for donors in australia. harrison said he hope someone else will break his record. he is a hero. most watched, most trusted, most grateful you spent your monday evening with us. good night from washington. i am shannon bream. >> tucker: well, good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." it's a big week. this is the one-year anniversary of robert mueller's appointment as special counsel to investigate russian interference into the 2016 election. it seems like a good time to assess, how it's going? the investigation is costingit millions of dollars, it's producing thousands and thousands of hours of cable news commentary. our political system has been brought to a virtual standstill. we still await the investigation, its conclusions. one year in, what do we know so far? certainly nothing we were promised at the outset of the investigation.ou there's still no evidence of any plot by the trump campaign to collude with the russiannl government to hack the presidency, to beat

hillary clinton. there is no evidence that russia hacked any vote totals for that matter. there still isn't any proof that they were behind the hacking of john podesta's emails. we still haven't even seen evidence they had anything to do with the dnc hacking. people have been charged with crimes, but only for behavior totally unconnected to trump's campaign or because they allegedly lied to mueller's investigative team. in the case of former national security advisor michael flynn, he apparently was charged with a felony perjury crime even though his fbi interviewers, we just learned, didn't believe he was lying when they spoke to him. so a few people are having their lives destroyed, but for w nothing that we can see. no collusion has been found ors even suggested. it doesn't mean we haven't learned anything. we have. we learned that when russia did try to influence the 2016 campaign, they weren't very good at it. they spent a small amount of money on online ads thatha almost nobody saw. most of them were in states that had nothing to do with the outcome of the race. they weren't competitive. the ads weren't even all on

trump's behalf. some were against trump. instead of backing a specific candidate, their greatest interest seems to have been sowing chaos and disunity in the american political system. and on that front, of course, mission accomplished. more than anything, we've learn just how clueless the people who run washington, d.c., are. rather than accept the fact that they created donald trump themselves by abandoning and then coming to despise the resth of the country they run, they couldn't face that, so they concocted the russia collusion story as a way to sustain a world where they did nothing wrong and they only lost because their enemies betrayed this country to a foreign power. for more than a year, russia wat all they could talk about because they certainly didn't want to talk about the issues that got trump elected in the first place. drug o.d.s, a vanishing middle class. their agenda of literally replacing the people who live ii this country with immigrants. they don't want to talk about that. but it hasn't been working.n for most of trump's presidency, democrats have looked forward to the big midterm wins that will

give them control of congress once again. that's the whole point of all of this, but it hasn't worked. their lead is dwindling. it's now within the margin of error. they may not win back the house at all. it looks like the senate is going to be beyond their reach. why?or because the public is recognized that the russia investigation ie not what they said it was. it is and has been from the beginning been a witch hunt created by a cabal frantic to keep it hold on power. tom fitton has been has been tracking the mueller investigation from the very first day. he's also the president of judicial watch, and he joins us now. tom, is that an unfair summary of what we've learned? have i missed something? have we gotten any indication of actual collusion a year into this? >> no, we haven't. you've been much too charitable. if honestly evaluated, the mueller investigation has been an unmitigated disaster. if the media were covering the, mueller investigation the way it was covering the trump presidency, i think we would all agree it hasn'tg worked. it's failing.

it was created based on anal illegal leak by james comey. many of the people who inspired the mueller investigation were fired from the government. sally yates, the acting attorney general. andrew mccabe, the deputy ag. james comey, the fbi director. andrew mccabe, excuse me -- the deputy fbi director. all three fired for misconduct. they helped get the mueller investigation rolling. you had the clinton dnc dossier that was hidden from the american people being used evidently by mueller. we have the flynn investigation under attack because of the corrupt way in which it was initiated and investigated by the fbi where they said he lied when evidently he didn't. and on top of that, we've got a federal judge questioning the ultimate authority of mr. mueller. and we still don't know what his authority is a year out because he evidently has had secret conversations with the justice department about what hiskn authority is.ye and on top of it, the russia, the russia investigation, the key aspect of it, the russia

troll indictment, it's now being turned into an opportunity for the russia intelligence operations to go into federal court and demand evidence from mr. mueller about what they have on russia intelligence operations, mainly intervention in our elections. what a disaster for the rule of law, and frankly, the president has been victimized through all of this. because evidently there's nothing to justify an investigation of him requiring justice department resources and authorities in a way that's been misused to date. >> tucker: i thought -- correct me if i'm wrong, the whole point of an independent counsel is to assure the rest of us that the investigation is on the level, that it's not tainted by potential conflicts. given that, why didn't mueller try harder to at least seem bipartisan, maybe hiring one registered republican as an investigator. he didn't bother to do that. >> it's the arrogance of the deep state. they think they can do no wrong. mueller and comey are part of the same team on that regard.st

on top of that, you have them hiring democrats with abandon and then you have the page-strzok text messages. he kept those two fbi agents off of his investigation because of bias and hid that from the american people for four months. mr. comey, if he were a typical government official, would have been asked to resign a long time ago. >> tucker: that's a really good point. tom fitton, following this from day one, thank you, tom. >> you're welcome. y >> tucker: it's pretty obvious that the democratic party's relentless focus on russia to the exclusion of all else like issues that matter to people may have been a mistake politically. an article this morning in "the daily beast" makes a ludicrous claim. it says that democrats actually wanted to spend the last year and a half talking about real issues -- health care and the economy - but they couldn't somehow because cable news stopped them. rachel maddow told them not to apparently. cable instead forced them to talk about russia. they didn't want to.ld luckily we kept copies of the

tape, and here's what they actually said about russia. >> there is no question that russia attacked us. >> attacks, ladies and gentlemen, on the constitution. >> attacks on the integrity of a our elections. >> an attack on our democracy. >> we are only at the beginning of understanding what the russians did to affect our elections. >> i think there is a broad recognition among our members that russia is not our friend. >> why does does it not worryco donald trump that the russians, according to the intelligence community, tried to, and indeed did kind of infiltrate and undermine our democracy by what they did? >> tucker: richard goodstein is a lawyer. he advised both of hillary clinton's presidential campaigns, and he joins us tonight for what's going to be a tough conversation for him, i would say. because it's not really plausible -- you know, you can argue that russia hacked our election, as democrats have argued, for the last year.ke they are our main enemy in the world, as they have also argued.

maybe time will prove you're right. i doubt it, but maybe. you can't argue if you are a democrat that what you really wanted to talk about was the issues. you didn't really want to talk about russia. you just happened to talk about it nonstop for a year. nobody's going to believe that because it's a lie. >> again, it's the intelligence community, not democrats, not republicans. the intelligence community is the group that said that the russians tried to undermine our democracy. so don't lay that off on me. >> tucker: there is no intelligence -- hold on. there's no intelligence community. there are a number a federal agencies. some exclusively devoted to intel gathering, other partly, like the coast guard. there is no intelligence community. there is no consensus on anything. >> there's a director of national intelligence.he there's a head of cia. every single person who is charged with overseeing intelligence for this country, when asked and when their agency was asked, said that the russians tried to interfere. the fact of the matter is the russians approached the trump campaign and said we have stolen materials, would you like them,

from the hillary clinton campaign. donald trump jr. said love it. putting aside what ultimately happened later --ai >> tucker: i would say we have plowed this ground before.n what i'm asking you isor a political question. clearly this is not bearing fruit for the democratic party. their lead is within a margin of error.t this is a political matter. it's just not working. they are not going to retake congress on the strength of the russia story. now they're telling us we never wanted to talk aboutut russia in the first place, and all i'm saying is that's a lie.s don't lie to me when i've been watching tv for the past year and all you talked about hissa russia.n did rachel maddow make you do that? like, don't lie to me. >> the fact is, i think there'sl two tracks. i think the fact is the democratic party knows it's not going to win this election. they will not win the 2018 elections just talking about mueller or trump even. they have got to have an affirmative agenda about economic justice and social justice. >> tucker: oh. >> but the fact of the matter is donald trump -- we used to sayso he was at historically low approval ratings. i checked today. jimmy carter actually edged him out, so he's now second-most

unpopular president this far into an administration. >> tucker: you are absolutely right. so why aren't the democrats going to take the congress and put pelosi back in the speaker's seat? >> every election -- we just had that special election in arizona. trump won by 21. the republican won by five. every single republican who won the house last year by 16 points or under has to be looking over their shoulder scared to death because of this momentum. >> tucker: you're right. okay, look. democrats have a lot of energy. it's a midterm in the president's first term. of course, they are going to gain seats. there have only been i think two elections in american history when that didn't happen. so it's going to happen, but democrats don't look like they are a lock to win back thehe house. given the president's relatively low popularity, and you're absolutely right. half the country doesn't like him. democrats should be way far ahead of where they are today. the reason they are not farther ahead is because they are not running on everything. they are running on things like more abortion and more illegal aliens. things that are insane and that

scare people. you know that. >> again, we will see when the 2018 midterms roll around. all we know is from every other single special election, thehe democratic wave seems to be onl the order of 10, 15%. you can say what you want at this point. that will take out a lot of incumbent republicans.. will it continue? that remains to be seen. >> tucker: that was going to happen no matter what but hold on. just for the sake of honesty, will you concede the democrats didn't spend the last year telling us that russia hacked our elections, whatever that means, it was a lie. but they didn't say that because rachel maddow made them or morning joe sent them a memo and they had to obey. they said it because they thought it would work and it didn't. >> they were horrified. they were horrified that a,it that the russians did this and b, that the white house was indifferent or worse was complicit. that's the thing that democrats have been talking about. >> tucker: they don't care. they don't care about this country. if they cared about the country they would secure the borders and fight back against china. [laughs] i mean, the countries that are

actually controlling our policies.ld no pushback from the democrats at all because they don't care. >> we had a net outflow from the u.s. to mexico.. the last four or five years of the obama administration, we had a net outflow. that's how much they care about the border. the people were leaving, not coming in. >> tucker: yeah. richard goodstein, thank you. >> sure. >> tucker: good to see you. a year and a half ago democrat, adam schiff came on the show and seemed very confident that group of russian collusion would be forthcoming any day.f here's what he said. >> can you look right into the camera and say i know for a fact the government -- >> absolutely. the government of vladimir putin was behind the hacks of our institutions. >> tucker: of. john podesta's email. >> you are carrying water for that kremlin. >> you are a member of congress on the intel committee. >> you will have to move your show to russian television.

>> tucker: you know what, that is so beneath your office. it didn't quite turn out that way somehow. author and columnist mark steyn joins us tonight.ui o he's been watching too. he's here to celebrate the year anniversary of the mueller investigation. mark, a year in, do you think that history has proved the congressman right? >> i must say i really enjoy your show on russia today -- what is it, tucker's kremlin tonight. i love it. the babushka who reads out the bingo numbers is absolutely terrific. the fact is, there are no russians in the russian investigation. they've indicted a bunch of russian trolls who are never going to be standing in any american courtroom. that's absolutely preposterous. they might as well indict macedonian farmers. they would all be an absurd joke if they weren't actually destroying american lives like those of michael flynn and carter page. whatever you feel about them, they don't deserve to be trashei

because they are the designatedr fall guys for a totally corrupted investigation. i will say this, i take it as read that foreign governments prosecute their own interest in other countries' elections. russia does that. france does that. the united states does that and often in its allies too, as when obama interfered in the israeli election and the brexit vote in the united kingdom.te i take that as read. it's far more disturbing to me when the elements of the domestic government interfere in their own country's election, which is all we really know now after a year of watching mueller's absurd investigation play out, that significant elements of the u.s. government were interfering in the u.s. election. that's actually far more serious. as for richard's points about the intelligence community, i

think that's actually part of the problem. the last time i checked, more than 4 million people had top security clearances. that's actually four times the population of my state, the one i'm in at the moment, new hampshire. it's about the population of new zealand. there shouldn't be an intelligence community, so-called, and if there is, they should all go off to some farmland in pennsylvania like the amish raise barns. they are just mischiefmaking here. >> tucker: hardly a community. quickly, is it possible when you hear democrats a year in say we never really wanted to talk about this, we wanted to talk about getting rid of the carried interest exemption or whatever, is that believable?d >> no. they have finally figured out what most of us figured out 11 and a half months ago, that nobody is interested. everybody understands -- john podesta's password

was "password." you don't have to be a russian or a macedonian, the average 7-year-old boy can hack into john podesta's account. that's how easy that is. this thing is ridiculous except for the real american lives it's destroying. >> tucker: i think one of my kids may have done that actually. i'm going to check after the show. mark steyn, please stick aroundy the creepy porn lawyer is back. he never really left and mark has been following his career. we will get an update on that with him in just a minute but first, new data show just how overwhelmingly left-wing faculty at colleges are. it's no surprise one professor says that the left is becoming intellectually arrogant. he joins us next. ♪ you made a promise

you agreed to never give up to be a decent neighbor to remember the good people who rise with every challenge to remember their strength when you feel tired to serve with grit and grace you made a promise we did too the all-new ram 1500 ♪ ♪ legendary jockey víctor espinoza is insatiable when it comes to competing. ♪ ♪ so is his horse. ♪ ♪ when it comes to snacking. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ that's why he uses the chase mobile app, to pay practically anyone, at any bank. life, lived victor's way. chase. make more of what's yours.

termites, we're on the move.24/7. roger. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. termites never stop trying to get in, we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home.

mr. elliot, what's your wiwifi?ssword? wifi's ordinary. basic. do i look basic? nope! which is why i have xfinity xfi. it's super fast and you can control every device in the house. [ child offscreen ] hey! let's basement. and thanks to these xfi pods,

the signal reaches down here, too. so sophie, i have an xfi password, and it's "daditude". simple. easy. awesome. xfinity. the future of awesome. ♪ >> tucker: the united states formally opened a new embassy in israel today, moving its old location from tel aviv to a new one in jerusalem. the official opening comes on the 70th anniversary of israel'd independence and just over five months after the president announced his plans for the 7 move. meanwhile in the gaza strip, at least 55 palestinians are reported dead tonight. more than 2400 injured. israeli soldiers opened fire after palestinians began setting fires and throwing firebombs across the border fence. others attempted to force their way over it. it is the single deadliest day in what had been weeks of violent clashes between palestinians and israelis along the border with gaza. meanwhile, turkey, a nato ally,, has recalled its ambassadors

both to the united states and israel in protest against the n move of the embassy. cnn's pro government propaganda outlet it maintains in turkey responded by uncritically publishing statements including an accusation that the united states is complacent -- complicit in crimes against humanity. that's what the cnn propaganda outlet did. we contacted turner media to see if they were reconsidering their role in supporting the turkish government. t they did not respond, as they have not responded, for an interview request, but we are going to keep trying. well, the academy has leaned left for a long time but at many schools, that tilt is becoming monolithic, utterly monolithic. a new report looks at the faculty at more than 50 top liberal arts colleges and found that if the service academies are excluded -- air force, navyy army -- registered democrats outnumber registered republicans more than 12-1. much more than 12-1 on some campuses. the higher up the food chain

you go, the more unbalanced it becomes. s this lack of ideological diversity is breeding arrogance among other things, say some. gerard alexander is a political science professor at the university of virginia in charlottesville. he wrote a great piece for "the new york times" over the weekend warning liberals, you're not as smart as you think. gerard alexander joins us tonight. professor, thanks for coming on. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: so what do you mean by that?an "liberals, you are not as smart as you think." >> as every writer knows, they don't choose their own titles and i might have preferred something a little bit less like clickbaity or aggressive and i was trying to communicate to liberals, many of whom i think mean well the country and don't realize some of the effects they are having that their tone,, their approach to a lot of our national conversations about a whole slew of issues, it can attract and persuade people. giving a speech from an oscar stage, giving a lecture on a campus, using all kinds of the platforms they have in american life, the prominence they have in american life, there are

times when that can be used to set an example, to educate, to attract, to lend celebrity and credibility to points of view, but it's distressing to me how often those platforms end up t being used in ways that communicate self-righteousness, a tone of intellectual and moral superiority. how often they are used to berate instead of persuade and i think one of the effects liberals don't realize they are having is how much they are alienating other people. i think it's almost entirely inadvertent. and i think it's one of many trends in american life that's really unhelpful that we could better avoid. and i try to give in the article an idea of ways they might try to avoid doing that. >> tucker: diversity was supposed to be the guard rail that prevented people from going off into self-righteousness andh lack of self-awareness. having people around who disagree with you and bring different life experiences to the conversation was supposed to broaden us.ha if, in most universities, there is nobody who doesn't agree with you, you never meet anybody with a different view, why wouldn't you become arrogant and dumb

over time, as they have? >> it's a serious problem.n' liberals have been such great forces in modern american life for bringing certain kinds of diversity to the table and being enthusiasts about that. who doesn't think america has benefited from more african-american faces, more hispanic voices, more women in prominent positions? america has been offended intellectually and other ways from that, but they really have had a blind spot when it comes to what some people i admire greatly have started calling "viewpoint diversity," may be better than ideological diversity. >> tucker: wait a second, what's the point of ethnic or gender diversity if not to bring viewpoint diversity? i thought that was the point. so but how can -- in other words, if you have a group of people who all look different but come from the same culture and have the same views, how wah that in any sense diverse? >> originally they didn't come from the same viewpoints. people who came from the jim crow south had very different life experiences thana upper middle-class northerners. but increasingly what has happened, especially through

american universities, is a trend towards gender and ethnic diversity,ie racial diversity, but not intellectual diversity. i think that has been really costly in just some of the ways you are suggesting. it breeds, among other things, an incredible intellectual complacency.y. and i think that in a sense,ng viewpoints that conservatives might voice come under tremendous critical scrutiny, are really a questioned, are really raked over the coals and often presumptively rejected as illegitimate or unpersuasive. whereas a lot of assumptions held by people in the american left go unexamined for long periods. that's the kind of intellectual environment in which error can thrive, in which orthodoxies can gel and in which, you are right, in which viewpoints can become, instead of diverse, they can end up becoming homogenized. there's a real danger that that's what's happening. not in the sense that all people on the left agree with each other, because on campuses, they don't. any academic knows that. but orthodoxy and homogeneity in

the sense that they stopt. reflecting the true diversity intellectually of the whole country. that really is happening. >> tucker: nicely put. i'm glad that you are in that environment. i don't even know what your political views are, but you are asking the right questions, and i'm grateful for that.n thank you, professor. san francisco's sanctuary city law is so broad, so far out that even a pretty liberal mayoral candidate says it's too much. that law needs to change. she joins us next. it's just a burst pipe, i could fix it. (laugh) no. with claim rateguard your rates won't go up just beacuase of a claim. i totally could've... (wife) nope! switching to allstate is worth it. with tcalled audible.le app you can listen to the stories you love while doing the things you love, outside.

binge better. audible. copd makes it hard to breathe. so to breathe better, i go with anoro. ♪ go your own way copd tries to say, "go this way." i say, "i'll go my own way, with anoro." ♪ go your own way once-daily anoro contains two medicines called bronchodilators that work together to significantly improve lung function all day and all night. anoro is not for asthma. it contains a type of medicine that increases risk of death in people with asthma. the risk is unknown in copd. anoro won't replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than once a day. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition, high blood pressure, glaucoma, prostate, bladder, or urinary problems. these may worsen with anoro. call your doctor if you have worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain while taking anoro. ask your doctor about anoro. ♪ go your own way

get your first prescription free at anoro.com.

get your first prescription free ♪ better than all the rest ♪ applebee's new bigger bolder grill combos.

now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. >> tucker: not surprisingly, the city of san francisco has some of this country's most far-out sanctuary city laws. so far out that even a fairlyha left wing mayoral candidate is fed up with them. angela alioto was collecting signatures for a ballot initiative that would scale back the city's sanctuary policies. policies that for years she supported broadly. currently city law blocks the police from reporting event habitual criminals and those suspected of felonies to federal immigration authorities. alioto said that needs to change as the city is becoming a magnet for illegal immigrants who are also dangerous criminals. angela alioto joins us tonight. thanks a lot for coming on. i doubt you and i agree on much politically, which is why i wanted to talk to you. >> that's probably true. >> tucker: that's probably true. i get the headline here is, the

headline here is the policies in your city are so crazy that even you, who support sanctuary cities says enough, is that a fair assessment? >> i not only support sanctuary cities, i wrote the law. i wrote the law in 1991 and it was amended in 2016 to add felons. >> tucker: why would someone amend it to add felons, people who are demonstrably dangerous eoto the citizens and taxpayersf the city, what was the idea? >> i have absolutely no idea. as the author of the law i find it totally unacceptable and so i'm writing this ordinance for the november ballot that says that dangerous and serious felonies are simply not going to be allowed to have the protection of a sanctuary law. it absolutely makes no sense that the elected officials of san francisco don't understand what the people want butsa the

they want to not have felonsnt protected. elected officials want to protect the felons. >> tucker: that's kind of the question. in a democracy, big policy should have popular support. are there hundreds of thousands, tens of thousands, dozens of san franciscans who say i want my city to protect dangerous felons? >> not that i know of because i've been out on the campaign trail for five months and i talk to people about the fact that my sanctuary law was amended to add not only misdemeanors and felonies, but dangerous and serious felonies with up to three, within seven years, some ridiculous wording and the people are aghast. they don't even know that that was in the sanctuary law but when they find out that it's in it, they are really shocked andw i have great support from the people. however, from the elected officials, they had a press g conference two hours ago. all of them lined up in front of city hall condemning me and calling me names basically. because i want to take felons

out of the sanctuary laws. such that they are not protected should they commit a serious or dangerous felony. >> it's like a bare minimum for governance. if you are in charge of a city you ought to be putting the. protection of your people ahead of everything else, no?he so what were they calling you? >> i've been called a nazi, i've been called trumpian. i've been called a fascist. i've been called a racist, i'm a civil rights lawyer. i've won more civil rights verdicts in the last 18 years -- i won the largest civil rights verdict against wonder bread and then to be called a racist and a nazi and a fascist because i'm taking felonies, felonies against children, felonies against other f human beings out of the sanctuary law i wrote that was intended to protect families and children staying together in

san francisco once they got here undocumented. so the entire intent of my sanctuary law went out the window when they amended it andu added felonies and right nowey they are trying to make the community think i'm trying to abolish the sanctuary law itself so now certain communities are up in arms and it's blatantly absurd. i'm going to go forward with this ordinance. >> tucker: we are rooting for you. i never thought i would say this but anything you are for but i'm rooting for you in this case. quickly since you are from san francisco, you walk down the street, you see junkies shooting up. you go to union square and there are people living there and defecating on the sidewalk. the city is protecting felons. do you think "i don't recognize this place"? >> again, i'm a mother of four, grandmother of five, a very successful civil rights attorney. if you told me a year and a half ago i was going to run for mayor again, i would have said i don't

think so, but i have to tell iay you, walking through the streets, seeing such property on -- poverty on the streets, something i've already addressed before and was extremely successful at addressing. seeing this unbelievable outbreak of people sticking needles in their arms and then slumping over and other people just walking by and going to their jobs. it's totally unacceptable to me, that will not happen when i'm mayor. i will take them off the street and give them the care they need.. we don't need any more money, we have the money in the budget, but to walk by and pretend that it's okay that san francisco, an iconic city in the world, it looks a third-world country with people on the streets dying is horrible. that's why i'm running for mayor. >> tucker: you better stop there, because i'm about to send you a campaign contribution. i don't think i can control myself. i can't do it, but i want to because what you are saying -- angela alioto, i can't believe

i'm saying nice things, but i really am. godspeed, good luck. >> listen, please go to www.violentfelonyreporting.com. >> tucker: i'm rooting for you. thanks a million. a new study shows that climate models may have exaggerated by global warming as much as 45%. that is science. why haven't you heard about that? we will tell you next.at uch. it's really not very important. i was in the stone ages as much as technology wise. and i would say i had nothing. you become a school teacher for one reason, you love kids. and so you don't have the same tools, you don't always believe you have the same... outcomes achievable for yourself.

when we got the tablets, it changed everything. by giving them that technology and then marrying it with a curriculum that's designed to have technology at the heart of it, we are really changing the way that students learn. and i can't wait for ten years from now when i get to talk to them again and see, like, who they are. ♪ ♪ most people come to la with big dreams. ♪ we came with big appetites. with expedia, you could book a flight, hotel, car, and activity all in one place. ♪

the full value of your new car? you're better off throwing your money right into the harbor. i'm gonna regret that. with new car replacement, if your brand new car gets totaled, liberty mutual will pay the entire value plus depreciation. liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance.

♪ >> tucker: you've seen the many headlines. you've heard the self-described experts, global warming is on the brink of exterminating the human race. for more than 20 years, we've had just one or two years left to take action before it's too late and yet somehow it hasn't come yet. maybe that's because the models are way off, as models often are in science.ma a new study in the journal of climate says the warming effects of carbon dioxide could be exaggerated by 40% or more.

that's not a political conclusion. it's a scientific one, though you probably haven't read it in the paper recently for some reason, why? judith currie is founder and president, also a climatologist and coauthored the new study, she joins us tonight. professor, thanks for coming on. >> thank you for inviting me back. >> tucker: we are grateful to have you. simply because we are told that the science is what matters. we have a new scientificly development.ol it doesn't mean, i'm not overly drawing the conclusions from this but it turns out the model seems to have been wrong, so why aren't the people who push those models on us owning up to that? >> well, they are starting to recognize that the climate models may be running too hot. in the recent u.n. assessment in 2013, they raised a concern that the climate models may be running too hot.

but that hasn't really changed the narrative about the alarm over this issue. >> tucker: i guess the reason this is so very significant to ordinary people is, huge public policies are based on these models, the amount of proposed carbon tax for example. all the ways we are responding to global warming are based on these models, so shouldn't our policymakers paying close attention to whether they are right or wrong?lo >> yes. the conclusions that have been drawn from these models have been way overconfident and they ignore so many things. apart from the climate models running too hot, the 21st century predictions ignore all sorts of things about possible changes to the sun or volcanic eruptions or changes to the ocean circulation. they are just pushing a very simple story line that climate change is driven solely by how much carbon dioxide we emit into

the atmosphere. that's a big oversimplification of the real situation. >> tucker: but isn't that theea opposite of science? isn't science allowing the data to form your conclusions rather than try to superimpose your conclusions on the data? >> well, nature has conducted the experiment for us. since about 1850, carbon dioxide has increased by 40% and during that same time, temperatures have warmed by about 2 degrees fahrenheit, and if you look at that data and combine it with what we know about other climatic factors, the result we obtained is that the sensitivity of climate to carbon dioxide is significantly smaller than what the climate models are telling us.

>> tucker: [laughs] that seems like the headline, but it's not being written unfortunately. judith curry, thank you for your honesty and your bravery. appreciate it.ei >> thank you. >> tucker: up next, our friend bret baier just wrote a new book. we will tell you what it's about and why you might want to buy it. bret's first interview about his new volume. an important update on the porn lawyer and of course we have it from mark steyn just ahead. do you need the most trusted battery in your noise cancelling headphones? maybe not. maybe you could trust you won't be next to a loud eater. (eating potato chips loudly) or you could just trust duracell. (silence) ♪

♪ most people come to la with big dreams. ♪ we came with big appetites. with expedia, you can book a flight, hotel, car, and activity... ...all in one place. ♪ everything you need to go. expedia

♪ >> tucker: time now for "the friend zone." we bring on one of our friends from here at fox onto the show.f tonight, our old friend bret baier. he hosts "special report." he's not just a news man and a political expert, he's also a history buff and a best-selling author. he's got a new book outre

tomorrow. it's called "three days in moscow: ronald reagan and the fall of the soviet empire." bret baier joins us tonight. hey, bret. >> hey, tucker, thanks for having me. >> tucker: doug brinkley, one of the most famous, may be the most famous reagan historian calls this "one of the best and most essential books ever written about ronald reagan." i'm impressed. >> and i didn't even pay him. >> tucker: it's amazing. three days. you sort of boiled down the pivotal moment to three days.ng what three days? >> it's the three days of the fourth summit between reagan and gorbachev where reagan goes to moscow and he meets with gorbachev. they are finalizing the nuclear arms treaty, but he also gives an uncovered and overlooked for the most part speech to moscow state university students and takes q&a from them. we used the three days to jump back and look at how reagan getf to this point and really leads to the seminal moment of the cold war coming to an end, the

wall coming down, and communism really taking a hit. the whole world was changed soon after that. >> tucker: what did reagan know about communism or the soviet union that others missed? >> from the very beginning, he thought that communism was just not going to make it and that it was destined, as he said in a speech, "the ash heap of history." he spoke about that for a long time, even back when he was president of the screen actors guild fighting communism in hollywood and you see that throughout his life. he holds that principle. gives some really stinging speeches, including calling the soviet union the evil empire. but when mikhail gorbachev comes up, he sees in gorbachev someone he can negotiate with. it was tough in some of those summits. we have a lot of behind the g scenes, new nuggets, interviews. i interviewed secretary of state george schultz, who is a national treasure. at his age, remembers meetings like they were yesterday. some oral histories that really had never been dug into about

behind the scenes and it really paints a picture of how the cold war comes to the end. >> tucker: interesting. i have an office next to yours, so i know you've been working on this book for a while. what did you come away thinking about reagan? did it change your view of him? >> yeah, i think at the time, he was underappreciated. there have been a lot of books looking back favorably to reagan, but this is more reporting on history and some of the behind the scenes moments and speeches. for example, when he gives that speech in berlin at the m brandenburg gate, "tear down this wall, mr. gorbachev," there were about ten people inside the white house who did not want him to say that. the state department took it out of the speech multiple times. he kept on putting it back in. and he went to that speech with it not in. and we had a conversation in the limo on the way to the wall where he turns to an aide and says you know what, the guys at state are going to kill me, but this is the right thing to do, and he puts it back in. that speech happens on june 12,

1987. we have a big summit coming up june 12th in singapore, and i didn't plan it that way, but there is some synergy there on history. >> tucker: can you imagine being the guy who took out the phrase "tear down this wall"? c [laughs] i mean, i hope history treats him badly. this book is out tomorrow. these are not just the normal blurbs you get your friends to say. oh, great book, buy two copies! these are unbelievable and they are from historians. extra impressive. i'm reading it this weekend. bret baier, great to see you, congrats. >> thanks, tucker. appreciate it. >> tucker: that creepy porn lawyer is back. that's the bad news. the good news is mark steyn is back. next. the good

[thoughtful sigh] the good still nervous about buying a house? a little. thought i could de-stress with some zen gardening. at least we don't have to worry about homeowners insurance. just call geico. geico helps with homeowners insurance? good to know. been doing it for years. that's really good to know. i should clean this up. i'll get the dustpan. behind the golf clubs. get to know geico. and see how easy homeowners and renters insurance can be. where we're changing withs? contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today.

book now at lq.com. what's going on? oh hey! ♪ that's it? yeah. that's it? everybody two seconds!

"dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. >> tucker: well, that creepy porn lawyer working >> tucker: that creepy porn lawyer who works for stormy daniels had yet another busy weekend on cable television

where he vowed to invade even more people's private lives. maybe it's time that he himself was given a closer look. here is with the federalist's mollie hemingway suggested the other day. >> he is a front man for what is obviously a well-funded and coordinated operation that has received next to no criticism or reflection by many people in the media. ith think it is worth asking, wo is this guy? how does he have access to special counsel or treasury department documents? i think it's worth finding out more about this thing that is drivingin so much of the covera. >> tucker: so who is this creepy porn lawyer? we don't ask ourselves the basic questions often enough. mark steyn does, though. he joins us again. who is this guy? >> he's a very wacky guy. he used to own the tully's coffee company, which more people, for those of us from the border, sounds like a very bad joke. if you are successful lawyer, you have a company called global

barristers.ar hehe had one called global baristas, and got sued for not paying $160,000 worth of coffee, which is literally grounds for a lawsuit. i mean, i don't quite understand. thisis guy not only doesn't he appear to have ever made any money for his clients, his own law firm went bankrupt. i never heard -- because america employs as many lawyers as the rest of the planet combined. i've never actually heard of a lawyer so incompetent his own firm goes bankrupt. this guy is a very eccentric figure. t as mollie hemingway said, there's a lot more to be found out about him. >> sean: what does it say about cable television, or the other two networks, that this guy has been the single most frequent guest, maybe ever? >> iuc think what it says is tht

he is much better at being a cable guessed that he is a lawyer. the tragedy here, if you like, is that stormy -- i bet you, poor old stormy won't see 70 bucks --av she won't have enough money to buy a decaf avenatti act has tully copies store by the time this is all through. but he'll get some publicity at at.t that is it. >> tucker: that's a really good point. it's always a client who loses. mark steyn, we all win when you are on. thank you, mark. >> thank you. >> tucker: a whole hour justid past. hope you enjoyed it. tune in every night at 8:00 to the show that is a sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. be sure to tune in tomorrow night. we'll take a look at the terrifying story that no one is paying attention to. some are flat out ignoring it. farmers targeted for destruction by their own government. in south africa. most of the world, including our own government, doesn't seem to

care.we we will talk to two of the people who just came to plead their case in washington. we met with him while they were here. that interview airs tomorrow night. good night from washington. sean hannity live from new york city. >> sean: what about pomposity, groupthink? where did that go tonight? >> tucker: we are against them! strongly. [laughter] >> sean: i can to member them all. you should test me in the morning. tucker, great show. welcome to "hannity." literally we have more news than we can fit in one hour but we will try hard. another historic, huge, massive accomplishment, another key promise kept for president trump.pe the u.s. is officially open an embassy in jerusalem and not surprisingly, hamas is responding to the bold move with terrorism, violence, and protest. in other words, another typical monday for hamas. other major breakthroughs in president trump's plan to do nuclearize the entire korean peninsula. the administration is now outlining the plan to disarm the