republicans finally passed their overhaul of the u.s. tax code and they sent it over to the white house for the president to sign. it's a major moment but the legislative year here in washington is not yet over. with taxes out of the way, congress must now return to that enormous he will fact that has been soiling the carpeting of the congressional living room for months now. we are referring needless to say to daca. it's been three months since president trump announced the end of that obama era program, the one that gives job permits to illegal immigrants who came here as minors. permits under that program will start to expire this spring and early march. democrats have said they will use the year-end

spending bill to shut down the federal government if more than 700,000 people here illegally under daca don't get amnesty. now, a single paragraph from a politico piece yesterday on the negotiations tells you everything you need to know about how democrats are looking at immigration policy now. quote: congressional republicans in the white house have long said that any daca deal would need to be paired with security and other enforcement measures. democrats say that's fine as long as the provisions weren't too onerous. end quote. in other words, democrats are fine with border enforcement, just as long as it doesn't work. that's why they are against the wall. the administration has already moved on the central point of the debate. they say daca recipients can stay here legally. but, in return, their family members must be explicitly barred from benefiting chain migration. if those relatives want to come to this country, they have got to get in line with everybody else trying to come to this country.

employers, meanwhile, ought to be required to use everify so that they can prove ail their employees are here legally. icities must cooperate in helping to enforce american immigration law. these are not crazy demands. it's not extreme to say that amnesty should be limited to dreamers and not their extended family and other countries. not ought to follow existing federal statutes or that big city mayors should stop pretending they run their own countries. these are basic ideas they treat existing imforeign relation law as real. something that should be enforced. they assume not every single person on earth has the moral right to enter this country for any reason and go on public assistance. by the way the public agrees with those ideas, strongly if you believe the polls on the subject. democrats don't believe in them. any measure that makes it harder for immigrants to come here illegally and stay forever at public expense is racist and immoral. they have said that repeatedly. why do they think that? is there some good reason to think that? is there any economist on

the planet who believes the key to thriving in a high tech economy is importing millions of poor people with fifth grade education who don't speak english? is that good for your country? of course not. but democrats don't see immigration as a way typically prove the united states. but, instead, as a way to transform the country to their political advantage. there is no precedent for this attitude in american politics. it never happened. traditionally politicians try win votes by improving the lives of voters. it's pretty simple. it's been going on a long time. herbert hoover, a chicken in every pot, a car in every garage that was his promise during the 1928 campaign, he whop. voters appreciate it. they always do appreciate it if they think you are trying to help them. bill clinton got elected twice because he campaigned on actual tangible concerns of middle class people. that all seems like ancient history. democrats don't do that anymore. moderate democrats understand changing the minds of voters is hard. especially when you despise them and attack them for the sin of, i don't know, being

white or male or privileged or hetero normative or whatever. they don't like you if you don't like them. so, you don't bother changing their minds. you change the voters themselves. look at virginia. it just happened there. the state's elected representatives decided long ago they didn't want the state's laws made by those who break them so they deprived convicted felons of the right to vote. terry mcauliff knew it would benefit his party if felon could say vote again, so he unilaterally restored those rights and attacked anyone who disagreed as baking got. remember that? currently control over virginia's house of delegates hinges on a single race where the candidates literally tied with more than 23,000 votes cast. in other words, mcauliff's gagamut work why not try it on a national scale group larger than convicted felons. they know if they keep up the flood of illegals they could turn it into a flood voters for them. they don't have to foster economic growth or be capable administrators or

provide good government. they just have to keep the pump flowing and power will be theirs. it's not a conspiracy theory it's happening in public. you can watch it happen. when democrats howl about shutting down the government because they want total surrender on daca, remember, this is the reason why. their political success does not depend on good policies but on demographic replacement and they dual anything to make sure it happens. one more thing by the way. in the interest of nonpartisan fairness and honesty which we believe. in it's not just democrats who believe in protecting illegal immigrants at all cost. senator jeff flake of arizona, he is retiring but he is still a republican. he agreed to support the g.o.p. tax plan in return for the promise of an amnesty deal. you thought the tax plan was about cutting your taxes or making our economy stronger. doing something for this country. but for jeff flake, and likely for other republicans on capitol hill, i hate to say it. it's true. the real priority was making sure that not a single illegal was deported. that's what they really care about.

congressman democrat who represents the state of california joins us. thanks for coming on. >> good to be with you. >> tucker: the priority is revealing. all the things going on in this country, a lot of them bad, and democrats in the congress have said the one thing we won't put up with is not giving amnesty to 700,000 people here illegally. why is that number one on the list of concerns? >> it may or may not be number one. it is among the list. it is one of the issues on the list there are others. there are the healthcare issues that are out there. the 9 million children in the children's health insurance program want to get that funded without cutting other essential health programs which is the current proposal that's being put forward. so there are series of issues. there is the healthcare issue. this there is certainly the issue daca is one of them. actually, we kind of stand with the u.s. chamber of commerce on this one. >> tucker: i bet. you are taking money from the same people. i just wonder. >> we do? >> tucker: sure. this is a concern of big business, of donors. they want cheap labor.

>> it's more than that. >> tucker: is there any economist you ever met the key to pros parity is importing a lot of poor people with low levels of education. >> that's quite different than the daca issue. the daca issue are usually young men and women who came here as children with their parents. many young children, five years, even younger than that so they grew up here. they are really american in every way except they don't have the papers. >> tucker: their educational levels are considerably lower than that of -- they recommendation actually, i have the numbers right here, 22% have a bachelor's degree compared to 32%. 10 points below native born americans, relatively few of even high school degrees. >> many in the military. >> tucker: there are some in the military. my question is as a broader question of policy. we are in a high tech economy. everyone knows that skills and education are key. why are we letting in a million low wage low skilled workers every year. >> an even better question than that why did we spend

1 trillion, $500 billion and not a nickel on education. not a nickel on job training. we just did that today. you know, we set priorities today. we said the priority is to transfer a huge amount of money to corporations and to the super wealthy, the top 1%. 83% of all that money. and not a nickel for education. not for the job training you just explained. >> tucker: i wonder why you are not holding up the government over that or carried interest. the big democratic donors hedge funds, private equity guys. you are not shutting the government down over that. >> we should. >> tucker: instead, it's to give citizenship or legal status to people here illegally, i'm beginning to think maybe the motive is getting new voters, honestl honestly. >> i don't think it will make a difference on the voting scale. what does make a difference there are 800,000 young men and women literally raised in the united states who say they are going to be deported very shortly. this is an important workforce. 22% of, what, 800,000? we are talking about, what,

you want to do the math? we are talking about. >> tucker: it's a lot of people. i just wonder, i don't think there is any person who says the u.s. economy is crying out for more low skilled labor. it's just not. you are from california. >> why don't we talk about the agriculture labor program where there is a need for low skilled workers. >> tucker: future is not for people with fifth grade education. it's for engineers. these are not engineers. >> well, we are looking at somewhere north of 70,000, if it's 22% that have that graduate degree. >> okay. but it's still lower than the national average. i guess here, my question. the daca question is unique because they didn't have consents when they came here. they came here as kids. but, why should we allow their relevant tistles in foreign countries to come here by chain migration? if you are a relative you have got to come the way everyone else comes when they immigrate to the united states. >> the chain migration question is a legitimate question and it needs to be answered in the context of a

comprehensive immigration reform. >> tucker: hold on, the debate is now over daca. going to happen imnegligently right now. why not say look, we will give up on chain migration. everify, you should have to fault federal law. >> you are talking to a fellow that's been the number one advocate of everify. >> tucker: amen. i'm so glad. why don't you convince your fellow democrats everify, end chain border migration. these are not crazy ideas. the public supports the ideas. >> there are many things we can do on immigration policy and those are some of them. essentially the everify is extremely important it ought to be there. there are other things that need to goo long with that and i will give you an example. california is the largest agriculturally producing state in the nation. depending heavily on imgrant labor force. that labor force is not available today but if you had the ag labor program. if you had a comprehensive review. everify, comprehensive border control along the way and by the way, as ranking

member of the coast guard maritime, you really want to spend some money wisely? put it into the coast guard. that's where most of the contraband is coming in. and increasing amount illegally. >> tucker: nobody trusts congress on border enforcement because they lied to us. that's why we have these problems to begin with. why not cool the temperature, reassure everyone that only the daca people are getting amnesty by just saying we are not going to allow relatives to come through chain migration. >> i'm not going to debate that with you. >> tucker: so you will be okay with that. >> chain migration is an issue to be dealt with. >> tucker: why wouldn't anyone be for that? >> well, i suppose somebody that is here that would like to have their mother or father come in. >> tucker: yeah. but they are not voters so they don't get a say. >> they could be. >> tucker: like said that's my whole point make them voters. >> they may already be discontinues. can i give you couple examples of people that have become citizens and they would like to have their family come.

>> tucker: they can come. they can get in line conservative else. good to see you. >> my pleasure. thank you. >> tucker: you will his difficulties haven't done anything to make people think better of hillary clinton which kind of weird. new gallup poll shows clinton rating 36% all time low approval 61%. all time high. what is going on here? editor at "time" ink inc. thanks for coming on. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: i don't want to pile on hillary clinton. she lost. that's enough punishment as far as can i tell. this may say something bigger and interesting about the country. her numbers among women are much worse than you would think for someone who is the self-described champion of all women. a lot of women don't like hillary clinton. why is that? >> i can't necessarily answer that question. i think it depends on how are talking to. if you are looking at these polls specifically it, showed that there was a drop

from 79 to 78% among democrats who were taking this poll. and the poll among republicans was from 11% to 5%. so i don't know if, you know, the number of women who support hillary clinton is really the issue here. really more that this is split across party lines. i have a loft thoughts on why that might be. >> tucker: that is definitely true. of course it's a party line thing. it always has been. her numbers among women are soft. she has been asked about it repeatedly. she lost to bernie sanders in the primary and lost married women in the general. she wad asked. why is that? i think they, women are publicly disrespecting themselves. i don't know what their -- i don't think they know what their own arguments are. in other words, they are too silly to know that i'm a great person. isn't that kind of patronizing? >> i have heard this from fox news hosts many times when hillary clinton says women didn't vote in their best interest by voting for donald trump and i certainly agree with her on that

point. i think that saying that her approval ratings among women are loy doesn't necessarily mean that the approval ratings of donald trump are then high for those same women. so, you know, there are certainly things that hillary clinton has skeletons in her closet. she has been criticized most specifically by donald trump and the g.o.p. and this network in particular over and over and over again. >> tucker: hold on, jillian. fox is one among many, many networks. i know it's this thing where it's fox's fault. okay. married women voted against her. unfortunately they are not all our viewers. you know the thing about women is they just don't know what's in their own interest. they just don't understand what they say. you would look at me and say wow that's patronizing, maybe even sexist. why is it okay when hillary says that about women. >> i think she was right in saying that women who voted for donald trump are voting against their own interest given the fact that donald trump has history of bragging about, you know, alleged sexual harassment against women.

given that a lot of the programs that he has put in place from the minimum wage or from advocating for not as high of a minimum wage to the healthcare bill disproportionately effects women. that's my view and also proven out by fact. >> tucker: these are obviously subjective statements you are making. not factual statements. don't adult women have the right to decide what they think is best for them without being patronized by liberals? >> they absolutely have the right to make the decisions that they believe are best for them. i think you could also say in this election a lot of people in a lot of rural low income people actually voted against their interests in voting for donald trump because, you know, the healthcare bills that he would propose and the tax bill that's going through are things that are going to disadvantage them. you can say this is sexist, you can say this is elitists. if you actually look at the policies in place they disadvantage women and low income part-time and disadvantage people who voted for donald trump. i don't think that's patronizing. i think that's true. >> tucker: might be worth medicine talgt on why they did that maybe people hate

you because they don't like your skin color or gender or where you live. you know, maybe that kind of wrecks the deal for you. you are not going to vote for somebody you think hates you. that's true for both sides u let me ask you this, hillary's book tour went on forever. i guess the numbers are going down because she has been doing all these media appearances trying to sell this book. she is incredibly rich already. why do you think she had to go on the world's lodgest book tour and try to sell this book beyond the point that people really wanted to buy it. what was that about? >> i don't think it was beyond the point that people wanted to buy it i know a lot of people were hungry to learn what lessons she took away from this election. what i really want to know is why are we talking about hillary clinton's approval snraghts i wants to talk about donald trump's abysmal approval ratings. >> tucker: if hillary clinton wants to move to barbados and do whatever hillary clinton does in her spare time, that's fine for me. hillary clinton placed herself at the center of public attention for almost

a year trying to sell this book. i have think it's fair to respond. i don't think i'm hillary hater or anything like that. she is jumping around trying to be relevant. >> she is not a public figure. she is not in public office. why does she even have an opinion. she is a civilian. i also don't think that -- this is the most watched cable news network in the country. i don't think that you guys can spend a lot of time inorder nangtly bashing hillary clinton. tongue tuck i'm actually not bashing. let me ask you one final question. okay? i don't want to be mean, but, can you think of a single interesting or insightful thing hillary clinton has ever said? i have covered her since 1992. and i have never hard one. have you? >> yes. i can think of many interesting and insightful things. >> tucker: hit me with one fun to be. i will let you deliver it. >> i think the fact that she acknowledged in her book various reasons that came to light about why she wasn't elected including counting for her own tactic k58

mistakes and some of the sebletionism leveled in the campaign and the nationalism and populism that the donald trump campaign played into. i think there was a lot of insight in that book. when you ask about the book tour and i was somebody to wanted to read that being boo. i wanted to noe what happened. i want to know why donald trump is our president. >> tucker: i could have told you sexism. could have called me and i could have saved you. >> that's not the answer but we don't call male politicians shrill and unlikeable. >> tucker: i don't know if they're shrill and unlikeable i would be happy to. and there are some who are shrill and unlikeable. you challenged me to that and. legitimacy of the mueller investigation. up next we will talk to congressional republicans who has been following this. and some answers to questions that may have arisen recently. we'll ask him coming up. ♪ f doctors

and pharmacists for their own frequent heartburn. f doctors and all day all night protection. when it comes to frequent heartburn, trust nexium 24hr. ♪ it's the most wonderful time of the year ♪ ♪ ding dong, ding dong $50 gift card for them, $10 bonus card for you. only at applebee's. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. but having his parents over was enlightening.

♪ you don't like my lasagna? no, it's good. -hmm. -oh. huh. [ both laugh ] here, blow. blow on it. you see it, right? is there a draft in here? i'm telling you, it's so easy to get home insurance on progressive.com. progressive can't save you from becoming your parents. but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto.

♪ ♪ >> tucker: fbi deputy director andrew mccabe spent 8 hours testifying before the house intelligence committee yesterday. the testimony was behind closed doors. secret. even though recent events at the fbi have raised major concerns about transparency there because there isn't much at all. the bureau repeatedly has refused to turn over materials congress requested. even though that's unconstitutional. and special counsel robert mueller's investigation has been damaged at least in its reputation when we found out it was filled with democratic partisans were the majority of the lawyers he has hired are democratic

donors. congressman matt gates is a congressman representing florida of he has called for an end to the mueller investigation and he joins us now. thanks for coming on. >> good to be on. >> tucker: we can't learn much if anything about the testimony because it was ridiculous. >> how ridiculous is that in the american people have a right to know whether their taxpayer money were used to undermine the president of the united states. the american people deserve to know whether the fbi was working to undermine the person they elected. that's why we need to have open hearings. if there is corruption in this hearing the best disinfective is going to be sunshine. >> tucker: in the absence of transparency are beginning to flower. no one trusts anyone in washington all of a sudden. that might bring back some trust. one of the key questions not to put you on the spot but maybe you know the answer. agent strzok who fame musclesly had an affair with his coworker. his text messages came to light last week. in them he talked about a meeting in andy's office. did we find out if that andy

is andrew mccabe. we did not find out. we have andrew mccabe before the judiciary committee tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. that also will be behind closed doors. it's obvious it is mccabe. this is the circle of people directly involved in the hillary clinton email scandal that migrated over to the trump administration trump investigation. over half the people on the hillary probe donated to hillary clinton or barack obama. have you weissmann, the number two, praising people for defying orders from the president of the united states and then peter strzok, the very person who may have dressed this up dossier as an intelligence document going from the clinton scandal to the trump investigation carrying his bias with him and then planning, actually planning action to undermine the president. >> tucker: do we know if the fbi paid for the dossier or any part of the dossier? >> we have asked that question of the attorney general, the fbi director, and roach stein. and none of them will tell us. how arrogant is that, tucker, that our own government will not tell us

if they used our money to go and pay russians in conjunction with the democratic party? this is stuff that you would see any a banana republic. not the united states. >> tucker: i'm confused none of those people were elected by investigators. you are elected by voters. this is a democracy, supposed to be in charge of the way the government operates, right? >> absolutely. >> tucker: yet, you the elected official can't get answers from the appointed officials, why is that? >> that's why we are issuing subpoenas, tucker. either we will get answers to these subpoenas. we will find out this information and share it with the american people or we need to start holding the senior officials at the fbi and the department of justifiable in contempt. it's totally unacceptable in a democracy to have the bureaucrats telling the elected representatives of the people that we don't have a right to know whether or not the methods and practices that were utilized were legal, were fair. >> tucker: it's a subversion of democracy, i agree. your own party agreed to allowing this testimony hid behind closed doors. you're a republican. you are one of the younger

members. what does the leadership of your party think of you going after them in public on live tv for that decision. >> look, i think it was the wrong decision and i'm not alone. we had over 20 members of the judiciary committee demanding a second counsel to investigate the clinton foundation and bribes that may still be impacting our national security going forward. and that shows that there is a desire within our caucus to get answers for the people we serve. i can't go back to my district and explain to my voters that, well, we just didn't get any answers so we gave up. we decided to throw our hands in the air. that's not fighting. >> tucker: good for you. i'm not sure what i think. i'm confused. i follow it pretty closely and i still don't know. >> the attorney general can fix all of it, tucker. the attorney general has the power to step forward, demand answers and where we see clear evidence of bias to shut down the elements of the investigation that are fed by that, that are led to actions to undermine the president. but it's like we have got an attorney general who is a spectator at the department of justice and not the real leader of that agency. >> tucker: congressman, thank you. good to see you tonight. >> good to see you.

>> tucker: california town menaced by what race racists. can they cut their way to utopia, excuse me, shocking, 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. this is not a cloud. this is a tomato tracked from farm to table on a blockchain, helping keep shoppers safe. this is a financial transaction secure from hacks and threats others can't see. this is a skyscraper whose elevators use iot data and ai to help thousands get to work safely and efficiently.

this is not the cloud you know. this is the ibm cloud. the ibm cloud is the cloud for business. yours. ♪ ♪ we are the tv doctors of america, and we may not know much about medicine, but we know a lot about drama. from scandalous romance, to ridiculous plot twists. (gasping) son? dad! we also know you can avoid drama by getting an annual check-up. so we're partnering with cigna to remind you to go see a real doctor. go, know, and take control of your health. it could save your life. doctor poses! dad! cigna. together, all the way.

dad! i was wondering if an electric toothbrusthan a manual.s better and my hygienist says it does but they're not all the same. who knew? i had no idea. so she said, look for one that's shaped like a dental tool with a round brush head. go pro with oral-b. oral-b's rounded brush head surrounds each tooth to gently remove more plaque. and unlike sonicare, oral-b is the only electric toothbrush brand accepted by the american dental association for its effectiveness and safety. my mouth feels so clean. i'll only use an oral-b. oral-b. brush like a pro. ♪ >> tucker: well, the government of palm springs, california out in the desert is plotting a war on racist trees. since the 1960's, a row of

tamarisk trees separated a golf course from historically black neighborhood. now locals were say the trees were planted with racist intent and the city plans to clear cut them as a result as punishment. the cost? $169,000. tray daniel is a resident who supports cutting down the racist trees and he joins us tonight. thanks for coming on. >> good evening. thank you very much for having me. >> tucker: i want to put up on the screen. first i thought this was a crazy story. we have learned a lot about what's racist in 2017. here are some of the things we learned this year are racist. ice cream trucks, car insurance, little mermaid, dr. suess, milk, math, science, the bible, grammar, the iphone x, emogis, jingle bells, babies, solar eclipse, the anti-racist book to kill a mockingbird is racist and simpsons. now palm trees in springs are racist. what racist sentiments have they expressed to you. how can you prove these trees are racist?

>> thee trees, tucker are not racist. a tree is neutral. it's benign and it's not the tree. it is the individuals and their intent when that particular type of tree was planted in that particular location, back in 1958, 59, 60-61. >> tucker: right. >> you see, that neighborhood on the 14th and 15th fairway is the original african-american neighborhood of palm springs. >> tucker: right. >> now as late as 1950s, the national board of realtors had in their code of ethics and i'm paraphrasing that no realtor should be instrumental in introducing into a neighborhood any race or nationality that will cause property values to deteriorate. >> tucker: i'm aware of that. we had a lot of all of things were in those codes. i know that. >> that's right. and, yes, they were. and you see that golf course, that black housing

development in 1960 is right on the 14th and 15th fairway. you build golf courses for one purpose and that's to sell homes. you cannot sell homes to white people or anyone else. >> tucker: hold on, you also build golf courses to play golf. i'm wondering, so i have no doubt though you have improved it though i'm willing to believe threw was racist intent in placing these trees and a lot of things going on in this country 55 years ago. why we punishing the trees to that you just conceded. >> we are not punishing trees. >> tucker: we are killing them. >> because the african-american -- the black families whose property are adjacent to those trees and if you have done any research on the tree, you will know that's one of the nastiest trees around and it's also been declared a environmental disaster by the federal government. >> tucker: wait, now, slow down. hold on now hold on. because that tree is a foreign tree, you are calling it nasty? >> correct. absolutely. >> tucker: i guess the

california i grew up in was a little bit welcoming to foreigners because the tree is not from california doesn't mean you have to kill it and call it names like racist. >> why -- we are not going to talk about it. we are going to talk about that tree, the way it is not maintained has depressed and deprived black families, whose properties are contiguous adjacent to the 14th and 15th fairway for 65 years from enjoying and property taxpayers from enjoying the same economic benefits of being on a golf course. the same he is stat thick benefits and social benefits. >> tucker: has it protected those houses from golf balls at all? there is always an upside to these things. >> people don't go out and say we are doing this for racist reason. they say we'ring go to give you landscaping. we will landscape you out of existence. by the way these trees are going to protect from you golf balls. >> tucker: there is truth to that, isn't there? hold on, look, the people who made these decisions. >> anything else they didn't. they plant only a free on

this section of the golf course. >> tucker: don't attack the trees against i find that often because they are not from california: people have made long dead in many every case. you are still hell bengt on killing these trees by your own admission commit nod sin, did nothing wrong. does that seem a little unfair? shouldn't we punish the guilty and not the innocent? >> i really take exception to what you just said. this has nothing to do with the trees. it has to do with black families and. >> tucker: they are just getting killed in it but nothing to do with them. they are just kind of in the way. if you were a tree you might feel a little differently and maybe you meditate on that. >> are you a tree? >> tucker: i'm not. >> what species are you. >> tucker: big enough to think about their perspective. >> concerned about the black people and their property values? you would rather save a tree then help a black family. >> tucker: i'm not saying that at all. >> that's exactly what you are saying. why would you not help these black families improve their property values and give

them the same rights as taxpayers. all the white families do on this golf course. >> tucker: slow down. i'm not convinced that trees need to die to make you feel better. that's it. think about that and come back. we can continue this conversation. i wish we had more time. trey, thank you. wow. that was intense. president trump's political action committee has a new ad touting what it says are the president's recent success stories. fox news chief national correspondent ed henry has taken a look at it and he joins you now. >> tucker, good to see you. exclusive tonight. how the president and advisors are trying to pivot out of the tax cut win to enact the rest of his agenda. once again, they are facing nay sayers who say the tax plan will not work. democratic leader chuck schumer today cited at&t cutting yobs in event years claiming there is no way the tax cut will trickle down to employees. hours later president announced at&t is doing the opposite giving out $1,000 pony news to 200,000 workers. increasing capital spending by a billion dollars.

several others like boeing doing similar. nau the president wants to pivot to immigration, infrastructure and other big items on the agenda. a gruesome his advisors that were called a group called america first policies is planning $1 million dv ad blitz starting on christmas day. we have it first. >> thank you, president trump. >> thank you president trump. >> thank you. >> every day americans are standing up to thank president trump. >> thank you so much. >> for making america great again. >> thank you for cutting my taxes. >> thank you for fixing our economy. >> thank you for keeping my family safe. >> thank you for putting america first. >> thank you for supporting israel. >> as veterans, thank you for reminding us to stand for our national anthem. >> thank you, president trump. >> thank you, president trump. for letting us say merry christmas again. ♪ you it? >> is focused very heavily on the president personally. his advisors say that's because they feel he has been beaten up from day one. millions of americans grateful for his leadership. they got taxes done and they will get behind him to get the rest of the jeantd

passed. we will see whether that happens next year, tucker. >> tucker: ed henry thank you for that good to see you. new opioid ad in being attacked because it's offensive to junkies. maybe that was the idea. we have all the details next. ♪ ♪ ♪

when you have a cold, stuff happens. ♪ { sneezing ] shut down cold symptoms fast [ coughing ] with maximum strength alka seltzer plus liquid gels.

-oh! -very nice. now i'm turning into my dad. i text in full sentences. i refer to every child as chief. this hat was free.

what am i supposed to do, not wear it? next thing you know, i'm telling strangers defense wins championships. -well, it does. -right? why is the door open? are we trying to air condition the whole neighborhood? at least i bundled home and auto on an internet website, progressive.com. progressive can't save you from becoming your parents, but we can save you money when you bundle home and auto. i mean, why would i replace this? it's not broken. ♪ >> tucker: federal officials are running a series of ads in the state of massachusetts intended to fight the opioid epidemic. that doesn't seem like a crazy thing to do since massachusetts is one of the states hit hardest by opioid abuse in od's. the resist the risk ads use vivid imagery like a newborn baby hair written detox tomb stones of people killed by overdoses. the attorney general of massachusetts whose name is marah healey is not impressed by. this she is complaining. her complaint is, among other things, that the ads quote stigmatize opioid

addicts. harvey carr is a boston radio host who has his finger on the pulse of new england joins you now to confirm this is a real story. right, howie? did the a.g. really say these ads were too mean to junkies? is that real? >> yes, tucker, she is very concerned about the stigmatizing. that's her word stigmatizing opioid addicts. you know, it's reared because they were never concerned about stigmatizing cigarette smokers. that never bothered them. but, somehow you know, if you see a tombstone and you think about whether or not you're going to die, that's bad or if you're taking drugs and you are pregnant, somehow if you see that the baby that's about to be born might be addicted, that's going to discourage you from going to a doctor. i don't understand this at all. but, you know what this is all about, tucker, is the fact that the justifiable department, jeff sessions and donald trump are

sponsoring these ads on buses and trains. mara healey is one of these attorneys general in the blue states that she is making her political bone so to speak on going after donald trump by her own account she has sued or participated in lawsuits against donald trump more than 20 times in the last 11 months. i mean, that's what she does. that's her rationale. she raises money off it. she gets favorable headlines in the "boston globe." that's what this is all about. she is just a grandstanding. >> tucker: these aren't her voters. working class america doesn't vote democrat nic. if syrian refugees were dying the would be demanding against opioid. howie, thank you for your insight. >> thank you. >> tucker: are we alone in the universe? an 18 year naval veteran says the answer may be no. he ran into an aircraft that he says defies the laws of

physics. he will join us in a minute to tell us what he saw. ♪ ♪ you switched to the capital one quicksilver card. and how do you feel? [sighs] like a burden's been lifted. those other cards made you sign up for bonus cash back. then they change categories on you every few months. then you had to keep signing up! you...deserve...better. now get out there and keep earning that 1.5% cash back on every purchase everywhere. thanks, doc. i'm not a doctor. what? [whispers] time to go. what's in your wallet?

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.

>> tucker: u. if os have been conspiracy theories for decades. often mocked for talking about it maybe they shouldn't be mocked. commander david gav gave row spent 18 years as a naval pilot. 2004 he had unforgettable contact with aircraft he said was defying the law of physics. thanks for coming on tonight. tell us what you saw. >> well, we were on -- we had launched on routine training mission. when we joined up we were told that the event was going to be cancelled and

that we have real world tasking and sent out to the west. take in mind this is taking place about 100 miles southwest of san diego between san diego and mexico on a clear, perfect day why get out to the spot they tell us it is at. we start looking around. both of us, both airplanes see disturbance in the water and white 40-foot long tic-tacs shaped object just hovering before the water. there is no reporter wash, there is no wings, nothing. as we drive around in a clockwise flow we get to the 9:00 position and i said i'm going to go down and check it out and other jet is going to stay high. as we go down, when we get to the 12 clock position it starts to mirror us. it's in a clockwise flow and opposite side of the circle for us. it's in a decline we are in dissent. we take a look at it takes about 5 minutes from the time we show up. i get over to the 8:00 presidency. it's about the 2:00 position and i decide i'm going to go

and see what it is. it's about 2,000 feet below me. i cut across the circle. as i get to within about a half mile of it rapidly accelerates to the south in two seconds and disappears. >> tucker: what would you estimate the speed? >> well above super sonic. it like bullet out of a gun it took off. >> tucker: so from what you know about aerodynamics, mechanics, physics, should this be possible what you saw? >> not with the technology that we have today. not at all. >> tucker: even now, even 13 years later? is there anything that unof yout you know of capable of this kind of behavior. >> when we saw the video of the ir. it has next saws. no discernible things of anything form or propulsion. this thing came from a dead hover over the water moving around to a climb up to

about 12,000 feet to rapidly accelerating away in a climb and in less than two seconds it was gone. you figure 50 miles of visibility and can you easily see an object that size easily after 10 miles and it disappeared in seconds. >> tucker: what would be the effects on a human pilot of the g forces involved in that altitude change? >> well, the altitude wouldn't be bad. it would be the acceleration. >> tucker: right. >> well, honestly, i wanted to fly it. >> tucker: yeah, i bet. >> you know, talking to some physicists. they don't think the human body could handle that kind of force. >> tucker: doesn't sound like the human body okay bottom line, what do you think this was? >> i believe as do the other folks that were on the flight that we -- when we visually saw it was something not interest this world. >> tucker: presumably you expressed that belief to your superiors. what did they say? >> actually, we caught a lot of grief getting back to the

boat. and i it got passed off as an event that no one could explain. keep in mind, they had been tracking these for two weeks prior to us seeing it. this was the first time that manned airplanes had been airborne when the objects appeared. >> this feels like a really big story to me. it's not exactly clear why vladimir putin is more interesting than this. i think this seems like a big deal and commander, i appreciate you taking the time to talk to us about it. you seem sober and believable and i appreciate it. >> thank you very much, tucker. >> tucker: thanks. we feel a little betrayed for months chris cuomo has cedar our weary soul. now is he pushing sinister gender stereotypes. we will show you the evidence and explain. that's next. ♪ ♪

with advil's fast relief, you'll ask, "what pulled muscle?" "what headache?" nothing works faster to make pain a distant memory. advil liqui-gels and advil liqui-gels minis. what pain?

when you're clocking out. sensing your every move and automatically adjusting to help you stay

effortlessly comfortable. i can even help with a silent night. does your bed do that? i don't actually talk but i can tell you how you slept. i'm the new sleep number 360 smart bed. let's meet at a sleep number store. i used to have more hair. i used to have more color. and ... i used to have cancer. i beat it. i did. not alone. i used to have no idea what the american cancer society did. research? yeah. but also free rides to chemo and free lodging near hospitals. i used to maybe give a little. then i got so much back. ... i used to have cancer. please give at cancer.org.

♪ >> tucker: i think it's fair to say that no cable network

has ever promoted a rival anchor the way we have promoted chris cuomo of cnn it's just not done. we have chronicled his whit, his mystical philosophical musings. we love chris cuomo on the show we did until the other day when he suddenly pulled off the mask and began trafficking in the most dangerous gender stereotypes. be too uncomfortable to show you the tape. hopefully we could learn having in this moment. we warn you now is the time to have the kids leave the room. okay, roll it. >> that is the sippy cup grip that you are using there right now. i don't get all the hands thing and the glass. you know, i don't know what it's all about. this is what i drink out of. i drink out of and i hold it like a man with one hand. you know, that's me. >> right, that's you. you just have giant. >> certainly not one of the concerns you want to hold a cup that's what you do.

>> tucker: like a man? really? or as the kids on twitter say seriously? you would think we would be past comments like that. maybe we had evolved a little bit that at a time like thissed when country is trying hard to be sensitive and inclusive that the rest of us wouldn't have to feel endangered bye byary gender assumptions like these the outdated discredited claim that there are two biological sexes with meaningful differences between them. wake up, grandpa. it's 2017. you think of all networks cnn would be a safe space where hate like this wouldn't be tolerated but, no, apparently it's like the middle ages over there where people still holds, quote, like a man. stereotypes, anyone? honestly, a little more than a little disappointed. was anyone other than chris cuomo we would be tempted to lodge a civil rights complaint at the justice department or at the very least switch to msnbc. for chris cuomo we will be patient. we think he can grow from this and we hope he does. that's about it for us tonight.

tune in every night at 8:00 to the show that's the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity and smugness and group think. dvr it if you know how that works. judge jeanine, one of our favorites, in for hannity tonight. hey, judge. >> judge jeanine: thanks so much. i have to tell you, tucker, i always want to stay on your good side. [laughter] >> judge jeanine: all right. welcome to hannity, i'm jeanine pirro in for sean. there is a lot of major breaking news tonight. we start with president trump and republicans scoring a major victory in keeping a huge promise to the american people. by passing historic tax cut bill. the president and members of the g.o.p. celebrated the accomplishment at the white house. let's take a look. >> it's been an amazing experience. i have to tell you. hasn't been done in 34 years. but, actually, really hasn't been done because we broke every record. it's the