need that more than anyone else. >> martha: we will be back here tomorrow night with more of "the story." that is our "the story" for tonight. tucker carlson coming up next. ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." rahm emanuel may be a democrat in one of the most democratic cities in the world, but that doesn't mean he is popular there. this city of chicago was falling apart in a lot of ways, it is deeply in debt, over 50 billion in debt. 650 murders there last year, most of the schools are genuinely terrible. he would not sign your own kids under any circumstances. not surprisingly, polls of chicago voters from last year showed rahm emanuel's approval rating at about 25%, with numbers like that, there is no chance he will be reelected next year. but like a lot of unpopular democrats, brahma manual has a

plan to keep himself in power. he can't win over existing voters, and he hasn't been able to. he can create new ones. chicago is rolling out a new government i.d. card called the city key. a few months ago, he said it was supposed to bring illegal immigrants out of the shadows. the cards don't store personal information, i.c.e. can't use them to enforce federal law, and that is intentional. chicago has announced that these cards, which were designed for illegal aliens, can be used for voter registration, in other words, noncitizen illegals will be able to vote in the city of chicago, including in federal elections that affect you. that is illegal. congress passed a law against it, it's explicitly illegal. yet the city is encouraging it. when a reporter asked this alderman about this, he did not care. "there is nothing stopping someone from getting a fake i.d. now and going to try to vote, he said. that is true, of course, but there is a significant difference between ignoring voter fraud, which is wrong, and

abetting it, which is horrifying. authorities in chicago want ineligible voters to vote. why would they want that? as the "chicago tribune" pointed out, it's pretty simple. rahm emanuel wants to get reelected. if it takes illegal to do so, fine, whatever it takes. we contacted the mayor's office for contact, and it did not bother to respond. the justice department for some reason doesn't seem to be doing anything about any of this. it is not just happening in the city of chicago. in the state of california, illegal immigrants good driver's license, hundreds and hundreds of them, and they can use those to register to vote and some do. in the state of maryland, some towns are trying to legalize voting for illegal immigrants. how long until that is a democratic party platform? how long at all some federal judge in hawaii declares that preventing illegal aliens from voting is racist and demands they get the boat immediately nationwide? it's coming, of course it is. the left wants power, and this will give it to them. chicago alderman sponsored the bill creating the ids and he

joins us. thank you for coming on. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: do you support noncitizens voting? >> i think there's a misunderstanding about the city key is. as a library card, access to the mass transit, a municipal i.d. that gives people who are exiting homelessness the opportunity to prevent an i.d. where a driver's license or state i.d. might be too expensive. it also is available to our undocumented neighbors. but let me be also clear. in order for someone to register to vote, they would have to sign an affidavit and present a birth certificate, a passport, a social security card, and potentially, you'd still need a second form of i.d. and if you fraudulently, if you defraud the chicago board of elections, the illinois state board of elections, and you are undocumented, you are subject to deportation. so this is not a municipal i.d. >> tucker: i just want to get this on the record. you are factually inaccurate.

i just want to hear you say it. you are saying that in order to register to vote, and the state of illinois, you need to produce evidence of citizenship. is that your claim? >> yes, it is. i also think it's important to recognize that what you are suggesting is that the city of chicago, the illinois state board of elections, the chicago board of elections, and undocumented neighbors are all coordinating with one another. >> tucker: i'm not suggesting -- slow down. i'm not suggesting a conspiracy. i want to get back to my original question, do you support noncitizens voting? i think it'll be interesting to hear your view. i'm not adjusting a conspiracy. i'm merely saying that when you let illegal aliens use this card, which was designed in part for them, and don't be disingenuous and pretend otherwise, that would be a lie, as you know. the mayor bragged about it. when you let them use this card to register to vote, but in fact you are not required to show proof of citizenship to register in illinois, you're wrong. you have to say that you're a citizen, you don't have to prove it.

you are abetting voter fraud and you know that. >> is simply not true. i know the rules to be a voter registrar, there are laws in place, and frankly, i just don't feel like it makes sense to turn communities, we like to celebrate our neighbors. we like to say -- >> tucker: it's not a question of celebrating our neighbors. you can celebrate someone, appreciate them, take them to dinner, while still understanding that only citizens are allowed to vote. let me ask my question for a third time. do you think noncitizens should be allowed to vote in our elections? >> the federal law, state law says that only citizens can vote. i'm not going to say and play a game where we will demonize -- >> tucker: it's not a game. what do you think? there is a federal law passed in 1996, the u.s. code, that says that noncitizens cannot vote in federal elections. they were allowed to vote -- >> i believe in federal law. >> tucker: you don't believe in federal law because this city card, the i.d. that you made possible his explicitly designed

to prevent federal immigration authorities from enforcing federal law. obviously you don't believe in federal laws. i just want to know what you think. if you could make the law, would you allow, as a theoretical matter, noncitizens devote? speaker i mean, no, of course not. we have laws up on the books to make sure that citizens can vote. i just don't believe in demonizing undocumented immigrants. that is not how i run my office, this is not why i ran for office. i'm a son of immigrants. and when i hear this kind of rhetoric -- >> tucker: that's irrelevant. you're a citizen. the question is not do you like all people here, that is a separate category. the question is, is there a meaningful difference between a citizen and noncitizen? you are trying to erase that difference. so what would be the difference is? what do you think should be the difference is? what should citizens get that noncitizens don't? >> there are lots of noncitizens, by the way, who pay taxes. there are lots of noncitizens,

undocumented neighbors, who serve in the army. >> tucker: you are trying to bypass my question. this is not a referendum as to whether they are nice people. >> some have given their lives. >> tucker: that is true. i'm asking you a much deeper question, and you may not get this on your political life often, but has to do with citizenship, the foundation of the country. what is the distinction between citizens and noncitizens? what do citizens get that noncitizens don't? why is that a meaningful distinction? >> citizens have access to a social security card, and some have access to the social safety net. in those distinctions have always been in place, which is why people work so hard to come here to become a part of our american fabric. it's why my parents came here. i just don't believe that these dog whistles -- i'm not suggesting you are making them -- but i am saying that people around the country -- >> tucker: what do you mean by dog whistles? what does that mean? >> what i mean by dog whistle is that there seems to be a

national rhetoric to pit for read people against poor black and brown people. >> tucker: i know you have a history of race baiting, so i'm not surprised you did that. i just want to ask you, let's be real, this is chicago. chicago is not a city where anybody is trying to win a lot of poor white voters. african-american voters are dissatisfied with the mayor. and everyone i know who covers chicago politics says, this is an effort to basically ignore them in favor of a new class of voters, some of them noncitizens. it's not about whites on any level. >> that's not true. there is no grand conspiracy between chicago elected officials and the mayor's office, the board of elections, and people in this city, to say, let's defraud the electoral process. >> tucker: what is the city -- this is the actual foreign interference in our elections, the idea that foreigners could be voting. you are doing a lot for illegal aliens in your city.

what are you doing to prevent them from voting and elections? >> let's be clear. there is one, evidence that the russian foreign influence meddled in our election. >> tucker: foreigners are voting in our elections. were you doing about it, if you care about foreign interference? >> i want to know why did the commission was disbanded because they were looking for all the information -- >> tucker: what are you doing? you just gave an i.d. card to people here illegally in violation of our laws and you are letting them use that card to register to vote. what are you doing? >> my family will have that i.d. card and we will use it to check out books at the library, just like someone else will. i will use it to get on a train. this is a him a usable i.d. >> tucker: i'm talking about voting, which is different. mr. alderman, were out of time. anthony pulled the town i was also a chicago alderman and he joins us now. thank you for coming on. so this seems -- what is the city doing to make certain that people who are not allowed to

vote under federal law, who are not citizens, are not voting? this seems to make it easier for them to vote, despite with the last guest just said. >> yeah, very so. first of all, thanks for having me on the show, tucker. the funny thing about the way this idea set up is that it's enticing illegal immigrants to obtain the i.d. they are telling people that when you obtain this i.d., any information you give us, we are going to discard at after that, which means anybody that is illegal, come and get this idea. the hard thing for us to swallo swallow, the illinois state board of election is actually stating that you can use this i.d. is a form to register to vote and the onus is solely on the applicant to attest that they are a citizen or not a citizen. we are operating government on the hopes that people are going to follow those rules, and they are here illegally anyway, so our hopes are that they are going to check that box.

it scares a lot of us. it's not what we are looking for. i am a son of an emigrant, as well. >> tucker: there are a million immigrants. it is not a question of who was an immigrant, the question is who is a citizen. who has a right to vote and who doesn't? it's not about race, either, obviously. the question is, what would prevent an illegal alien, a noncitizen with this card from voting in an election in chicago? >> absolutely nothing, tucker. absolutely nothing. here's the crazy thing about chicago, as we have committeemen that go out and they have registered to vote forms. and that is going to be in a gym with maybe 200 people in there and in a more comfortable setting, where checking that box that you attest you are a citizen could be a lot easier. all that paperwork assented and you receive a voter card in the mail. this card to set up, if you look at it, it looks like a driver's license, a whole bunch of bar bar codes and numbers. if all of the information is thrown out on this, what does that come back to?

you are documented -- >> tucker: exactly. the last guest, your fellow alderman, told us that in order to get register to vote, tell mike in chicago, you had to proe birth certificate. that is not true. is it? >> is absolutely not true. >> tucker: that's a lie? it's a lie that he just told. >> we pulled it off the computer, we pulled up a sheet, as well. you can actually fill it out online, mail it in, you check a box and sign your name to it. that is pretty much edge. >> tucker: i appreciate it. i want to bring our previous guest -- i want to confirm, because it is he willing to come back? you just heard that. you claim to the beginning of the segment that you had to show proof of citizenship, a birth certificate, to register to vote, but that is not true. i just want to be clear, do you want to stick with that false claim? >> i read to the rules and the law. i'm not sure where the alderman is getting the information from.

clearly, there's a difference of opinion on a different of facts. >> tucker: are you saying that every person who registered to vote in your state has shown proof of citizenship of the united states? is that your claim? >> people who register to vote have to show two forms of i.d., one can be a passport, which requires you to be a citizen. he birth certificate which shows where you are born. a driver's license, social security card, and now you can show one of the two. >> tucker: oh, so you don't have to show proof of citizenship because of course, this card has none of the data on it, a social security card can be bought down the street. that is the whole point! >> tucker come a point of clarification as well. after this i.d. was created, the illinois state board of elections has come out and said that they will accept the city key as a form of i.d. to register to vote. you can go in there and -- we are crossing our fingers that you don't check -- >> tucker: fizzes voter fraud. the end of citizenship. also the end of the segment.

thank you both, gentlemen. that was interesting. we have an update on the gun-control rally that cnn held last week. after the event, high school student called colton claimed that cnn tried to give him a scripted question to ask on camera. colton came on this show last week on thursday to tell his story. cnn denied the account. no colton and his parents sent us their email correspondence with cnn, which seem to confirm his claim that his question had been altered by a cnn producer. on friday, we asked cnn to verify and comment on those emails. because that with our journalistic duty, so we did it. a short time before air, cnn provided us a different set of emails. we asked the hobbss about those, they said they were being slandered by cnn and that is where it stood, two sides telling contradictory stories, without access, we can only guess which one was telling the truth and guessing is not enough. tonight we have more, and update. the hob family concedes that they did remove a line from out of their emails in a way that might make some think it its meaning had changed. colton's father said it was

accidental. we don't know, we can prove or disprove that. for the sake of honesty and for the closure, to which we are committed, we have to tell you there is no evidence as of right now that cnn tried to give colton a hobb encrypted quite -. the republican congressman is reintroducing a democratic bill from 2013 verbatim, word for word. suddenly democrats are not eager to pass it. why is that? we will tell you next. ♪ [burke] at farmers, we've seen almost everything so we know how to cover almost anything. even a "red-hot mascot." [mascot] hey-oooo! whoop, whoop! [crowd 1] hey, you're on fire! [mascot] you bet i am! [crowd 2] dude, you're on fire! [mascot] oh, yeah! [crowd 3] no, you're on fire! look behind you. [mascot] i'm cool. i'm cool. [burke] that's one way to fire up the crowd. but we covered it.

talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ like you do sometimes, grandpa? and puffed... well, when you have copd, it can be hard to breathe. it can be hard to get air out, which can make it hard to get air in. so i talked to my doctor. she said... symbicort could help you breathe better, starting within 5 minutes. symbicort doesn't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden symptoms. symbicort helps provide significant improvement of your lung function. symbicort is for copd, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema. it should not be taken more than twice a day. symbicort contains formoterol. medicines like formoterol increase the risk of death from asthma problems. symbicort may increase your risk of lung infections, osteoporosis, and some eye problems. you should tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. symbicort could mean a day with better breathing. watch out, piggies! get symbicort free for up to one year. visit saveonsymbicort.com today to learn more.

if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. when this bell rings... ...it starts a chain reaction... ...that's heard throughout the connected business world. at&t network security helps protect business, from the largest financial markets to the smallest transactions, by sensing cyber-attacks in near real time and automatically deploying countermeasures. keeping the world of business connected and protected. that's the power of and.

you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh, sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. now you can get it, too. welcome to the party. ♪ >> tucker: republican congressman matt gaetz of

florida has introduced a bill that would increase oversight of the fisa courts, the courts that allow the government to spy on you by making judges subject a presidential appointment at senate confirmation, bringing democracy and transparency to the process. democratic congressman adam schiff of california may find that bill familiar. he introduced the exact same bill word for word five years ago. apparently this time he is not eager to back his own law. why is that? did his principles change or did his short-term political calculations? we invited congressman matt gaetz to join us as well as former hillary clinton campaign, to advisor, richard goodstein. to you, congressman, this is a word for word the same bill. tell me if i'm wrong. the person who wrote the bill is refusing to support it or seems like you want. why is that? >> it seems odd that when barack obama was president, democrats wanted to give that president more power to work with assented to get members of the fisa for that aren't part of the d.c. swamp, but that come from all over america, and

have the opportunity to represent the values that americans hold dear regarding their liberties. i did not change one comma and adam schiff's bill, because i think everyone to democrats and republicans will be in power ine future. i think we ought to work together rather than work separately. >> tucker: that he send you a thankful text? >> i asked for him to cosponsor it and i have not heard back. >> tucker: how strange is that. richard, would you mind calling him? i want to be clear: good for adam schiff, whom i rarely complement, for introducing this bill in the first place five years ago. it seems like a common sense reform. why wouldn't he supported now? >> can i remind you why he introduced a bill? in light of the edward snowden leaks that were thanks to wikileaks, who were vilified by republicans back then and donald trump said, i love wikileaks on the campaign trail. my point is that things get twisted in odd ways. >> tucker: hold on.

he wasn't just vilified by republicans, also by democrats. to be fair, i don't know why republicans didn't supported them. they should supported and so should everyone. honestly, how could adam schiff, who poses as a man of principle, they also support his own bill? that doesn't make sense, does it? >> i think the rules of the senate have changed about confirming judges. you'd have to ask him. i am not here -- >> tucker: you'd have to be. >> back then, he had ron wyden and other liberal democrats who were supporting the principal, the interests of protecting individual freedoms. i think there was something behind it. >> tucker: i agree. all of this gets to the core question, these dueling memos, republican and democrat, nunes and schiff, get to the question of the fisa warrant. what did the doj say in order to spy on carter page? why can't we see that? why can't we decide for ourselves? >> we should, tucker. i'm glad that the white house has joined the call to see more

of what was a mess fisa application and i think that we will be able to see things that adam schiff wrote that are verifiably untrue. i think that will bolster the claims that we are making on the republican side that there needs to be reform and there needs to be accountability for people at the fbi who withheld the political origins of this dossier from the court. that is the real problem here. there is no dispute that cash at the dnc was convertible into a government-sponsored warrant to spy on american citizens. whether you are a republican or democrat, that should concern you because it could happen to any of us. that is why we need reform and frankly, it be nice if we didn't all go to our separate corners politically, if we found ideas that republicans or democrats had offered that would provide the transparency and oversight to give the american people confidence. to speed when i agree. who knows, but a really, sincerely hope, that if the roles were reversed, and the rnc had paid for a document, that some republican administration had used to spy on a rival political campaign, that would be principled enough to say that is an abuse of power because it

is. i'm sure you agree is a civil libertarian, you just said you were. we should be worried about that. bye shouldn't we see the fisa application? >> i am a civil libertarian. i more so an american citizen who cares for the integrity of the united states and the fbi was concerned with -- for good reason -- is that carter page was a foreign agent. maybe they did it no trump people knew. i will say this, the russians approached one campaign, and one campaign only. >> tucker: i know, he's in the pocket of putin. it's really simple. why can't we see the fisa application? this is our government. they spied an american citizen. why can't we know? >> you have to ask the fisa -- >> tucker: why would i support that? why don't democrats say let's end this nonsense. >> fisa a secret by design. the fact of the matter is, what schiff said and is unrebutted is

that the dossier had relatively little role in getting out warrant. >> tucker: let's find out. >> there was a reference -- >> tucker: how do we know? is there any support in congress, if the russians want to control the political process, they are doing it now, paralyzing this debate, which we could end instantly by making it public. is there support? >> as long as we are able to redact sources and methods come where i think we should be able to find agreement, i don't think the democrats will want to do that because the dossier was the lead piece of evidence, it is what every lawyer you know -- >> tucker: why not and the poison? >> i agree with the congressman that they should be put out. there is no disputing that the whole investigation preceded the dossier been concluded. papadopoulos was the tip of that spear. >> tucker: we don't know that. let's find out and then we could do a show on it. no rush until the congress

will -- no russia until the congress releases edge. let's put it to bed. thank you both. barbra streisand is out and about. she said the president called the parkland shooting apparently via black magic. we will tell you how d wow he t andgu how she said it. stay tuned. ♪ i beg your pardon? he says, you should have chosen full-car replacement. excuse me? let me be frank, he says: you picked the wrong insurance plan. 'no. i picked the wrong insurance company.' with liberty mutual new car replacement™, we'll replace the full value of your car plus depreciation. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

>> tucker: there is still no evidence that the 2016 election was hacked in any way but rather than back down from that claim, some are getting bolder with it.

in a recent interview with "variety," barbra streisand says that the 2016 election was stolen with rigged voting machines. she also believes the george w. bush wins with a product of regular voting -- rigged voting machines. she also blamed the president for the parkland shooting. she said he "brings out the violence and people" like a shaman. joe concha writes about media for "the hill" and he joins us tonight. the question is not -- no one is surprised by barbra streisand saying this. the question is how it was covered. to the press cover this like they cover, i don't know, sarah kids? breathless disbelief and shock and horror? or did they let it go? >> let it go and a big way, tucker. you mentioned how barbra streisand brought up how she knows for a fact that voting machines in wisconsin and michigan were compromised, votes

were actually changed. she says she knows this by speaking to senators in wisconsin and michigan. the writer of this variety piece -- i get it, it's a puff piece, you think you would follow up with the the three democratic senators in michigan and wisconsin are one f the republican once there, doubtful that is who she spoke to. say, she is saying that this happened, did it? of course, they would say no because there is no evidence of that whatsoever. she's allowed to say things like that and get away with it. so far as blaming president trump on the parkland shooting, to understand this. since columbine, in 1999 , there have been 25 fatal mass shootings at elementary and high schools. these horrific events have happened under the clinton administration, the bush administration, the obama administration. how this suddenly is happening under the current administration just shows you why president trump, one of the reasons he won his because he had no hollywood support but that probably was a good thing because when they say things

like this, obviously, they seem just a tad out of touch. >> tucker: what's interesting is that people as famous as barbra streisand used to be able to say whatever they wanted in the press and there was no feeling that you had to fact-check it because they are from celebrity land and who cares what they think. but now, there is this weird double standard where if an actor expresses any right of center view, he sounded by political fact is if he's running for office and if barbra streisand has this unlimited pass to say unsupported things like this. >> they also can get blacklisted from getting major roles, as well. >> tucker: good point. >> we play parallel universe almost every week, meaning let's pretend this was said during the previous administration under the 44th president, president obama. let's say that johnny depp had joked about assassinating the president or madonna threatened to blow up the white house or kathy griffin held up a severed head that resembled president obama. the outrage would be

overwhelming. you would need to add four more hours to 24/7 cable news just recover it. when it happens here, while it does get some coverage, it is almost laugh it off, kind of muted, with many other celebrities who have said the president should die or in mickey rourke's case, i would love to take a louisville slugger to this guy, it gets laughed off because of who the target is a not so much about what is being said. >> tucker: let me ask you a quick question. have you ever read a piece that said, barbra streisand is a really nice person and kind to her assistant and decent to the people around her, and beloved by her friends and acquaintances. i haven't read that piece. have you ever read it? >> [laughs] maybe once or twice. in "variety," this was -- i'll wrap up quickly. she cloned her dead dog and created two other dogs off of it. this is a woman that is worth $390 million. you have millions of pets that are up for adoption every year, hundreds of thousands that are euthanized, and here she is going about it this way. maybe rescue a couple with the

money that you have or commit to a charity. >> tucker: i can't get with you on that. it's morally complicated, i would probably fold my springer spaniel because i couldn't control myself. we disagree. great to see you, joe. >> the pleasure is all on the side of the table, trust me. >> tucker: amazon.com is run by the richest man in human history. but the, company made billions of $. they are paid no federal income tax. why? that story next along with diet and exercise, once-daily toujeo may help you control your blood sugar. get into a daily groove. ♪let's groove tonight. ♪share the spice of life. ♪baby slice it right. from the makers of lantus,

toujeo provides blood sugar-lowering activity for 24 hours and beyond, proven blood sugar control all day and all night, and significant a1c reduction. toujeo is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. it contains 3 times as much insulin in 1 milliliter as standard insulin. don't use toujeo to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you're allergic to insulin. get medical help right away if you have a serious allergic reaction such as body rash, or trouble breathing. don't reuse needles or share insulin pens. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which can be life threatening. it may cause shaking, sweating, fast heartbeat, and blurred vision. check your blood sugar levels daily. injection site reactions may occur. don't change your dose of insulin without talking to your doctor. tell your doctor about all your medicines and medical conditions. check insulin label each time you inject. taking tzds with insulins like toujeo may cause heart failure that can lead to death. find your rhythm and keep on grooving.

♪let's groove tonight. ask your doctor about toujeo. ♪share the spice of life.

we're all under one roof now. congratulations. thank you. how many kids? my two. his three. along with two dogs and jake, our new parrot. that is quite the family. quite a lot of colleges to pay for though. a lot of colleges. you get any financial advice? yeah, but i'm pretty sure it's the same plan they sold me before. well your situation's totally changed now. right, right. how 'bout a plan that works for 5 kids, 2 dogs and jake over here? that would be great. that would be great. that okay with you, jake? get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change from td ameritrade investment management. ♪ >> tucker: jeff bezos is the richest man in the world, the richest man who has ever lived in the world. amazon, his company, is one of the country's most valuable. but the company's tax payments are not keeping up with this great wealth. that is a profound understatement. here's one example.

last year, amazon made $5.6 billion in profit, they netted that. but they used tax credits and other benefits to avoid paying any federal income tax. did you pay federal income tax last year? oh, one of the biggest companies in the world. none. nevertheless, governments around the country, state and local, are racing to provide amazon with more perks and tax breaks as it looks to choose the site of a second headquarters because masochism is very common among state governments. a financial analyst, a very smart one, joins us tonight. thank you for coming on. how does it work that one of the biggest companies in the world, an american company, pays no federal taxes? >> that's a good question. this is a nonpartisan issue. president trump has stated that it's a "no" tax monopoly. both democrats and republicans alike would say that we are in agreement with that statement, and that is not okay. although they do pay state and

local income taxes, they pay zero federal income -- >> tucker: no. "the new york times" today left to amazon's defense, and effect by saying, that is not really true. they instinctively defended a company for paying no federal taxes. this is how upside down our world is. >> that's unusual. i would expect most democrats or liberal newspaper or source to not pack a big corporation paying zero federal income tax. >> tucker: yet it's a very liberal corporation. >> here's a reason why they get away with it, from the sources various tax breaks, they say that executive stock options are allowing them to pay zero federal income tax. now it's not illegal. these are tax loopholes, it's in our tax code, our current tax system. they are taking advantage of that. but it doesn't seem right or fair. a company that raked in

$175 billion last year, this just isn't right. i'm sure you paid more in federal taxes. >> i did. i haven't put tens of thousands of people out of work, like amazon has. they've hired a lot but they have put many more out of work. they destroyed many more businesses than they have created. i get it, that is the nature of market capitalism. they feel no obligation to give back it also the federal treasury at all? >> what's worse is that they are able to grandfather in deferred taxes. deferred taxes, those that they have delayed in the past, perfectly legal, now they can have those taxes at the lower corporate tax rate, if i effective at 21% versus 3035%, in the prior years. that is ridiculous. we would all love to refund our taxes, and let me pay my lower individual income rate right noe now taxed at a lower bracket, as our corporate rates.

that is just ludicrous. it shouldn't be allowed. >> tucker: no, it shouldn't. the default, and even, the president said this. the default or people and businesses, it's allowed, therefore you got to do it. it also allowed to scream obscenities at your elderly parents but it's wrong and you shouldn't do it. it's not illegal. there are a lot of things that aren't illegal but they are immoral. does any company ever say, this is our nation from america? we have to give back a little bit. do they ever say that? >> they showed. it gets worse because of the state and local level, they are now offering tax incentives for amazon to put their second headquarters in their town. that is a legitimate thing to want for your city, not at the expense of taxpayers. >> tucker: i agree. amazon, we reached out to them, they did not respond. one of the questions i wanted to ask, does that mean i still have to pay my federal taxes? to my viewers? >> unfortunately, the current

tax code stance, we do. >> tucker: so we do but jeff bezos doesn't? thank you for straightening that out, heather. this is turning me into a crazy person. barack obama disclaimed at mit that has administration never had a scandal, not one, thanks to the magic of diversity. that is what he said. brit hume joyce's next to identify which planet the former president is living on. ♪ has pro-skin technology designed to quickly wick away moisture to help maintain your skin's natural balance. for a free sample call 1-877-get-tena. for a free sample people are fighting type 2 diabetes... with fitness... food... and the pill that starts with f. farxiga, along with diet and exercise, helps lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. lowering a1c by up to 1.2 points. do not take if allergic to farxiga. if you experience symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling,

difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking and seek medical help right away. do not take farxiga if you have severe kidney problems, are on dialysis, or have bladder cancer. tell your doctor right away if you have blood or red color in your urine or pain while you urinate. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast infections in women and men, serious urinary tract infections, low blood sugar, and kidney problems. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have signs of ketoacidosis which is serious and may lead to death. ask your doctor about the pill that starts with f and visit farxiga.com for savings. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. 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. 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. but there's no way to avoid that mi...s pmi, hey! this'll help. rocket mortgage by quicken loans makes the complex simple. there's also origination fees and... this takes care of it, thank you. yeah. understand the details and get approved in as few as 8 minutes.

♪ >> tucker: president obama spoke at mit on friday, and immediately began rewriting history. he made the claim that has administration was scandal free, thanks to the magical power of diversity. running guns to mexican cartels didn't happen. weaponizing the irs and the fbi against political opponents,

fake news. while obama has been patting himself on the back, the party he shatters searching for a champion in the next election. fox's juan williams just argued that the three strongest challenges would all be african-american women, oprah, michelle obama, senator kamala harris of california. is it true? brit hume joins us tonight. thank you for coming on. is it true? do you think diversity kept barack obama's two terms entirely scandal free? >> i don't think it was entirely scandal free. you just mentioned a couple of examples and there's another one, kind of a howler, his secretary of state so recklessly mishandled classified information that she was very nearly indicted in many legal experts think she should have been. i would rate that is a big scandal. i don't think diversity had anything to do with it one way or another. it certainly argues against the idea that it was scandal free. it wasn't. >> tucker: it's funny, though. the former president -- and to his credit, he hasn't been --

this was an off the record comment that got reported. he hasn't been in the news really come and i think that is exactly what a former prevacid and should be coming out around. however, it seems a little early to be rewriting the history of administration i just ended. doesn't it? >> all presidents try to see their administrations of the most favorable possible light and he is looking back on his and i'm sure he's looking at the man in the white house and trying to create a contrast with him, because obama, whether you like them or not, did behave himself with a certain dignity and grace that some have found lacking in donald trump, clearly obama has found it lacking a donald trump, but i think he would like to contrast his performance in office with that of mr. trump. to say that has administration was scandal for his nonsense. >> tucker: it is. there was a piece by our colleague and friend juan williams, a lot of people have written this, said that the three main challengers to president trump, who announced

he is running again three years from now, would be oprah, michelle obama, and kamala harris of california, all three black women. what struck me about this was the way it was framed in the way so many of these conversations are framed. they primarily turn on questions of race and gender. is that the future of american politics? identity politics? >> matures the future future of the democratic party. the president of the democratic party looks at things that way. being a woman and a minority would be an important credential for a nomination in the democratic party. it doesn't mean he will get the nomination, but it gives you a leg up. it gave hillary clinton a leg up and enabled her to fight off the rather significant challenge from a geriatric socialist and the person of bernie sanders. what might have thought that would be easy but such is the democratic party. it wasn't easy at all. looking ahead to 2020, whoever it is, is likely to have quite a leftist credentials in order to touch the heart of the

democratic party, which is far to the left of where it used to be. all three of the women described, i'm not sure where oprah is on the issues come i haven't looked into it carefully because i doubt she will run. kamala harris has shown herself to be quite liberal, and certainly michelle obama would be seen in that light, as well. i think kamala harris, by the way, would be an interesting candidate. she has a tendency to make absence a particularly amazing things. she said that joe arpaio should not have been pardoned because he committed a crime. badham, that is why he needed to be pardoned. she also said that it was wrong to say that the dreamers were unlawful. that is part of the definition of where the dreamers are. they came here and are here illegally. that is why we are trying to -- so many people are working hard to try to find a way to keep them here. they wouldn't be subject to deportation if they weren't unlawful. such as kamala harris. i think michelle obama, tucker, would be an opposing candidate. >> tucker: interesting. can we be totally honest and say that terry mcauliffe, making

noises about running the other day, a number of people who look like terry mcauliffe, saying they will run as a democrat, nobody like terry mcauliffe will get the nomination this time? >> i don't think so. i think terry mcauliffe would probably be seen as too much of a creature of the democratic party as it once was under bill clinton and later under hillary clinton. i don't think that is for the democratic party is right now. dianne feinstein, who is not a liberal on everything but a liberal on nearly everything, was just denied the endorsement of the democratic party in california. and dan lipinski, a congressman from the southwest side of chicago, whose district includes the suburbs, was just given the heave by the democratic congressional campaign committee in his reelection bid in favor of a more liberal candidate. this is where that party is coming, and if you will win it

nomination in this party in 2020 in my estimation, you have to be pretty far out there. if you are elizabeth warren, you might have the credentials, you might not have the right to skin color. michelle obama might indeed fit the bill. >> tucker: i think it's been an under covered story for a long time. i appreciate it, brit. good to see you. >> you back. >> tucker: college students of course can't handle free speech or most other rights these days. a lot of them can't it seems like. what campuses are the worst on free expression? where can't you see what you think it all will give you the top ten next. ♪ ♪ [screaming & crying] [phone ping] with esurance photo claims, you could have money for repairs within a day... wow! that was really fast. huh. ...so it doesn't have to hurt for long.

hmm. that's insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call.

don't we need that cable box to watch tv? nope. don't we need to run? nope. it just explodes in a high pitched 'yeahhh.' yeahhh!

try directv now for $10 a month for 3 months. no satellite needed. you're still here? we're voya! we stay with you to and through retirement. i get that voya is with me through retirement, i'm just surprised it means in my kitchen. so, that means no breakfast? voya. helping you to and through retirement. >> sean: there was a time when american colleges were hives of free speech and independent thought, that was a long time ago. now they are famous for tolerating no dissent whatsoever. speak out as a student, you can be suspended or flunked, more

insidiously, speak out as a president, you will frightened or fired. or try to bring new ideas to campus, you'll provoke a riot. we saw that the uc berkeley, where milo yiannopoulos visited. [protester noises] >> sean: >> tucker: most campuses are pretty pretty bad. but which ones are the worst? thanks for coming on. what are the worst schools for his free-speech? >> it's a wide field. when we look at what schools are in their place on the list, i can think, how can i get any crazier? i end up kicking myself. let's start with uc berkeley, the college that really kicked it off at the end of last year, where a presentation by milo yiannopoulos was canceled after protesters took the streets and overwhelmed the police.

committed property damage, violence, and ended up just causing an enormous amount of mayhem. >> tucker: yeah, they did. >> uc berkeley has kind of been on the mend since then. they paid an enormous amount of money for various free-speech events, although not without allegations that they first tried to stifle and censor that speech. they paid about $800,000 for ben schapiro, i believe. they currently are facing a lawsuit regarding a speech that was planned by ann coulter, where the department of justice recently filed a statement of interest. >> tucker: we follow that pretty carefully, harvard on the list, drexel on the list. why drexel? >> drexel professor tweeted, in his words, satirical and joking tweet regarding white genocide. all i want for christmas is white genocide, poking fun at the idea that white genocide is a thing that exists.

somewhat predictably, the internet erupted in outrage with calls for his firing, and he was suspended and investigated by drexel and he had to keep himself off campus because drexel said that the environment was not safe for him. eventually said, i can't come back into each year. this is not going to work. >> tucker: unbelievable. let me ask you a quick question. you study the stuff for a living. if you had kids about to go to college, would you want to send them to any college, if so, where would you want to send them? >> first thing i would do would go to the website and look up our speech code ratings and see which schools are protecting their students expressive rights, public or private. then go look and see what kind of controversies have happened on campus. i am pretty sure that i would want my children to feel free to associate with the people they want to associate with and not

be told who they can and cannot be friends with. >> tucker: that's for sure. used to be a free country. thanks a lot for joining us tonight. we are out of time sadly. had a great time, though. good night from washington. sean hannity, right now.>> hann hannity. two major stories we're following tonight. first, the attorney general jeff sessions is now saying the department of justice will investigate the abuses against the trump campaign. this comes after adam shiv's counter memo confirms that the f.b.i. lied to the fisa court judg judge, about the clinton bought and paid for dossier filled with propaganda in order to get the warrant against carter page, also breaking right now, more damning evidence of the massive beaurocratic failure of the broward county sheriff's department surrounding that horrific florida school shooting. now in addition to the dozens of missed