a blessed passover and good friday to all who are serving tonight. have a good weekend. most-watched, most trays trusted, most gratefully spent e evening with us. good art from washington, i'm shannon bream. ♪ >> tucker: well, good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." if we have learned anything over the last year, it's pretty hard to accomplish things in washington. the republicans control the white house and the congress and after a full year, no wall has been built and obamacare is still there.ob federal judges are part of the problem with that, lots of executive orders have been shot down with bogus rulings. but the core problem is the structural one. the president is not an emperor. no president is. but that has not stoppeded mass delusions on the left that he has in fact a dictator. at an event yesterday hillaryt clinton suggested that president trump is on the verge of taking over this country somehow and destroying the constitution. watch this.

>> as someone who grew up inh vienna and barely escaped the holocaust, my mother would say from time to time, that it could happen here. what are your concerns about the stability of our democratic institutions and structures in these tumultuous moments? >> i worry about the degradation of institutions. i'm more worried about whether our constitution is going to be honored. so i'm hoping that the worst the question you asked me ruth, would never get to that. it will require people turning up and voting in midterm elections. >> tucker: really worried about the constitutionct as we try to invalidate the first two amendments to the bill of rights. there it is. he is a dictator. that's not a novel take on the left calling trump a dictator.

something of a religious ritual now, actually. >> we have a president with a strong authoritarianua personality and what frightens me is not only his respect and adoration for tyrants all over the world, but his disrespect for democracy in our own country. >> we're getting more north korean every day in this country. >> there is nothing american about what donald trump did in pennsylvania. he goes out there and whips up like it's a mussolini rally and, yes, that's what i said. >> i said they must call for his impeachment. some people are saying, well, we will vote in 2020. we cannot stand that. we cannot wait for that. it is too dangerous. >> tucker: who put all the dumb people on tv? [laughs] somehow despite being a dictator people feelde perfectly free to criticize the president in public to massive cheers. nobody notices the irony. ethan bearman is a radio host and frequent guest on our show. he joins us tonight.

ethan, thanks for coming on. i guess if you were a dictator, the first thing you would want to do is take away people's right to say what they think and take away their right to defend themselves. the first two amendments to t the bill of rights, is trump doing -- i'm sorry, his opponents on working on that, invalidating and repealing those amendments. maybe this is transference, i'm guessing? >> well, i think the issue here though is he opened his campaign out like in a very authoritarian way. let's call somebody else a bad name.. mexicans are rapists, right? so let's point out what is wrong with other people, focus on muslim ban. can't allow them into the country. that is an authoritarian move. reaching to the other, pointing to them and reaching into our dark places. i don't like that any bit. on the first amendment side, he wants to strengthen defamation laws to make it easier to sue the press. >> tucker: i would say the phrases you describe would fall under the heading of o rudeness, being impolite. look, i'm not going to i defend that.

i'm an episcopalian. i believe in politeness. let's be real, dictators do two things. one, they try to narrow the range of acceptable opinion and punish people who fall outside of it that is the left doing that, not the right. pardon me, that's true. two, they take away people's right to defend themselves. they double down on their monopoly on the use of force. they are the only ones with guns. the left is doing that, too. trump may be a lot of things. you don't like him, i get it but the authoritarian tendencies are on the left. do you not see that? >> no. i mean, well, some on the extreme left i would actually agree with you on. no. absolutely not. anti-jewish crimes according to the adl went up 57% here in the united states last year under trump's watch in 2017, at a rate and number that hasn't been seen in a very long time. it's an alarming trait. >> tucker: i wonder where that's coming from, though? i know you are sort at the vanguard of calling for increased muslim immigration into the country. taking a look across the ocean at europe where crimes against jews, anti-semitic

crime, has risen dramatically in, say, paris. is that being led by right wingers or is it being led by muslim immigrants? >> you don't think any of>> the extreme right wing nationalists in places like germany and france have anything to do with any of that? >> tucker: maybe some. i don't know. maybe. let's be real. ask anybody. talk to any israeli who recently moved from france. i don't think they are mad at marie le pen. they are really upset about muslim immigration because the antisemitism is coming from muslims. given that we know that, it's kind of beyond debate. why would you as somebody who is concerned about that be calling for more muslim immigration here? >> i haven't specifically called for more muslim immigration. what i have called for is a continuance of our legal immigration program and embracing those who are already here, tucker. i think it's important to include and involve people in our community and not set them apart and make them into the other, which appeals to the jungian shadow which is bad. we don't need to appeal to the dark side. >> tucker: i'm opposed to

the jungian shadow. i am. i'm also opposed to freudian projection since we are getting keep into german psychiatrists.onon i think it's very striking that if you are concerned about government overreach and the election of a dictator and i actually am concerned. i think all good americans are. the framers were concerned about it. that's the why they wrote the constitution the way they did. then you ought to be terrified of anybody who attacks your freedom to say what they think is true. what i find is striking is nobody on the left ever says anything as universities kick kids out. punish people for having differing points of view. don't allow speakers to say what they think. that's fascist stuff. why doesn't anybody ever mention that? >> two things, one, next time you are in san francisco listenn to my show. i talk about that. i don't appreciate shuttle down free speech. we must in a democracy have a fair exchange of ideas. however, there are some thoughts and ideas that don't deserve to be aired. and you and i have ado tendency to chose not to air those.

>> tucker: oh, they don't deserve to be aired. so you don't have the right. >> that's right. >> tucker: everything is cool unless people disagreeht with you in which case we have to punish them. sure, hold i y on. what i'm saying is the left is punishing people forat saying what they think is true now. not everyone agrees with everyone else's opinion, like, to have free speech, you have to tolerate the views of people you disagree with. and the left no longer does. you don't see that as authoritarian?re >> i do not agree with you that the left no longer does. i think that's a very small fringe element that tries to shut it down. >> tucker: google, facebook, twitter, biggest companies in america? bleeding boycotts against people's opinions you don't like? you don't see this as troubling? >> any time that we shut down free speech in an open and public place, i'm absolutely on your side on that one. organizations have a place -- to keep a workplace friendly and open to allll people. and if you are offending your person sitting next to you, that is something that hr has to deal with.

because we also have laws. >> tucker: h.r, that's where speech goes die. of course. thank you so much. good luck with your h.r. a professor of classic emeritus at cal state fresno joins us tonight. professor, you spent a lot of time studying dictatorships and how they take power from the people and hold it to themselves and basically do what theyeo will despite popularan sentiment. what are the things that dictatorships do first to prepare the way for totalitarian rule? >> one of the things that hillary clinton said in that speech is they destroy trust s and transparency. that was quite ironic. she was introduced to the national scene in her late 30s by parlaying $1,000 investment in cattle futuren into $100,000 investment, which was a mockery of a whole transparent idea of investment. it was 4 trillion to 1 odds.

she didn't pay taxes. fast forward 40 years to, you know, travel gate, file gate, the rose law firm records., uranium one, the email. they all have one constantnt common denominator, tucker, that's a lack of transparency and feeling that she is exempt from equal application of the law. so it's kind of -- i don't know whether to laugh or cry. one of the ironies when she he gave that speech, she got $25,000. i had she given it two years ago or four years ago, she would have had 100 times that amount, as would her husband because they had something that people twanted. and that was influence to buy.d and so now she doesn't have it and she is sort of bitter and she is shrill and angry. but she is engaged in projection where she is the perceived sins of herself on to others. you made a good point. because every time a republican is in power, he is a nazi or brown shirt. when george w. bush was there in 2006, if you remember, al gore, george

soros, garrison keeler, linda ron stat. he was a fascist brown shirt. we had a movie how to kill him. we had a novel check point. suddenly he is out he doesn't have the reigns of power anymore. is he a sober, judicious never trumper. donald trump has inherited the same role. we have the same documentary about killing him. we have op-ed about john wilkes booth again. we have the nazi slur. and it's all based on the premise that exalted called noble means justifying any -- any means of obtaining them. it's again and again and again. and i am not worried aboutbo donald trump until he weaponizes the irs in the manner of lois learner under the obama administration. if mike pompeo had 30,000 emails that he was destroying, i would be really worried that secretary of state or if h.r. mcmaster had ordered surveillance be unmasked and leaked from the nfc or warped at the trump administration was trying to

warp the fisa courts with anti-hillary hit piece i would be worried. so far it's been on the other side. f >> tucker: yeah, that would be worrisome. >> it would be because it would be assault on institutions. >> tucker: honest enough to say it too if they ever do it? >> i hope i would, too. t >> tucker: you would be. i know you would be. thank you for joining us. i appreciate it. >> thank you for having me. n >> tucker: got news for you, the wife of pulse nightclub shooter omar mateen has been acquitted. noor salman was charged with providing -- and obstruction of justice. the jury was not convinced of that the fbi used mateen's father as confidential source and lied about it after the shooting. we will learn more about that story and of course we will bring it to you as we do. very bad week for facebook. now it may be getting worse. may have given assistance to barack obama's 2012 campaign. doesn't sound like them,

does it? we'll investigate live from washington on good friday. ♪ ♪

applebee's to go. order online and get $10 off $30. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

♪ ♪ >> tucker: well, we learned this week that cnn executives are aciddous viewers of this show and of course we are flattered, we know that because cnn has announced that actually it may not be a good idea tot support foreignn dictatorships. last week we telling you about cnn turk. a channel in turkey. a cnn franchise that has for years repeated the political talking points of turkey's

authoritarian anti-islamist government. mr. erdogan in the picturere right behind me. now in a deal worth $900 million a major stake in cnn turk is about to be sold to conglomerate who has referred to erdogan as boss. cnn and erdogan together. in a rare fit of conscious cnn may reconsider itssi consideration with anti-american foreign autocrats since they have been caught. in a statement to fox the network said this, "wes will be meeting with the new owners in due course to discuss the implications of the sale. if following those conversations we have any reason whatsoever to believe that journalistic integrity of the channel could be compromised by the new owners we will revoke the license." which is funny since cnn turk for years has been carrying water for the erdogan government even as it beat and killed protesters in the streets, cnn has been carrying its water. showing at one point a penguin documentary, rather than the repressive crack down by the turkish secret

police. anyway, we are glad cnn is watching the show. we welcome the development. in the future, of course, we encourage cnn to care about journalistic integrity before they are called out for backing dictators. well, facebook's disastrous week continuing to get even worse thanks to another scandal. in 2012 it turns out the company handed over user data to barack obama's presidential campaign. in doing so, may have violated the law. fox news 24/7 headlines n anchor brett larson has more on that. brett, what do you know? >> hey, tucker. yeah, not a good week to be facebook basically. what we're finding out today is there are reports that in 2012, they may have just given user data to the barack obama campaign. there were reports in the "daily mail" former person that ran the campaign, socialor media for him, someone at facebook said we are giving this to you because we agree with you. of course, giving them that information for free would

be a violation of thee federal campaign finance laws because that would be violation of rather direct or indirect giving of -- they are basically giving a campaign donation in that situation. and you can't do that in federal elections.n. for the president and forr congress. then we are also learning today that hillary clinton's name coming up once again now connected to all the problems with facebook that the app she was using during the 2016 campaign and they were encouraging people to connect with their friends. they may have been w going through your contacts list and doing that illegally and taking the data of their users to encourage people to vote for hillary clinton to try and find people that they could persuade to be voters. not very good news for facebook all around. and this is all in light ofs the problems that they are having with the cambridge analytica story that we haveid been following for the past couple of weeks with the 50 million users and the data that was taken from them.se and then this very, i think, damning piece of information buzzfeed is reporting on,

this a former facebook executive saying something about what their site does and how they connect people and he, in part, says about facebook anything that allows us to connect more people more often is de facto good. despite the fact that they had concerns that doing this could even allow someone to coordinate a terrorist attack or even expose someone to bullying. so, tucker, it is a bad week to be facebook. >> tucker: yeah. and it should be. i'm glad that other people are paying attention to this now and not just us. thank you for that. >> thanks, tucker.tt >> tucker: a former member of the federal election commission, a senior legal fellow, joins us tonight. thanks for coming on. s >> sure. >> tucker: if it turns out that the obama campaign received this data, that would be an in kind contribution, correct?or >> it is very valuable data. former media director for

the obama campaign said facebook actually came to their office and said, well, we don't normally give this data out but we're going to let you have it because we favor your campaign. that turns it into potentially illegal corporate contribution. >> tucker: how would that not be illegal and not be a crime? a >> if they made this data t available to anybody who wants it, well then, of course, any campaign could get it but the fact that they specifically had rules against this, does make it an in kind contribution. contrast this with what they did with cambridge analytica, remember, cambridge analytica, when they found out about this, they went to cambridgege analytica and said, you need to destroy this data. you're not supposed to have it. that tells you that in the one case, they let the campaign have it. in another case, they were saying well, no, you are not supposed to have this data.ot >> tucker: so facebook, but also google and twitter and apple, the big tech companies, could easily throw an election and we wouldn'thr know it and so we should be terrified of this. i don't think we are terrified enough.e but what is the u.s.

congress, what are the appropriate agencies and the executive branch doing to make sure that these huge companies who have more power than any companies have ever had in human history are remaining transparent? i mean, we are certain this is not happening. what are we doing to assure us of that? >> in the case of the obama campaign potentially getting corporate contribution which is illegal, that ought to be investigated by the federal election commission where iss used to be a commissioner because it's a potential violation of federal law. >> tucker: is it -- >> no idea where they are going to open up an investigation.re potentially also the u.s. justice department could investigate it because if it was an intentional and knowing violation of the law, that takes it from being a civil violation to a criminalti violation. so, both of those federal agencies have potential jurisdiction over this. so far, no one has said at any of those agencies that they are going to open up an investigation. that's what they ought to do though. >> tucker: yeah. well, if you have lunch with any of your friends encourage them. >> i will. >> tucker: thank you very

much. company with a big political effect and politics isn't the only way tech is hurting america. not by far. next week we are spendingha all week on a special series on what big tech is doing to you, your children, our culture, this country, our politics. it's changing all of those things. and we should know how and we are going to tell you how. well, the media scandalized when anonymous report suggested that the interior secretary ryan zinkecr may care more about competence than aboute diversity. did he commit a sin in hiring on the basis of ability? what sin? we will tell you next.

>> tucker: members of president trump's administration have been accused of all manner of things, from domestic abuse to spying for the russians. but here's an amazing one. interior secretary ryan zinke, former ceo, accused of the worst sin of all, not loving diversity. a breaking report this week yc and then accusing him of seeking to hire the best people for jobs at the interior department without regard to their appearance. that was the chiron. "zinke ingrid by hiring the best." thee report was denied by zinke but the left reacted with horror. christine clark is president and executive lawyer for civil rights and liberty under law. things were coming on. >> thanks for having me.

>> tucker: i know i can't speak for anyone else. when i saw that cnn report that ryan zinke was daring to hire the best people, i thought what is this country coming to, hiring people on the basis of relevant criteria, like experience or skill, commitment, i mean, that's just wrong. and i think you would agree with that. >> no. we want people who are qualified and experienced. especially at the helm of our nation's most important federal agency. but we also need to make sure that those agencies reflect the growing diversity of our country. i'm not just talking about racial diversity, i'm talking about gender diversity and ethnic df diversity, at every turn with this administration we have seen efforts to turn the clock back. a we know that diversity is not a priority for thiser administration, whether we are talking about cabinet level appointments or judicial appointments. this administration is one that has not placed a premium on diversity. >> tucker: what do you think of the nfl? do you like the nfl? >> that's a totally different context different context.

>> tucker: all, it. to the same standards apply? why do they get a pass on the diversity thing in the nfl? is there a reason? >> when we look at the coaching ranks, there's a lot of work to do. >> tucker: no, slow down. i'm on your side. the players. it's all male, it's disproportionately african-american. does that bother you? >> the nfl is a sport. it's a male sports. i'm notsu surprised that it's al male. >> tucker: does it bother you? their point is, we hire the best. actually the nfl doesn't care what color you are. they want the best players. it is not offensive? when you watch it, are you thinking, i can't watch this, they are not following the diversity rules? >> what bothers me is my taxpayer dollars, your taxpayer dollars, supporting federal agencies that don't reflect the diversity of our country. >> tucker: what if you fly on an airplane and you think that airlines s should apply the same

diversity rules you're calling for here? theyre shouldn't take the people who score the highest on the pilot test, but they should hire also on appearance, the way people look. >> every workplace -- >> tucker: t surgeons, too? >> everyone should hire the best, but place a premium on diversity. >> tucker: the way you look or what you're capable of doing? when you were flying a plane, how important is it, what you look like? >> incredibly important. it's also important that we place a premium on diversity. the fact that -- >> tucker: diversity means appearance, it means what you look like. it's theal shallowest possible criteria. it's literally your shade. that is what you are saying. by set more important than talent? >> you know what matters, what matters is that you are my daughters and my black sons can turn on the tv and see an administration that reflects the diversity of our country. gender diversity, racial diversity, ethnic diversity -- >> tucker: really? what matters to me is that the

government is run by cut competent people. i don't care where they are from because i don't think that what you look like is the most important thingk is because i'm not shallow.or but you are arguing that it is. >> president trump appointees has been virtually all white and all male. we haven't seen anything this remarkable since the reagan years. >> tucker: he were just not getting anywhere because if you can argue that one of us is doing a bad job, i'll agree with you. i thinkhe some of them are not that impressive. i will be blunt with you. but it has nothing to do with what they'm look like. again, i'm not a shallow person. i don't judge people on their appearance and i don't judge books by their covers. i try to get deeper than that. i'm wondering why as a society we've decided the shallowest possible measure is the most important. do you ever ask yourself that? >> diversity is one among a number of factors. like the: it sounds most important thing. >> it needs to be taken into account when appointees of cabinet level positions, all the

wayy down. we want the federal government that reflects the diversity of our country. >> tucker: i just want to be totally clear. you mean diversity of skills? i'm with you. when you were little, did you think you'd be arguing to judge people primarily in how they look? >> i'm talking about gender diversity, racial diversity, tucker. 89% of president trump's judicial nominees have been white male. >> tucker: are they bad? [laughs] >> many of them are terrible. he knows nothing about how federal courts operate. >> tucker: is a problem. i'm with you there. you should never hire incompetent people. t i don't care what they look like. i'm with you. thank you.nk >> good to see you. >> tucker: secretary zinke is stillr: employed for the time being but another member of the administration was not so fortunate. former trim speechwriter says his life was destroyed by the media without a shred of evidence against him. he joins us with his story next.

you totanobody's hurt, new car. but there will still be pain. it comes when your insurance company says they'll only pay three-quarters of what it takes to replace it. what are you supposed to do? drive three-quarters of a car? now if you had liberty mutual new car replacement™, you'd get your whole car back. i guess they don't want you driving around on three wheels. smart. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, we'll replace the full value of your car. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

♪ ♪ where's jack? he's on holiday. what do you need? i need the temperature for pipe five. ask the new guy. the new guy? jack trained him. jack's guidance would be to maintain the temperature at negative 160 degrees celsius. that doesn't sound like jack. actually, jack would say, hey mate, just cool it to minus 160 and we're set. good on ya. oh yeah. that's jack.

you may be at increased risk for pneumococcal pneumonia, that can take you out of the game for weeks, even if you're healthy. pneumococcal pneumonia is a potentially serious bacterial lung disease that in severe cases can lead to hospitalization. it may hit quickly, without warning, causing you to miss out on the things you enjoy most. prevnar 13® is not a treatment for pneumococcal pneumonia... it's a vaccine you can get to help protect against it. prevnar 13® is approved for adults to help prevent infections from 13 strains of the bacteria that cause pneumococcal pneumonia. you should not receive prevnar 13® if you have had a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine or its ingredients. if you have a weakened immune system, you may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, limited arm movement, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, joint pain, less appetite, vomiting, fever, chills, and rash. help protect yourself against pneumococcal pneumonia. ask your doctor or pharmacist about prevnar 13®.

♪ ♪ ♪ >> tucker: in the past two years, the media have adopted new principles of someone is connected to the current administration, that personge cn be targeted for destruction for any reason at all. it is all virtuous because the president is evil. until last month, david sorensen was a speechwriter in the white house. then "the washington post" accused him ofcu domestic violence. whyy did they do this? because of the word of his ex-wife. sorensen lost his job. he said the post had no evidence that he ever did anything wrong. they had no court records, police report, evidence, pictures,ow nothing. now his life has been destroyed. david sorensen joins us tonight his story. david, i want to say at the outset, i've never spoke to you in my life, i don't know anything aboutut you, i don't kw your ex-wife's name. what struck me about the story, normally i would not get involved in this because these

things tend to be complicated. what struck me about the story is you say "the post" literally had no evidence, that you had done anything wrong? >> that's right, tucker. first of all, these accusations are completely false and fabricated. i've never been violent in any way toward any woman in my entire life by the very thought of it is disgusting. is not the way i was raised. "thehe post" in their ongoing wr against president trump decided to publish a story based on my ex-wife's word alone. but i was physically violent during our marriage. they had no evidence. i've never had a police report against me for violence, never had a restraining order against me. and free of her friends even came out, people i hadn't spoken with in years, and said that she had a history of instability and dishonesty and that they shouldn't believe her and that they witnessed her being violent against v me. >> tucker: was she violent against duke? >> she was, actually, and i sent

"the post" in every media outlet that asked, a 13 page document, as soon as i was accused, full of text messages and photo evidence documenting her violence against me. you never brought it up in our divorce, which i initiated. there is simply nothing but her word to go on and it is really shameful. >> tucker: you say you had documentary evidence that she was the perpetrator of violence. did "the post" from an evidence? >> not that i'm aware of, no. not that i recall. they said i alleged it. she admitted to it. she admitteded to it and text messages and in subsequent interviews with they media. i had a reporter one time during all of us, by the way, i spoke to every reporter i could. i was very transparent. i had a reporter say to me, acknowledging that she was violent towards me, and that was an established fact, say, well, we heard that you said some pretty nasty things during your marital fights. i couldn't imagine a reporter

saying the same thing to a woman whose husband had admittedly been violent toward her. a >> tucker: which reporter was that? >> this was from a local tv station in maine, where i was working before my job at the white house. >> tucker: that's pretty shocking. the obvious question is, if your ex-wife admitted using violence against you and there is evidence that she did, you deny that you used violence against her and there's no evidence that you did, why did you lose your job? >> because they work for president trump in the white house. that is all there is to it. i don't think it's a question of whether that story would have run if i didn't work there. president trump, thank god for him, at least as calling out the media for their ongoing bias, like few people are. a on top of all that, tucker, for my part, i passed a polygraph exam proving my innocence, the sitting governor of our state,

my former boss, offered me my job back. virtually everybody we both know came out publicly and said we don't believe her. they had total faith in me. >> tucker: it is certainly orwellian. i think you are probably not alone in this. this is the first time we've dug out on one of those stories, what we find is upsetting. thank you for telling us your story. i appreciate it. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: the left is pushing hard for a ban on assault weapons, whatever those are. we still haven't decided. but how will that work exactly? will it keep anybody safe? will ask someone who supports it next. ♪ ♪ applebee's to go. order online and get $10 off $30. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

order online and get $10 off $30. if your adventure keeps turning into unexpected bathroom trips you may have overactive bladder, or oab. ohhhh... enough already! we need to see a doctor. ask your doctor about myrbetriq® (mirabegron). it treats oab symptoms of urgency, frequency, and leakage.

it's the first and only oab treatment in its class. myrbetriq may cause serious allergic reactions. if you experience swelling of the face, lips, throat or tongue, or difficulty breathing... stop taking myrbetriq and tell your doctor right away. myrbetriq may increase blood pressure. tell your doctor right away if you have trouble emptying your bladder or have a weak urine stream. myrbetriq may affect or be affected by other medications. before taking myrbetriq, tell your doctor if you have liver or kidney problems. common side effects include increased blood pressure, common cold symptoms urinary tract infection, constipation, diarrhea, dizziness, and headache. need some help managing your oab symptoms along the way? ask your doctor if myrbetriq is right for you, and visit myrbetriq.com to learn more.

♪ >> tucker: almost everybody on

the left supports pending so-called assault weapons these days. so some are going even further. cnn's chris cuomo says it is not happen, more and more of themot are calling for a total repeal of the second amendment. that's not a gun ban, it would just make it impossible possibo ban guns later if we needed to.i in new york city councilman who is running for lieutenant governor and is a frequent guest on the show is here. thanks for being here. one of the reasons i'm so glad that you are here, i know you were honest. i'm trying to get to the core of what this means. i keep hearing that people are saying that we need an assault weapons ban and that if i complain aboutla it, i don't lie children or something. that's fine. tell me what you're calling for. there are tens of millions of semiautomatic rifles in circulation, already in people's homes. would those be included in the band? would people have to turn their guns and or not? >> this is not about turning guns in. most importantly, this is about

finding one thing -- is a complexx problem, we need a complex solution. both on dealing with the supply and access to guns and the demand issues that most people, like we were speaking about, because of violence. we need solutions to both of those. the assault weapon ban, i think of semion automatic weapons that have high-capacity ammunitions that are made for rapid fire and possibly combat. >> tucker: okay.y. right. you basically said what everyone is saying. i justo want to drill down the specifics of one piece of it. i'm not suggesting this is your whole response to violence but is part of it. what does that mean? you've m got tens of millions of semiautomatic weapons that are already in circulation, people already have them. you want to stop all sales tomorrow but you still have tens of millions of these guns. d what do you do with them? do you do something about them? >> but i would like to do, it's easy go to the point that would

cause the most consternation. what i have said, it's not about getting the guns from people in their homes at this moment in time. what we want to do is prevent visa sales for moving forward. >> tucker: okay. i'm not -- this is a core of a question. if you think that guns are causing violence, and there is no social science that shows that, but if we will pretend that guns are the problem, and i guess wen are, then you have to answer what to do about the guns. >> i disagree. there's ar: lot of data. >> tucker: i'm conceding great and playing along. just for the purposes of this argument. what do you do with them? you say at some future date, what does that mean? >> the core of the question, the last time i was on the show, there was agreement that we should not have unfettered access to guns. the next logical question is, is there too much access to guns? if the answer is yes, then we collectively should speak about what to do with that. what often happens when we come

here as we drill down on one thing as opposed -- as if one thing will either cause or perpetuate it to go forward. >> tucker: we had an assault weapons ban that didn't work. >> that's not sure what all. >> tucker: it's a factual matter. in fantasyland -- 4 2004, 89 deaths for massacres. after it expires, the next ten years, not including parkland or vegas, there were about 300 incidents. >> tucker: but the murder rate didn't move. the rate of people killed by firearms of all kinds c did not change at all. that is not my opinion. it's a fact. >> the data i just said is also true. the amount of people killed by assault weapons -- >> tucker: how many people died? hold on. i want to know what you mean. so you've got hundreds of millions of high-capacity magazines. magazine clips that hold bullets. >> i already ask you that

question. >> tucker: i want specifics because i'm an american citizen. >>ic trying to prevent future sales of this weapon. i've already said i'm not focused on that. >> tucker: at no point, if there are hundreds of millions of high-capacity magazines, you could ban the sale today as it would not affect the outcome at all.s hundreds of millions is a lot. would you do anything about those magazines? >> are you saying goes hundreds are a problem? >> i think guns are an adamant object so don't shoot people. >> i consistently concede that there are other things that help move gun violence. you don't see that guns are a part of the problem. >> tucker: you are running for office. i'm just a hackwe journalist. >> do you agree that guns are a part of gun violence? >> tucker: i just want to know what you are going to do with the magazines. >> that's a question you want to answer. >> tucker: guns or tools.

when they are missed used, they hurt people. >> do you think guns are a part of the gun violence problem that we have? >> tucker: [laughs] i'm not getting anywhere but i'm trying! thanks. american credit card debt just had a terrifyingly high, all-time high, $1 trillion in personal credit card debt. are we headed for a catastrophe? nobody's talking about it but we are. stay tuned. morning. and if we're not moving at that speed, our colleagues will fly right by us. >> sandra: our job is to facilitate smart conversation so that the people who are watching us can better understand what's happening in the world. >> bill: to go deeper and find another question that other people aren't asking that's the real challenge. >> sandra: deliver it straight bad or good. deliver the new

diabetes can be a daily struggle, even if you're trying your best. 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. wi'm really grateful that usaaq. was able to take care of my family while i was overseas serving. it was my very first car accident. we were hit from behind. i called usaa and the first thing they asked was 'are you ok?' they always thank you for your service, which is nice because

as a spouse you serve too. we're the hayles and we're usaa members for life. see how much you could save with usaa by bundling your auto and home insurance. get a quote today.

>> tucker: so you thought california had gone insane. here's proof. >> tucker: you thought california had gone insane. here's proof. a judge has ordered all coffee sold a mistake to come with a cancer warning label. apparently there is a tiny theoretical likelihood that a chemical and coffee might marginally raise coffee risks if you were to drink several hundred gallons an hour so everyone should be afraid. meanwhile, in the world of science, the w.h.o., world health organization, recently took coffee off o its list of possible carcinogens. the evidence was not there. in part because of two huge studies last year, the biggest ever done on coffee. they surveyed more than 700,000 people over time and they found that coffee substantially improves life span. the more you drink, the longer you live. coffeeee should be given away fr free. it is an elixir. it is the fountain of youth. it is what we've been looking for. everyone should have it.

the red fox everyone does, trust me. credit card debt is exploding in this country. forto the first time in american history, americans as a whole on more than a trillion dollars just to credit card companies. that is $8,600 for every household t in this country, moe than three grand for every single man, woman, and child in america, including babies. that is o just credit cards. a millions of americans have student loans, home loans, carless, plenty of other data. every reaching a tipping point for debt? what would happen if the economy reaches another downturn? now that whatever happened? chief macro strategist at tampa- tell me how to pronounce that! too many vowels for me. she joins us tonight. i'm glad you are laughing because this is a terrifying subject. particularly credit card debt because it is something that everyone can relate to, you

understand how it works if you are a consumer. these levels seem very high to me. are they? >> they are very high. what's even more is the place that we are accumulating at. in fact, the last three months of 2017, consumers racked up credit card debt at a faster pace than in the past 30 years. faster than in the great recession. >> tucker: it just seems like thisis is one of those stories that is never crowded but it ought to be. here you have the biggest companies in the world getting kids on credit cards in college, charging ratings rates that banks would never charge. i'm going to charge -- i had my -- the bp visa card, what's the interest rate? 28.2% -- 28% interest. it's shocking actually. it's usury. illegal in other countries. why is it happening here and no one is saying anything? >> because people don't seem to have much of a choice these days. if you look at what hourlyto earnings have been, decade

after decade after decade, they have been growingr at slower and slower pace. people are barely making ends meet. if you look at the past six out of the past seven months hourly earnings have actually been either flat or they have fallen. people aren't really making much money. then you look at spending. spending is still growing pretty fast. income isn't growing really fast.. what are you going to do? take these credit cards and gethe desperate. >> tucker: this is an age old problem, when the mafia used to do this in immigrant neighborhood, basically the exact same thing credit cards are doing. the feds cracked down on it and sent them to prison because you are not allowed d to do that, why do we let the credit card companies do the same thing? >> i think part of what we are seeing is that a lot ofe the financial services have been struggling to make money anywhere because we have had had interest rates pushed down so, so, so low. that doesn't give those banks much room to work to make money.o they borrow -- they take money from you into the checking account and lend it

out in like a mortgage or something. those rates have been so low that it's been tough for them to make money. they have gotten desperate and gone out further and further into these kind ofpe edgy activities. just to try to make money.ry >> tucker: preying on the weak. >> exactly. >> tucker: you said low interest rates. this is one of the many unintended consequences ofin fed policy. what happens when they go up as they are going to? >> yeah, well, your credit card payments are going to go up a lot higher as well. they are going to be going faster and faster. look at what all this debt that is outstanding and your payments every month.t even if you don't add anything more on to your credit card, your payments are going to get more andon more expensive. at the same time, it's not like that income is growing really fast. people find themselves just further and further in the hole. if we do get a recessionon which is going to happen, right?. this is a normal cycle. have you booms and busts. normal thing to happen. how are people going to get through?ts >> tucker: i'm ashamed to say that i and a lot of conservatives have defended

this crap for a long time and we shouldn't have and we shouldn't now. i appreciate the overview. thank you. that's it. happy easter on sunday. passover tomorrow. here is griff jenkins. jenkins. ♪ ♪ >> welcome to this special edition of "hannity." president trump versus the oblivious left. i'm jeannine pirro in for sean. you won't believe what hillary clinton said this time. but first, we're going to start with president trump's legal fight against california's sanctuary state policy. according to the "los angeles times," california attorney general, xavier, today released a policy guide to