>> shannon: these lion cubs are predicting the big game on saturday, they must lovear tom brady because they chose the patriots to win. that's it for us. ♪ >> tucker: welcome to "tucker carlson tonight" ," aftr weeks of hype and innuendo and threats and a lot of hysterics, we finally have the house intelligence committee memo in hand tonight. we're going to spend the next hour telling you about it, what's in it, what it means, what it tells us about how our leaders govern when we are not watchingin them. if you are a regular viewer you know we rarely spend an entire show on a single topic, we think this is worth it. there has been so much lying about this memo, that its lessons are being at risk of drowned out and lost, we think truth is the antidote to that.

what does the memo actually say? it's not primarily about donald trump or even about the broader russia investigation. the memo is a story of a semiobscure trump campaign volunteer called carter page, who back in 2016 was identified by the obama administration as a secret agent of the putin government. four times fbi officials went to a surveillance court and argued they had probable cause to believe that carter page was working with russia spies, he was an agent of a foreign government. three times fbi director jim comey personally signed off on this claim, deputy director andrew mccabe and rod rosenstein put their names to it as w well. why were all of these officials so certain that page -- who was a naval academy graduate, has no criminal record -- was betraying hisy country? we now know they were lying on the trump dossier, that's the unverified opposition research dumpy paid for by the rnc and

hillary campaign and compiled by a british spy called christopher steele. the trump dossier made spying on him possible. how are we sure of that? andrew mccabe of the fbi said so behind closed doors under oath to congress this past december. if the democrats are now furiously denying that in anonymous leaks to synthetic reporters. but it's obviously true, and the minute we will talk to a member of congress was in the room when he said it. if the fbi had powerful additional evidence, why did they include the dossier in their request at all, w why did they lead with that? g the trump dossier allowed our government to spy on carter page, it's not a talking point, it is a fact. given that it is a fact, it is remarkable to learn that the fbi knew at the time that the dossier was unreliable to put it charitably. an independent fbi unit analyze the document and found its

claims were only minimally corroborated. the fbi also knew that the dossier author was an inflamed partisan working on behalf of political operatives trying to win a presidential race. he actually told the doj employee bruce or that he was desperate donald trump not being elected president. if no rational personou could in good faith to reach the trump dossier as fact. that is exactly how the fbi presented to the fisa court when they asked to spy on carter pag page. that is lying, there is no other way to describe it, they have been busted lying but they won't it.t former fbi director jim comey took to twitter not to apologize or even to address the facts the memo raised much to mock the release of the memo like the aspiring msnbc contributor that he is. dishonest and misleading he said, he didn't bother to

explain how he was dishonest and misleading, comey who leaked his notes about the president and a petty revenge move after being fired is now declaring it beyond the pale for congress to carry out its constitutional duties of oversight of the fbi. he apparently used the fbi as a fourth coequal branch of the government not equal to the oversight of the other three. suddenly a lot of people in washington seem to agree with him. the current fbi director, c christopher wray argued that tht names of fbi officials in the memo ought to be redacted, hidden from public view, why? how would that serve the publict interest? ite would protect the fbi and is always that wasay the point. all of this should make you nervous, the dishonesty mixed with self-righteousness. you wonder how many people at the fbi believed that carter page was a russian agent. they don't believe that now. if they did, he would be in

handcuffs. yet he still a free man. civil liberties has been violated and his reputation has destroyed. democrats could not care less. they know it's a lie but it's all irrelevant to them. even if he is crushed in the process. ten years ago, donald trump will be gone and the democrats will have forgotten that they once pretended to fear russia as a threat to our democracy. but our law enforcement and intelligence agencies will remain as long as the country stays intact and we have got to trust them. we give them incredible powers, including the power to take human life. we allow them to operate in secrecy because they tell us they must. inha exchange for all of that, e ask them to operate with integrity. to prove to us that they haven't

become tools of a political regime because always and everywhere, that is thehe temptation. unfortunately it looked like it happened here. former u.s. attorney from the district of columbia, we have been following this on the very beginning. what jumps out at this memo now that we have it? >> andrew mccabe's testimony but for the dossier there would have been no application to the court for a warrant. >> tucker: democrats are saying on background, that's not true he never said that. >> it's true, i've confirmed it with people who are in the room. it shows us that everything we have suspected and on the public record, shows us that in fact senior doj and fbi officials not only lied to the american people but they lied to a fisa court repeatedly over a number of months but what they knew to be false information and inadequate information being provided to a

very secret court. it's a disgraceful period in the history of the department and that james comey and loretta lynch and all of the people involved in this have performed disgracefully and unconstitutionally which is even moreally important. >> the dossier is essential to the russia collusion theory targeting trump. that's the basis for the appointment of robert mueller. you've got the corruption associated with a fisa surveillance and associated with the fbi and doj working hand in glove with the clinton campaign to push this narrative beginning in the summer of 2016 and it all went to the appointment of robert mueller. there is no russia collusion story without the dossier. we now know and have confirmed six ways to sunday there was nothing behind it. therefore, why is there a special counsel investigation? >> tucker: what would help a lot i think would be declassification of a number of subsequent documents.

including at least part of mccabe's testimony and part of these requests. >> probably eventually, what's interesting about this, the democrats were complaining that the release of this four page memo would compromise sources and methods, destroy the ability of the american intelligence community to collect intelligence, all of that is obviously nonsense. what is clear now is that huge amounts of underlying intelligence have to be declassified and have to be shown to the american people so they can understand what tom just described. the fbi and the doj conspired with the democratic party, thepa dnc, and the hillary clinton campaign to exonerate her of violations of the espionage act and trying to prevent donald trump from becoming president, to frame him up for a nonexistent crime of collusion. >> we sued for the underlying

documents today. >> tucker: have those ever been released in a previous cas case? >> is fbi properly targeted james rosen. >> tucker: and his parents. >> there is precedent for the courts releasing this information. the agency can declassify it and ask the court to declassify it. what's also troubling as we were lied to just this week because we were told by the fbi and department of justice, the president of the united states was told the sky was would falf this information was released. there were no names that were released that would harm the fbi and doj -- these are officials who ordinarily would've been subject to publiccu disclosure - why was, why were they trying to railroad president trump into keeping this document secret?

>> tucker: because they were protecting themselves. >>l. and it comes out and it's o bignp deal. >> tucker: i think this raises concerns of every american of all political postures about the behavior of the fbi. are there any elected democrats you know who are saying we should find out how our government is behaving? >> no, it's quite sad. it puts the focus on jeff sessions and rob rosenstein, i have a lot of confidence in jeff sessions doing the right thing, no confidence in chris wray. we need a grand jury to investigate what the bureau and the department of justice under obama did it to do what happened in this case. there are serious crimes that were committed by government officials, there needs to be a federal grand jury and it needs to happen now. >> tucker: thank you both, very much. i'm republican representative from the state of new york, he wants the supporting memos

released right away. you say that the documents we were just talking about, the evidence the fbi brushed stomach brought to justify spying out to be released to the public, what's the argument against tha? speak of argument against it would be there could be some information over the course of the application that will include sources and methods that may need to get redacted in the effort to argue against providing any of the related material that was sourced -- some might say we shouldn't be releasing any of it. the counter argument i would provided to that is anything at all that could possibly be released for the american public, it's one thing when you lead a majority memo that was released today. it's another thing when you get an opportunity to read the adam schiff memo when it comes out.

when you see the documents created by the obama justice department and a you are seeing the abuse and misconduct at the highest levels of these agencies for yourself and the documents are created by them, then the american public is able to form their own independent judgment on their own without having to rely on what might be filters of adam schiff through a third party in the media, through a twitter account, and then you are being educated on believing that the memo that got released today was going to have all the sources and methods that it shouldn't. when he wasin complaining that - you get the point. when he was talking about those details, when reality comes out, you can see for yourself. >> tucker: the thing that democrats are pushing back against tonight is the pivotal line in the memo that says andrew mccabe behind closed

doors testimony said it was the basis of the request for the fisa court. can we get a copy of that relevant part of his testimony? >> absolutely, and we should. transcript should come out, once again adam shift and the democrats, they are just lying. they are complaining that nunes and the majority were making changes to the document, even though it was grammatical changes in those other substantive changes were requested by the minority as well as the most substantive change which was done by the fbi. >> tucker: thanks for coming on, i appreciate it. the apparent ease with which the fbi was able to monitor carter page without his knowing it should have the rest of us asking when is it acceptable to spy on u.s. citizens? has the norm become it's always

acceptable to spy on its own people? glenn greenwald writes for the intercept, he spent a lot of time covering american surveillance, thanks for coming on. i showed in the interest of honesty note the obvious irony which is the republican congress just reauthorized the law that made this possible in the firste place and it did so with very little public debate on the subject. that raises a more basic question which is why is this question -- when and how and fon what reason the government spies in its own people -- why is it so rarely debated in public? >> it's a great question. it's the reason why edward snowden decided to risk going to prison, he was concerned that this huge massive surveillance state was constructed in secret, not just foreign but inward,ut domestically for the american people without anybody knowing it. he came forward to because he was so concerned that congress and the senate never debated it,

the irony is that we have had democrats on the one hand spending the last year warning that trump is a lawless dangerous threat to democracy, we've had republicans saying the deep state is dangerous, democrats, the leadership got together with the republican majority includingcl devin nunes and it just not more than two weeks ago voted to increase its buying power and block out safeguards of how it's used. it's w incredible to watch this debate unfold. >> tucker: it's almost i nauseating. totally ironic. you know a lot about how this works, what is legal and what is not legal. what does the u.s. government need to show to a judge to legally spy on a u.s. citizen? >> in order to target a u.s. citizen the way that they targeted carter page -- which means essentially that they are going to listen to all of his phone calls, read his emails,

monitor him digitally -- need to demonstrate to a fisa court which is a court that meets in secret that there is probable cause to believe that he is an agent of a foreign government or a terrorist organization. they convinced a judge, a fisa court judge thatt there is probable cause to believe that he is an agent of the russian government. >> tucker: how often are those requests turned down, do we kno know? >> almost never. there is something like a 99.8% approval rate. the fisa court is a joke in terms of whether or not it provides real safeguards or oversight for how the nsa andnd fbi can spy on american citizen citizens. they rubber-stamp whatever it is that's put in front of them. democrats used to say that a lot when george bush and dick cheney got caught spying on americans without going to the fisa court, thegu argument of the busht' administration was it's so burdensome, it's so easy, they

never turn you down. now democrats are trying to say it's a very rigorous process. they almost never say no. >> tucker: and glenn greenwald has been a brave a voice from the left, thank you for that, i appreciate it. >> tucker: what exactly in this memo was so dangerous that you want to supposed to it? it would endanger this country for you to readul it. we'll have that next

♪ i'm walkin♪ wow! nshine ♪ i'm walking on sunshine ♪ wow! ♪ applebee's handcrafted burgers. any burger just $7.99. now that's eatin good in the neighborhood. can this much love be cleaned by a little bit of dawn ultra? oh yeah one bottle has the grease cleaning power of three bottles of this other liquid. a drop of dawn and grease is gone.

small business, internet providers promise you a lot. let's see who delivers more. comcast business offers fast gig-speeds across our network. at&t doesn't. we offer more complete reliability with up to 8 hours of 4g wireless network backup. at&t, no way. we offer 35 voice features and solutions that grow with your business. at&t, not so much. get internet on our gig-speed network and add voice and tv for $34.90 more per month. call 1-800-501-6000. >> tucker: the president wants it out even though there are concerns that the work of tens >> tucker: the president once

about even though there were tens of thousands of law enforcement may be smeared. >> it's staggering how republicans continue to put party over principle. >> this is a tipping point for ourac democracy. are we going to be a democracy after today, or is it going to be despotism? >> paul ryan is no longer on team usa or even on team old republican party, he's on team devin nunes. which means to some extent they are all advancing in some sense the interest of russia. a >> tucker: ask questions and you are working for putin. there is a meltdown over the release of the fbi memo, why is that? why shouldn't we have been allowed to see it? a former -- it's a super simple question. why should i as a task taxpaye?

>> i think the big problem is they didn't want to see the memo. >> tucker: why did they want you to see it? >> they wanted to have some balance they want the source documents to be released. i have been reading this memo all day. >> tucker: they didn't what the source documents released, that's factually untrue, they can release them right now. the testimony of andrew mccabe is a source document. the request to the fisa, democrats don't want those released. >> of course they do. i've talked to you about this last week, these are the exact things i said last week. let's see all the documents. >> tucker: we are in the agreement there, it will be interesting to see who stands in the way of that. up until today, democrats have stood in the way of releasing this. if you think there is a libelous material in here, factually inaccurate material, if you think it imperils national

security, tell me how.e in the absence of those two factors, i have a right to see it. why would democrats stand in ths way? >>ea i have been reading this ar day, it reminds me of when geraldo rivera opened al capone's vault. there was a lot of hype >> tucker: every democrat had a chance to read this, why would they having read it tell me i'm not allowed to see it? you're making two arguments.. >> i'm watching this document now, they probably should've just said let it out because it proves nothing. it doesn't endanger the rush probe, it shows that papadopoulos was under surveillance for a good reason. >> tucker: i'm not here to rebut the rationale for the russia probe. that is another show. this memo doesn't speak to those things. what it speaks to is the surveillance of an american

citizen who has in the years since shown no evidence at all that he's working for the russian government.er >> carter page has been under surveillance fore the fbi since 2013 and he was told that he was being recruited by the russians. >> tucker: you're missing theay spirit of i'm not saying he wasn't't surveilled. in order to beat surveilled the obama justice department had to make a case thatwa a he was a foreign agent. that is a slander against him. where is the evidence he was working for f russia? >> this memo isn't concerned about evidence. since 2013, the fbi has been warning carter page about russians trying to recruit him he continued down the same path. >> tucker: he's guilty? do you think carter page has betrayed this country by working for a hostel for a nation, that's the claim the obama

justice department made four times. >> i don't know if it's true or not. when we see these source documents were going to find ouh what he was doing. and how it's connected to the trump campaign. >> tucker: why is he a free man when he has betrayed his country? it's very heavy charges to someone who is not been indicted or convicted and against him there is no publicly available evidence. >> why he is walking the street is a question that should keep a lot of republicans up at night, let's leave it at that. >> tucker: it's hard to believe you would say something like that. >> i have absolutely no evidence when a guy has been under surveillance by the fbi since 2015. >> tucker: martin luther king was under surveillance. what is this?'t >> you cannot get a fisa renewat unless you show the judge that you have evidence that an american citizen was involved with what you are claiming he

was involved in. >> tucker: we know now that at least part of that evidence, the lead of the pfizer request was the trump dossier. >> that's not what it says. and it certainly doesn't prove that. >> tucker: i want to restate one question to you. do you have any evidence that carter page is guilty of the crimes you have charged him with on this show. >> absolutely not. >> tucker: then you probably shouldn't suggest he is guilty. >> i think he might be talkings to some people and that's probably why he's still walking the streets. >> tucker: this is getting really heavy. thank you, chris. even more documents on the way, a renowned professor explains how it could set a new precedent for transparency where you might have a tiny shot of understanding what the government is doing in your nam name. stayth tuned

my dentist suggested biotene. my mouth felt more lubricated. i use the biotene rinse and then i use the spray. biotene did make a difference. [heartbeat] this one's below market price and has bluetooth. same here, but this one has leather seats! use the cars.com app to compare price, features and value.

>> tucker: spending aug >> tucker: we are spending all of tonight's show on a single topic something we really do but we think it's worth it. we are still unraveling the contents of today's fbi memo. some are calling for more documents to be released. could it declassify agnes have set a new precedent for transparency and given you a better hope of understanding with the government is doing. thanks for coming on. this was the explicit concern of

the agencies including the department of justice and releasing this memo. if we release this were going to have to start telling the public a lot more about what we are doing and we don't want to. will they have to? >> that's what's most disturbing about this. you have a disconnect between what the fbi said emma what democratic member said about the release of this memo. those of us who have been working in national security cases expect there to be some type of footprint of sources and methods. this thing wasn't even remotely classified. that concerns a lot of us because the use of classification laws for tactical purposes, if you look at what the fbi said, they said we wantt this thing to remain classified because it's inaccurate due to a mission. that's complaining about how the fact is being betrayed, not how

they are classified. many critics have said for years at the fbi and other agencies have been classified materialoio avoid embarrassment. this may be a most public and relatively rare example of that. there is nutley remotely in this memo that justifies the rhetorid used by minority leader pelosi, ranking member schiff. they all say that there would be dire consequences. the fbi director said thereit would be grave problems that would be released. >> tucker: the freedom of information act as i understand that the said unless the government has a compelling reason to keep something secretive has to release everything unless it can show that it shouldn't because it belongs to the public. it seems in washington the instinct is opposite, everything is classified unless there is political pressure to declassify it. >> anyone looking at this memo can see that it's written to avoid sources and methods. it's basically what we had already heard the difference is that there were discussions of

testimony and othercu details. there is no disclosure of new sources, it was confirming that the dossier was a critical part ing securing that fisa order. the question returns us to why did all of these members say this would jeopardize nationalab security? we can have disagreements about what to do with the fbi. we should not have disagreements about something like this. when you say there is a national security risk about a document being released and it's something of this kind of they have any sources or sensitive information -- it's a problem. it's a lying to american people. >> tucker: we have a member of the intel committee on an in a minute. i'm going to lead with that. one former fbi official thinks it's a profound problem forxp te country he joins is next, to explain why

hold together.

a little to the left. 1, 2, 3, push! easy! easy! easy! (horn honking) alright! alright! we've all got places to go! we've all got places to go! washington crossing the delaware turnpike? surprising. what's not surprising? how much money sean saved by switching to geico. big man with a horn. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.

♪ ♪ >> tucker: most media outlets have spent far more time and effort covering the fbi memo's release than the actual allegations contained in the memo itself. it's almost like thee allegatios which are that the u.s. government illegitimately spied on its own citizens barely matter to them. i don't care about you. andrew clave and is contributing editor at city general, -- they both join us tonight. this pertains to the agency you spent p so much time at, you are hearing people on other channels, almost a chorus of it is becoming hysterical that people who are interested in seeing this information or have questions about the fbi are unpatriotic, they are insulting the men and women of the fbi. you think that? >> i don't think that at all.i

everything the fbi does should be out in the open and we should be having questions about things likeke this. nothing about any of these cases and what has been now confirmed in the memo has ever looked normal. we have to ask ourselves what were so many safeguards and guidelines and procedures but we always followed never followed here? i will say one more thing to that. when i went into the fbi, we had a saying that you don't want to be concerneded about propriety, you also want to be equally concerned about the appearance of impropriety. in fact, i have a lot of friends and colleagues that got in a lot of trouble because of the appearance of impropriety and this has that at the very minimum written all overt it. >> tucker: just to make sure i'm clear on this, you don't feel diminished as a veteran of the fbi when people ask questions about its behavior. >> not at all.

i've talked to a lot of friends in the fbi and outside in all of us are concerned about the irregularities of this and the top level of the fbi in the last few months. >> tucker: i can see why. mr. clave and, what do you mae of the press coverage of this? >> i think it's a scandal within the scandal and almost as bad as the scandal with the fbi. we just finished watching a spielberg movie the post about how brave "the washington post" was to defy the nixon administration and to bring out the pentagon papers despite s their cries of hurting national security, now suddenly national security is sacrosanct. i remember decades of the left squealing about j. edgar hoover and his unjustified wiretaps and now we are told that unjustified wiretapping is a nothing burger. the press has done nothing for this past year but whine about how donald trump has slapped them back and forth.

now when it comes to releasingge information, it in no way damages the public good and damages the national security, the press -- the people who are supposed to speak truth to power and spin it to make it less important. it's appalling. it brings that old latin tag, who will guard the guardians? if we've lost the press that doesn't care about the truth, to hold any powerful h person to hh standards, then we have lost the people who are supposed to guard us. >> tucker: how does someone who calls himself a journalist a default position of who we would always think there would be more information as long as there is no downside --ho how does that person argue against things the public is entitled to see? >> i think it's a holdover from the obama administration, and administration turning the federal government into a chicago style machine.

and outward malfeasance. while the press stood by, afraid to lay a finger on a president who they looked at the first black president and as the spokesman for their point of view. they didn't want to touch him and when you have no press the government is going to get out of control in the obama administration did. >> tucker: do you think it is in the fbi's interest to declassify what it can as it pertains to this investigation? things that don't jeopardize our national security. tell us more. >> the natural tendency for me in any other fbi official would be to say no. in this instance, the answer is yes. this goes way beyond what the fbi does, what the case is about, and what the particular series of circumstances is. this goes right to the idea of civil liberties and the balance of the fbi's responsible between

criminal investigations, national security and civil liberties. we messed up. we have to get this out, the sooner we do, the sooner people see as much as they can see and is much as it's safe to show them, the better off we'll all be because right now as we've seen today, national security wasn't the argument for this. t >> tucker: they lied about that, thank you both that was interesting, i appreciate the perspective. one congressman on the intel committee says they memo released todayys is an attack on the rule of law, why is that? will explain d what? yeah, liberty mutual 24-hour roadside assistance helped him to fix his flat so he could get home safely. my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. don't worry - i know what a lug wrench is, dad. is this a lug wrench? maybe?

you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

and i'm the founder of ugmonk. before shipstation it was crazy. it's great when you see a hundred orders come in, a hundred orders come in, but then you realize i've got a hundred orders i have to ship out. shipstation streamlined that wh the order data, the weights of , everything is seamlessly put into shipstation, so when we print the shipping ll everything's pretty much done. it's so much easier so now, we're ready, bring on t. shipstation. the number one ch of online sellers. go to shipstation.com/tv and get two months free.

♪ >> if he were to release that memo, he would not only >> if he were to release that

memo, he would not only be endangering our country, he would also be violatinghe the rules of the congress of the united states. >> the release of this memo is reminiscent of the darkest days of the mccarthyhe era. >> there is zero proof or evidence that there is political bias in the fbi. if you say it long enough and often enough, there will be people who have doubts about it. it's a profoundly unpatriotic thing to do. >> tucker: you're not patriotic if you want your questions answered. democrats are lashing out. something profound is happening here. they are very upset by the release of the memo. house minority leader nancy pelosi said president trump just sent his friend putin a bouquet. congressman, many democrats including democratic leaders pelosi and schiff said before its release, it would jeopardize

national security. that turned out to be a lie because there's nothing in this, why would they tell us that if they knew it wasn't true? >> you should be concerned about this too. it it doesyo sources, should red the memo because they were reported on, it doesn't mean we acknowledge them in ongoing investigations. >> tucker: please be precise a about how it jeopardizes our national security. a lot of us are concerned about doing that and i would never want to play any role. that's why it's such a seriousdo charge. >> you're playing a role in doing that right now. we don't acknowledge sources in ongoing investigations. >> tucker: what source are you talking about? >>nt the memo goes into papadopoulos and page and others that you only knew about because they were reported on -- >> tucker: i knew about papadopoulos because he was indicted. you just accused me of

endangering national security and i they gets fair to be very precise in how i'm doing that. not the larger danger >> you'veu can either apologize or explain it. iou think it's how does that jeopardize our country's security? >> because we don't reveal a source of an ongoing investigation. let me finish. at every police station in america, the police are interviewing a suspect in your suggesting we should give the suspect the evidence before we ask him the question. they gave the white house evidence in the rush investigation. >> tucker: i'm talking about me as an american citizen who had a chance to read this much talked about the memo today and

i listen to people like you explicitly tell me that i'm hurting our country by reading it. >> your also hurting our country but not acknowledging the rule of law has been runle over. >> tucker: one serious crime at the time. you don't have an answer whichth is why you're not answering the question. >> i give you a bunch of>> answ answers. >> tucker: iat have literally no idea what you're talking about. we know from this that carter page four times was described by the department of justice as an agent of a foreign power. >> and in 2013 and as well. >> tucker: has not been revealed before.e. >> i'm revealing something you should have read, which was his testimony where he acknowledged he was person a and the indictment in 2013 was he was suspected of being a russian foreign agent. >> tucker: i don't think he

was accused of it. >> he was suspected of it. >> tucker: do you think since the doj accused him of that before, a fisa court, is he a foreign agent? >> he's under suspicion, it's an ongoing investigation that is not closed. it's still an open investigatio investigation. >> tucker: if you're going to impugn the man's character, suggesting that he's betraying his country, committing treason. i think it's fair to ask you man-to-man no innuendo do you think is betraying his country? >> i think you're not allowing the fbi to answer that question with what you and others are doing. >> tucker: all i want is for my questions to be answered. i sit here an open, willing repository for all information including your m.o., including the documents that supported thisis memo.

>> you support our memo coming w out. >> tucker: you support our memo coming out? absently. what i don't support is making reckless allegations about other americans that you cannot c support. youti just said on my air, on my show that -- my going to be arrested for that it seems like something a man could be arrested for. >> these are important times in our history. either you are supporting those who are undermining the independence of the department of justice or your standing firm and this was wrong, i wish you were on my side because i think you know better. >> tucker: i'm not sure what you are talking about. >> i don't like what you're talking about but more profoundly i don't understand i

it. >> why don't you reader memo? >> tucker: tell me one thing i have said that you think makes all americans including my children less safe? >> you continue to support the idea that we should give it suspects in criminal cases the evidence against them before we ask them any questions. d >> tucker: i do think we should give them the benefit of the doubt as the constitution requires them to do. call me a liberal. one of i said that i think we should give evidence -- i'm not sure what that means. i think people charged in a criminal case have t a right to the evidence against them? >> not when they are being questioned, not when they are under suspicion. >> tucker: what information have i given -- >> do think is a problem they were sent evidence of the rush investigation when they are subjects?

>> tucker: may be i would in the case of today's memo, what specifically have i espoused that empowers threats to our country? >> you are peddling the narrative that the trump administration is putting out. which also is the putin narrative because they are we tweeting this with their russian bots. if you are on the same side as wikileaks and it putin, you should take a step back and wonder who's bidding are you really doing? >> tucker: i don't know what to say, i don't want to explode on tv i'm going to end this segment now. >> i'll see you nextef week. >> tucker: will be back soon. rg. any burger just $7.99. now that's eatin good in the neighborhood. theseare heading back home.y oil thanks to dawn,

rescue workers only trust dawn, because it's tough on grease yet gentle. i am home, i am home, i am home

so, howell...going? we had a vacation early in our marriage that kinda put us in a hole. go someplace exotic? yeah, bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. what? what happened? i got a little over-confident on a moped. even with insurance, we had to dip into our 401(k) so it set us back a little bit. sometimes you don't have a choice. but it doesn't mean you can't get back on track. great. yeah, great. i'd like to go back to bermuda. i hear it's nice. yeah, i'd like to see it. no judgment. just guidance. td ameritrade.

successful people have onthey read more.on. how do they find the time? with audible. audible has the world's largest selection of audiobooks. books like peak performance... and endurance. books that energize and inspire for just $14.95 a month. less than you'd pay for the hardcover.

with audible, you get a credit-a-month good for any audiobook. if you don't like it, exchange it any time. no questions asked. you can also roll your credits to the next month if you don't use them. audible members use the free mobile app to listen anytime, anywhere. ...on the go... or in the car. the audible app automatically keeps your place, no bookmarks required. so you'll pick up right where you left off, even if you switch your phone... ...to your echo at home. get more books in your life. start a 30-day trial and your first audiobook is free. cancel anytime, and your books are yours to keep forever. listening, is the new reading. text "listen 8" to five hundred five hundred to start listening today. >> what's the difference between disagreement and bad faith? disagreement is legitimate, it may be contentious but it's honest. bad faith is what you just saw. when you ask a legitimate question and you were shouted down, indeed accused of a crime. a sitting congressman just

accused this show of harming american national security and working for vladimir putin. it's going to be an incredibly intense couple of months. we're going to cover every bit of it on this show. thanks for sticking with us. hannity is next. >> sean: welcome to hannity. breaking right now, the highly classified fisa abuse memo has been released and it is absolutely shocking. it is stunning. now this now is the biggest abuse of power, corruption case in american history. now tonight we have irrefutable proof of a coordinated conspiracy to abuse power by weapon thighsing and politicizing the powerful tools of intelligence by top ranking obama officials against the trump campaign against the constitution and against your fourth amendment rights. they have been deeply shredded by deep state unelected bureau cats all in an attempt to influence an election and then undermine a duly