house without their support, so we are working and earning their trust. >> martha: it's going to be fascinating to watch. thank you very much. good to have you here tonight. i hope you come back as we move through the midterms. that is our story for tonight. we will see you back in new york tomorrow night. ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." for the past 18 months democrats in the congress and their p.r. consultants in the press have told you that donald trump won the 2016 presidential election mostly because his campaign somehow colluded with the government of vladimir putin. to prove that they have brought the usual business of government here in washington basically to a standstill and launched the most divisive special counsel investigation in the history of the country. it has now gone on for more than a year and yet remarkably to this very day we still have no proof of collusion. just this weekend democrat mark warner of the senate intel committee, someone everybody in washington pretends is

impressive, was offered a chance on television to provide actual evidence of russian collusion. he declined. of course he did, they always do. you've seen this before, but tonight we have something different for you. we have a democrat who says he has the smoking gun. three months ago we made this offer to congressman of california, a member of the house intelligence committee. watch. >> if you have any evidence at all of collusion, any, and i don't care how small it is, i will give the floor to you, and i mean that. i want to wrap this up. i'm sure you do too. >> tucker: we offered the congressman a full half-hour live on the show if you could give us evidence, real evidence of russian collusion for trump's campaign and to his credit, tonight he is taking us up on that offer. there's nothing staged about this conversation, the one you are about to see. if the congressman has proved the trump people colluded with a foreign power will be the first to call for indictments. but if he doesn't have that proof, if after all this time there is still no real evidence of collusion then we will know

for certain that this whole thing is a lie that has badly damaged our country. we are going to find out in just a minute. meanwhile, the russian investigation continues to expose deep and terrifying corruption in washington, not in the ways people who launched it expected. on friday, "the new york times" and "washington post" reported that the obama administration employed a spy who posed as an advisor to the trump campaign during the 2016 election. he was a longtime cia asset who fed information back to federal intelligence agencies. the obama people lied about doing this. as far as we know nothing like that has ever happened in american history. richard nixon was accused of less than that and he left office. you would think the self-described guardians of democracy in the media would be horrified by the suggestion of partisan spying no matter what they think of trump personally. but they are not horrified. instead they are aggressively defending it like the crate and lackeys they are. "the washington post" over the weekend actually ran an op-ed with this headline, we are not making this up. "the fbi didn't use an informant

to go after trump, they used one to protect him." amazingly "the new york times" agreed with that. here was it story on the subject. "fbi used informant to investigate russia ties to campaign, not to spy." in other words, donald trump should be grateful that obama's spies spying on him. it's for their own good. the people who wrote this should be ashamed. it's partisan cheerleading and embarrassingly credulous. just transcribe whatever spin you got from your fbi source and call it a new story. how with these idiot reporters feel if the trump administration read their emails or tapped their cell phones were sent a spy to spy on them and then claimed it was all for their own good? obviously they would be outraged and so would we, because we are not hacks. obama's cia director john brennan by contract is a hack. he's also a liar who has done more to embarrass and discredit the intelligence community than any other single person. brennan has been on twitter attacking trump and anyone else who wants to know more the about

the obama administration's spying efforts in the last campaign as if americans don't have a right to know when the government was spying on them and why. a ruling class is completely out of control, that the real lesson of this russian nonstatus. byron york from the "washington examiner" and jonathan turley. professor, first to you. does the public, do americans have a right to know if they were spied on and why? >> i think that they do. these are very serious allegations and they are unprecedented. we don't know what the truth is. maybe there was a valid reason for the investigation. maybe they used valid means, but we should want to know. what i think it is being a case of willful blindness here is that we have confirmation that trump apparently was correct when he said over a year ago that he had people in his campaign that were under surveillance and it turns out that it was much broader than we thought even though people like clapper and other in the obama's administration don't make it administration to 90. it does appear to be a

surveillance program, it does appear to be an investigation and now you have an individual who reportedly offered to be an advisor in a campaign when he was an asset for the fbi or the cia or both. i can't imagine what justice official would sign off on that. you can try to split this as you may. whether this is an investigation or surveillance. but from a trump standpoint there is a legitimate issue. you can tell a victim this isn't a mugging, it's just a force divestiture but it sure feels like a mugging and less you can prove to the contrary. >> tucker: if bush had done this to obama i would want to know why and i think it's fair to want to know. when did this start? >> the emergence of this informant has kind of thrown into doubt our previous timetable of this. we've always been told that the fbi investigation formally started on july 31st. the road up something called the electronic communication and

started this investigation, but now we hear that the informant was actually reaching out and talking to trump campaign people well before that, at least weeks before that, maybe longer before that and i think what you are seeing on capitol hill is some investigators, republican investigators are looking even further back than that. >> tucker: what would that mean? that he was doing it laterally because he was interested or that he was doing it at the direction of one of the obama agencies? >> that he was doing it at the direction of an agency before they had a pretense, a pretext to actually do this. so that would be a big issue inside the fbi. also, we are seeing some investigators looking even further back to march. on march 21st trump goes to "the washington post," meets with their editorial board. >> tucker: i remember very well. >> a lot of criticism for not having a foreign policy advisors. in part because the entire foreign policy establishment had shunned him.

they ask him who are your advisors? peoples of pulls out a piece of paper says here they are. and on the list he says carter page and george papadopoulos. we know now that james comey and andrew mccabe personally briefed loretta lynch about them. and then shortly thereafter they were discussed at what is called the national security council principals committee, which is secretaries of state, treasury and defense, cia, all these people are talking about carter page then. >> tucker: totally shocking for a professor, quickly since you've got more historical perspective on this, then most people, it is anything like this ever happened that we know of? >> i know of no president. they have a case to make. the point though is for those people that are objecting, what are you objecting to? this is a serious matter. no matter how you feel about trump, we need to find out the truth about this. if there was an investigation, if there was an asset who tried

to become an advisor in the campaign, those are serious matters for all of us. and i think that trump is right. he won about it i think in the wrong way, but he has a legitimate objection here that we should know the true fact. >> tucker: i agree and i don't think it's about trump at all. thank you both very much. i appreciate it. when greenwald is cofounder and editor at the interception he joins us tonight. you are not a trump supporter. i don't think this is about trump, i think this is about oversight of our intel and law enforcement agencies. what do you think of the coverage, which you've been following closely, of this alleged mole in the campaign? >> it's incredibly bizarre, because for the last two weeks all we heard from the fbi and of course the media reported it was that it was extremely dangerous to try and expose or determine the identity of this informant because to do so would be to jeopardize his life, the life of other people, national security, all the things they always want to hide from the public what it is that they do and now that

"the new york times" and "washington post" published huge amount of details about this informant making it incredibly easy to know that it was stephen helper because "the daily caller" two days earlier had reported all the same details and named him. we all now know who the informant is and we know that that was just a fairy tale, that he's not some covert undercover agent, but somebody who is a well-known cia operative whose name has been repeatedly published in newspapers as a cia operative and as a republican operative for decades, and so the whole claim that the media was circulating on behalf of the fbi that this was some sensitive covert asset turned out to be a lie and "the new york times," "the washington post" knew that, which is why they did everything but name him by publishing all of the details to let us know who it is. >> tucker: it wasn't just the media. you saw mark warner of virginia, who was on the senate intel committee, seen as a pretty sober person, basically threaten his colleagues with criminal prosecution if they in any way divulge the identity. what would be the justification

for that? >> this is what the intelligence community does. and i've been trying to essentially make this point for 18 months now as we've been told we are required patriotically to accept whatever they say. i have been reporting on the nsa. they constantly said it would be a crime if we divulge this, it would endanger people if we report on it. nobody was ever heard. there were trying to cover themselves and their own wrongdoing and not the national security of the country and that's the same here. you have people like mark warner and inside of the fbi and justice department who don't want us to know the name of the informant, not because they're worried about national security, but because they are worried about themselves, and that's why they are using the language they always use. you will be engaged in espionage, you will be jeopardizing lives. this is what they always say and the reason why i think the media deserves criticism is the media knows better than anybody that when they say that in the vast

majority of cases they are lying and trying to cover for themselves and that's why it's so important that we keep digging. >> tucker: i remember your nsa reporting well. i apologize for not making it more seriously at the time. you are right. thank you for being one of the last remaining civil libertarians. i appreciate it. >> thanks. >> tucker: congressman eric swalwell says he can show real evidence that the president colluded with the russian government, but first we would like to hear his thoughts on the fbi's buying operation on the trump campaign and the commerce men joined us tonight. thanks for coming on. >> of course. >> tucker: you are up for reelection of course, almost all members are. if you find out the trump fbi had begun spying on you and was reading your emails and listening to the phone calls of your staff and in fact had an advisor of yours calling back to fbi hq reporting what's going on in your campaign and they said it's just for your protection, would you feel okay about that? >> if they didn't have probable cause i would be pissed.

>> tucker: what would constitute probable cause? >> the judge would have to sign off on it. >> tucker: no judge -- you just heard fresh reporting that apparently this person, this advisor, fake advisor of the trump campaign was doing this long before july and may be as early as march. i don't think there's any indication of a judge signed off on that, does that bother you? >> i've seen the evidence, i don't accept the premise of your question. there's a multiplicity of different individuals who saw things, judges who signed off on fisa applications. >> tucker: did a judge sign off on this? i'm putting "the new york times" and "the washington post" and they are saying that a long time cia asset was spying on the trump campaign on behalf of the obama administration. did a judge sign off on that? >> i can't go into classified information. >> tucker: you brought it up. you set a judge signed off on it. is that true, do you know that? >> i haven't seen anything improper. i've seen a lot of evidence that was concerning.

but what i do see that's improper is a president was a subject of an investigation and using his doj to look into the evidence locker. >> tucker: let's make it really specific. i said we know from reporting "the new york times." >> tucker: now you're trusting "the new york times." you don't trust them most of the time. >> tucker: if i'm wrong, tell me. you are on the intel committee. they are reporting that a guy who was claiming to advise the trump campaign was reporting back to the obama agencies. you just said a judge signed off on that or suggest that one had >> a lot of the evidence judges have signed off. >> tucker: that the spying operation. >> i can't say on what is being alleged. i can say all the evidence i've seen -- i believe a judge has signed off on a lot of good evidence. >> tucker: does not not bother you? if you were spying on your campaign, trump was spying on your campaign. without a good enough for you? >> it's a great question. considering all the evidence i've seen in this investigation, all the contacts that trump has had with the russians, i want judges to sign off on anything

that would make sure that a foreign adversary wasn't meddling in our election. >> tucker: do you care if a judge signed off on spying operations that are waged against political campaigns? >> i think you have to be a little more careful and understand the political consequences. >> tucker: what about the moral and legal consequences? should a judge have to sign off on a spy within a presidential campaign, especially when the agency is controlled by the opposing party? showed a judge have to sign off on that? >> we should trust judges to be independent, investigators to be in dependent. i haven't seen any impropriety yet. >> tucker: you don't know if a judge signed off on it, and you don't care. i don't want to put in your mouth. >> i'm not going to give you classified information. >> tucker: why can't i know that? >> i'm not going to report on "new york times" reporting of classified information. >> tucker: do believe this happened? >> the evidence i've seen there were very good reasons to be concerned. i can go into that. >> tucker: we are going to spend the whole next segment going to the evidence and i can't wait to hear it and if you

can convince me i will call for indictments. >> are you concerned about the leaking that is taking place on the story? >> tucker: were you concerned that the dossier was leaked, does that bother you? >> i thought the dossier was the beginning of the investigation. you keep moving and shifting. >> tucker: it's really simple. i'm an american. if it turned out the trump fbi will spying on your campaign, even though i don't agree with you on the issues, i would say you better have a pretty good freaking reason. >> a damn good reason. >> tucker: exactly. better have a judges order. they didn't have a judge's order, you know that. it doesn't bother you, i'm asking you why. >> i'm telling you i've seen a lot of evidence, a lot of contacts that the trump team had with russia. >> tucker: you've seen no evidence that this mall was approved by a judge. >> you are trying to acknowledge something we have not acknowledged yet. there's plenty of evidence.

>> tucker: i'm obviously not going to move you into the factual realm. >> or in the break a law or realm. >> tucker: if it turns out they spy on your campaign, as god watches i will call them out that because i think it's immoral. >> tucker: ohmic >> if they didn't have probable cause. >> tucker: probable cause means nothing as you just said. we will take a quick break. it just a minute the congressman will present his evidence that the collusion investigation israel and that the trump campaign worked with the prudent government and worked to beat hillary clinton in 2016. ♪ coppertone sport. proven to protect street skaters and freestylers. stops up to 97% uv. lasts through heat. through sweat. coppertone. proven to protect. so allstate is giving us money back on our bill. well, that seems fair. we didn't use it. wish we got money back on gym memberships.

get money back hilarious. with claim-free rewards. switching to allstate is worth it. with recurring constipation and belly pain if you feel like you spend too much time in the bathroom talk to your doctor and say yesss! to linzess. ♪ yesss! linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. linzess can help relieve your belly pain, and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements. linzess is not a laxative. it works differently to help you get ahead of your recurring constipation and belly pain. do not give linzess to children less than 6, and it should not be given to children 6 to less than 18. it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach area pain, and swelling. so say yesss!

to help for recurring constipation. yesss! to help for belly pain. talk to your doctor and say yesss! linzess. ♪ better than all the rest ♪ applebee's new bigger bolder grill combos. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

♪

>> tucker: welcome back. we are still doing by eric swalwell of california, member of the house intel committee. if you been watching cable news no doubt you've seen the congressman talking a lot about russia. here's part. >> russia attacked our democracy this past election. >> and then they showed up to his trump tower, offer the evidence to his family. they received it, they didn't turn it down. donald trump for years had been working with the russians, he brought people in his campaign who had ties to the russians. >> we've seen a candidate and a president who has spoken in very flattering ways about vladimir putin. >> all the arrows continue to point to a personal, political and financial relationship that donald trump had with the russians. >> tucker: the congressman's comments and i we've given him a lot of time to present to us evidence, actual evidence of collusion. i was man, thanks a lot for coming back. >> of course. >> tucker: trumps that in the campaign i want to bring us closer to russia. i certainly agreed with that. a lot of people on his

campaign -- >> why? why did you agree with that? >> tucker: i think is a geopolitical matter the enemy is china. >> we have nor more than one enemy. >> tucker: absolutely. i don't agree with the trump administration posture towards russia. it's too bellicose. it doesn't make you a traitor. but is there actual evidence, i have followed this pretty carefully. where is the actual evidence of collusion between the trump campaign and putin? >> 2014, 15, 16, russians hack into our dnc. they weaponize social media. 2015 they make what i think is the first approach that we know. felix, russian-american, former business partner with donald trump approach is donald trump's lawyer michael cohen and says let's get donald trump to build a trump tower in moscow. we can engineer this, get trump and putin together and make our boy president. that's the first known approach. the hacking is going on. you start to see the different approaches. there's two different types of approaches.

the approach is to get trump and putin together, which is unusual because he's a candidate, and then the approach to preview the hacked emails that the russians have against hillary clinton. you see that offer made to george papadopoulos while he's over in london by a russian. he lied about that and he pled guilty to lying, admitted that had occurred. you see the approach with the june 9th meeting. russian developers close to boot and trying to get trump and putin together. they offered dirt on hillary clinton. that june 9th meeting, they moved heaven and earth. to take the meeting. donald trump, days before the meeting occurred, once his son knows the media is happening tells the world no information is coming out about hillary clinton. days after the meeting julian assange tells the world that hillary clinton emails are coming out. then you start to see the hacked emails released. what does candidate from two? he doesn't disavow them. no one in the family has says we have taken these meetings. instead, he invites the russians on a public stage to hack more.

he asked them to do it. he made an invitation. >> tucker: he did. this is july 27th 2016 at the jerome national which he owns. here's the clip you are talking about. >> russia, if you're listening, i hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. i think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. let's see if that happens. >> tucker: two questions. >> he was rewarded. >> tucker: took russia ever come up with those emails? they didn't actually. >> do know that for a fact? >> tucker: we haven't seen them. >> let's let the mueller investigation continue. >> tucker: maybe mueller is in contact with the russians but trump didn't come up with those from the russians. >> there is still an attempt there, right? you can attempt to do something and fail. >> tucker: i hate to inject common sense into this. >> would you do it in broad

daylight? >> tucker: when you dial them up on the short wave in the basement? would you really sent a coded message in the middle of a joke in a press conference? >> i'm not saying he's the smartest guy in the world, tucker. never accused him of that. >> tucker: that's the smoking gun right there? >> as part of the evidence. an invitation made by a candidate telling them it was okay. he's not the smartest guy in the world. >> tucker: so he's both a secret agent for putin but he's so dumb he spills the secrets at a press conference on tv. >> the latter. he makes an invitation. he doesn't disavow what they are doing. what do they do? they start to do more. he >> tucker: to actually give from the 30,000 emails. >> they start to do more, they start to have more. >> tucker: you are the people laughing at the end of what he said, right? >> he's committing the offer in broad daylight. >> tucker: why didn't he just asked her all the many russian agents? >> let me continue. >> tucker: those are for questions, right? is a little confusing.

>> why wouldn't he admit to obstruction of justice in public you let theirs know they are so stupid they commit the crime and public exception. he did it. >> tucker: has any agent ever broadcast a message to his handlers ever? >> has any business been ever been elected president? he made the invitation in public and then you start to see during the summer of 2016 -- we have an email that is titled kremlin connection, an offer made to paul erickson of the campaign to connect donald trump and vladimir putin again. kremlin connection. >> tucker: did they connect? >> i don't believe they connected. >> tucker: where's the evidence? >> first, don't confuse evidence with a conclusion. evidence gives the fbi and the department of justice -- >> tucker: where's the smoking gun? i watched rachel maddow. i get it. there are a lot of russians and russian people and emails, but where is the actual proof that something happened after more than a year of this? >> i don't have subpoena power.

bob mueller does. >> tucker: you have high security clearance anywhere on the intel committee. presumably you have more than like a clip of him at a press conference. >> i'm only giving you the evidence i've seen in an unclassified manner. i'm telling you all of that warrants looking at whether or not we can prove beyond a reasonable doubt conspiracy to defraud the united states. >> tucker: are we working on that? we've been at it for a long tim time. >> not with the obstruction that we continue to see. >> tucker: that's all you got? >> no. >> tucker: with the part we haven't heard? i'm waiting. >> it's right in front of her nose. it's right in front of her nose. >> tucker: more secret messages? >> when we look back on this in 25 years we will be amazed at how much of it was right in front of us. so they are hacking. >> tucker: we are all speaking chinese at that point and people are like people thought russia was the threat. >> they never turned out any of the approaches. the candidate makes an invitation in broad daylight. they continue to try and arrange meetings through the summer and then you start to have what i

call -- if there's a quit broke while there has to be a quo. candidates positive favorable statements about putin. even if those are as you said so we have a better relationship. how do you explain the national security advisor, michael flynn, who had been over to russia just a year before telling the russians don't worry about the barack obama imposed sanctions. how do you ask when that? how do you explain bringing the russians into the oval office and giving them national security -- >> tucker: here's what i would hope, that we would stop with the sanctions on russia. i think they are counterproductive but the trump administration has done just the opposite. we sent javelin missiles to the ukrainian rebels. we have opened up domestic oil production here, which hurts them in gas production. we have killed over 200 russians in syria. we have bombed the government, which is their closest ally outside the borders. in what sense has he been pro-russia as president? i say this with sadness because i don't think think you shoulde doing anything.

>> all the favorable things, bringing russians into the oval office, kicking out americans. failure to impose the congressionally passed sanctions. you know how hard we had to work? >> tucker: what about killing the 200 russians? >> did he kill them? >> tucker: he sent the u.s. military. >> i think you give him too much credit. >> tucker: are not flagging for trump. i don't think he should've done it it. i credit her to sized him on t. he's killed 200 russians, obama did not do that. he sent missiles to ukrainian rebels. obama did not do that. he is competing with energy and weighs obama's never try. why is he more pro-russian that obama was? >> don't excuse what he has to because the public sentiment -- you are giving him too much credit. >> tucker: i'm just saying this whole thing is insane, that's what i'm saying. >> then you have all the consciousness of -- all of the lies that have been told. whether it's the june 9th meeting, the russian adoption excuse and what it was really

about. that's conscience of guilt. a lot of turned away someone acts after an investigation is launched can tell you what they were doing. don't confuse evidence with a conclusion. there's more than enough evidence to continue and find out how close are these ties? >> tucker: i was hoping for something. we are going to take a break right now. we will continue our conversation with congressman eric swalwell of california. ♪ 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. a farmer's market.ve what's in this kiester. a fire truck. even a marching band. and if i can get comfortable talking about this kiester, then you can get comfortable using preparation h. for any sort of discomfort in yours. preparation h. get comfortable with it.

savings on the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it senses your every move and automatically adjusts on both sides to keep you effortlessly comfortable. and snoring.... does your bed do that? right now during our semi-annual sale save up to $700 on sleep number 360 smart beds. ends soon.

need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one and done. my mom washes the dishes... ...before she puts them in the dishwasher. so what does the dishwasher do? new cascade platinum lets your dishwasher be the dish washer. three cleaning agents dissolve, lift and rinse away food the first time. new cascade platinum. it's red lobster's create your own shrimp trios. pick 3 of 9 new and classic creations for just $15.99. try new creations like savory crab-topped shrimp, and parmesan truffle shrimp scampi. but hurry, shrimp trios ends may 27th. and parmesan truffle shrimp scampi. gentlemen, i have just received word! the louisiana purchase, is complete! instant purchase notifications from capital one . technology this helpful... could make history. what's in your wallet?

>> tucker: we are continuing our extended conversation with congressman eric swalwell, democrat of california. you've talked a lot about russia but you also become known for your position on guns and you are one of the very few democrats i think who has been honest about that. you say that the u.s. government ought to ban a certain species of rifle, you wrote a piece about this. this is not a secret of view yu have. if you say this. we should ban possession of military style semiautomatic assault weapons. we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons. so we should confiscate? >> this entire class of firearms. what do you think would happen if the federal government tried to do that? >> did you read the op-ed? >> tucker: i just quoted it extensively. >> i'm not calling for confiscation grid we should

invest in a buyback. restrict any weapons that aren't brought back to her gun clubs, hunting clubs, shooting ranges. keep them there where it's safe, not on our streets, and if you are caught, just like if you were caught with drugs or anything else, they have probable cause to go into your home and you had one of these weapons, i'm never suggesting sending troops out. >> tucker: congressman from california. can you put this back on the screen please? i'm going to quote once again. and we should buy back those weapons, and i'm quoting, criminally prosecute any who refuse -- would choose to defy it by keeping their weapons." if you're going to prosecute people who don't give up their weapons. >> if they are caught with them during i'm not sending troops door-to-door. >> tucker: what you think would happen? the overwhelming majority of those people are law-abiding, have committed no crime, no plans to commit a crime. he would instantly turn them into families.

do you think you would have a civil war, are you worried about that? >> what do you think will happen if we do nothing? would do you markets will be killed? more churches will lose parishioners? >> tucker: i'm critiquing your very specific suggestion, and you are a lawmaker so this is meaningful, what you said. >> i trust the american people are law-abiding, that their weapons could be bought back or keep them at a gun club. you don't have to give it up but keep them at a gun club. >> tucker: you've done nothing wrong, you haven't heard anybody and you just made them into felons. >> there's no troop round up here. >> tucker: you just made them into felons. you just said that in the piece. i'm not making this up, you wrote that. if i'm a gun owner and i have one of the weapons you say should be banned and i don't feel like bringing it to a gun club, i feel like keeping it in my bedroom closet. >> i don't think you are giving the american people one of credit that they will be law-abiding. >> tucker: that they would obey you. >> i'm suggesting we have a conversation in congress and pass a band like this. it would have to be passed by a

majority. >> tucker: would you apply these standards to yourself? >> i don't think ops though. >> tucker: your bodyguards. >> i don't have bodyguards. >> tucker: i was there today. >> i don't personally have bodyguards. they are police officers, they are sworn, they are trained. >> tucker: they are there to protect you. >> i have two brothers who are cops, my dad was a cop. i don't want them to protect me, i want them to protect the people getting shot up in the schools. >> tucker: the police to protect you. >> this isn't about capitol police. >> tucker: it is though. >> this is about the kids who are dying. they are afraid to go to school. they hear a book dropped, they think a shooter is walking into the classroom. don't they deserve to be protected? >> select protect them. >> tucker: you have them in your building where you work.

>> don't denigrate the cops. >> tucker: i'm not denigrating them. you don't actually care more than i do, we care the same. >> do you think ops should have guns? >> tucker: i think your bodyguards have the same guns i have to protect my family. >> don't denigrate them like that. >> tucker: if he comes to protect my wife on a network you go to work -- >> protecting the constituents. >> tucker: they are protecting you actually. why shouldn't my wife have the same firearm at home that your bodyguards used to protect you? >> that's a ridiculous argument. it's absolutely ridiculous. >> tucker: because you are more important than me? i'm asking it since your question. why should you go to protect your -- >> our cops should not be outgunned. period. our military shouldn't be outgunned. >> tucker: why don't we just limit them to the same guns i can have at home? >> why can't we have a real conversation about this? >> tucker: this is a real

conversation. >> you are calling cops bodyguards, and that's disrespectful. they were all here in town honoring the fallen and you are calling them bodyguards. my dad was a cop, he's not a bodyguard. he protects people. that's ridiculous. >> tucker: to members of congress have bodyguards? >> that is so disrespectful. >> tucker: they are. the government pays for them. >> they protect you and your kids and our families. >> tucker: can i get the same in my office in the text payers can pay for it? can i ask a question? if i walked on the office, great guys, i'm not attacking them. they are not under attack at all. i'm merely saying that you have better protection than i do. and you are saying that my family doesn't deserve to have a certain species of weapon. you get to decide what we can protect ourselves with but you are not going to in any way take the ability to protect you away from the capital police. >> i'm saying every police

officer in america is outgunned. for their safety and the people they protect they shouldn't have assault weapons. >> the rules don't apply to you. >> let's protect the kids work. >> tucker: i agree. thank you very much. the left has a new cause, defending ms-13. why are they letting anti-trump sentiment drive them into the arms of a gang that kills people with machetes? great question! we will ask at next. ♪

if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting.

tell your doctor if these occur. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. other side effects include upper respiratory tract infection and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ♪ otezla. show more of you. tso why binge in here, when you can do it out there. with this clever little app called audible. you can listen to the stories you love while doing the things you love, outside. everyone's doing it she's binging... they're binging... and... so is he. so put on your headphones, turn on audible and binge better.

my secret visitors. hallucinations and delusions. the unknown parts of living with parkinson's. what plots they unfold, but only in my mind. over 50% of people with parkinson's will experience hallucinations or delusions during the course of their disease. if your loved one is experiencing these symptoms, talk to your parkinson's specialist. there are treatment options that can help. my visitors should be the ones i want to see. ( ♪ ) face the world as a face to be reckoned with. only botox® cosmetic is fda approved to temporarily make moderate to severe frown lines, crow's feet and forehead lines look better. it's a quick 10 minute cosmetic treatment given by a doctor to reduce those lines. there is only one botox® cosmetic, ask for it by name. the effects of botox® cosmetic, may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness

can be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyelid and eyebrow drooping and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. leave your mark on the world. minimize its mark on you. get started at botoxcosmetic.com. >> tucker: the democratic big ten has grown a little bigger in the last week or two. now it explicitly includes dangerous gang members as well. after the president described ms-13 as animals last week, the left lectured us on how it's wrong to be mean to a group that buttress people with machetes. here's part of it. >> is it appropriate for a president to ever call anyone an animal even if they are sadistic gang members? >> i think that something to

watch out for. the history of political leaders dehumanizing opponents, even criminals and using animal metaphors is a dangerous one. that is not something we should accept from an american president. >> i do think there's a serious problem with the president dehumanizing any group in the united states, even if they are hardened criminals. >> tucker: so many buffoons on tv. where do you start? none of these people, by the way, live anywhere near any neighborhood threatened by ms-13, so they can ignore the gang. but a lot of people, particularly poor immigrants, do live near ms-13 and that's a huge problem. timothy is a district attorney in long island. it has become an ms-13 stronghold. he knows a lot about the gang and he joins us. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: do you think that of all the people you can defend in america, ms-13 would be near the top of list of groups that you want to stick up for? >> without getting into name-calling, let me be very clear about something. this is one of the most violent gangs that we have in the world.

it's a transnational criminal organization whose motto is rap rape, kill and control. and on long island i can tell you firsthand in september 2016 they brutally killed to a beautiful long girls in april 2017. they killed four young girls, brutally hacking them up with machetes and instruments. this is a gang that must be taken extremely seriously. that's why we are all working together to eradicate this gang from our communities. >> tucker: tell me if my impression is right, ms-13 isn't really active in the neighborhoods where, say, msnbc contributors might live. it's really immigrants were getting the brunt of this. >> there's no question that this gang preys upon young hispanic boys. i will tell you a quick anecdote. in december of 2017, the

suffolk county police department prevented a murder. they received a tip from the community. they did surveillance and they actually interceded in an attempt by ms-13 gang members to abduct a young hispanic boy from a hamlet in suffolk county that is a very diverse hamlet an end includes large salvadoran population. time in and time again this gang preys upon young immigrants. we need to do everything in our power to protect everyone in suffolk county, everyone in this country, including immigrants, and this gang is one of the biggest threats to their safety. >> tucker: is unbelievable. now of course they are a big democratic constituency. thanks a lot for coming on for that perspective. glad to know what you're talking about. hillary clinton's world bitterness to where went to gail this weekend. she was the commencement speake speaker. yale is very impressive. mark steyn is with us next. ♪

ance saved an average of $412. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance, an allstate company. click or call. paying too much for insurance that isn't the right fit? well, esurance makes finding the right coverage easy. in fact, drivers who switched from geico to esurance saved an average of $412. that's auto and home insurance for the modern world. esurance, an allstate company. click or call. essential for the cactus, but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr. a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and further joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines,

low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell you doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. needles. fine for some things. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. an "unjection™".

not the conservative guy, travis allen. what about this john cox? talks a big game... but what's he done? a chicago lawyer? huh? thirteen losing campaigns - seven in illinois? cox lost campaigns as a republican... and as a democrat. gave money to liberals. supported big tax increases. no wonder republicans say cox is unelectable in november.

♪ >> right now we are living through a full-fledged crisis in our democracy. there are not tanks in the streets, but what's happening right now goes to the heart of who we are as a nation. and i say that is not as a democrat who lost an election, but as an american afraid of losing a country. >> tucker: as a general matter if you watch the show you know we don't cover hillary clinton because she sat and we feel sorry for her for real. then she showed up at yale, which as you know is one of the most impressive places in the world with some of the smartest kids on the planet, obviously we are very impressed by gail. they invited her to be the commencement speaker and so we kind of have to cover it.

during her totally not bitter at all addressed clinton pulled out a russian hat because she is hilarious and said "if you can't beat them, join them, because that's not a cliche. of course we can never beat author and columnist mark steyn at analyzing this behavior so we are outsourcing it to him so our hands are clean. we are not being mean to hillary clinton, who deserves our pity, we are leading mark steyn explain it for us. >> i love the way that hillary is now doing visual comedy. she is disappointed she didn't get to beat -- by the way, i like it when you do a visual gag, but you explain it, what you are meant to find funny about it beforehand. so when she said this is a russian hat. i think obviously she's at a loose end, doesn't know what to do. i think vladimir putin should make her chief commissar. i think she's eminently qualified for it. i personally would have preferred it -- by the way, i do actually think this is the

actual russian hat that russian intelligence agents left the fusion gps dossier under for christopher steele to find in a men's room in moscow. normally it's not m.i.a. six tradecraft to take the hat but he thought it might make a nice souvenir for chelsea. unfortunately she had already been given one by the iranian one died so she gave this russian hat to her mother, which is very thoughtful. for my own part, i think it would've been a much more effective routine if she had worn the shoe -- which as you know has been warned by macedonian content farmers who lost her the election or perhaps to establish her authority of the traditional -- originally worn by alexander the great if i recall my schooldays and still favored by macedonian content farm overseers when they want

the masses to cower in terror before then. like many women at the royal wedding, she made a poor headgear choice. >> tucker: [laughs] i knew you could bring martha out of 1 of the saddest most heartbreaking moments i've seen in a long time. do you think -- being honest here, being sincere, do you think yale is aware of how thoroughly it degrades its own already eroding reputation by inviting someone like this to be the commencement speaker? >> i do think as a serious matter that partisan politicians when they are invited to give commencement addresses should not talk about partisan electoral politics. i mentioned chelsea a moment to go. for some reason chelsea gets paid -- or she did before november of 2016, she got paid seven-figure sums to deliver speeches on diarrhea and africa.

i wouldn't want to hear a speech on diarrhea and africa for commencement but i think that's actually more seemly and appropriate for the occasion. >> tucker: i agree, and less dirty than what we saw. mark steyn, a genius, self-evidently. thank you, great to see you. >> thanks a lot, tucker. >> tucker: we actually have more hillary clinton news. an update on the investec investigation of the fbi into her emails. we will have them for you after the break. ♪

let's do an ad of a man eating free waffles at comfort inn.

they taste like victory because he always gets the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed, when he books direct at choicehotels.com. or just say, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com gives skin the moisture it needs and keeps it there longer with lock-in moisture technology skin is petal smooth after all, a cleanser's just a cleanser unless it's olay. so, howell...going? we had a vacation early in our marriage that kinda put us in a hole. go someplace exotic? yeah, bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. a hospital in bermuda. what? what happened? i got a little over-confident on a moped. even with insurance, we had to dip into our 401(k) so it set us back a little bit. sometimes you don't have a choice. but it doesn't mean you can't get back on track. great. yeah, great. i'd like to go back to bermuda. i hear it's nice. yeah, i'd like to see it. no judgment. just guidance. td ameritrade.

you won't find relief here. congestion and pressure? go to the pharmacy counter for powerful claritin-d. while the leading allergy spray relieves 6 symptoms... claritin-d relieves 8, including sinus congestion and pressure. claritin-d relieves more. >> this is a fox news alert. fox is reporting tonight the doj inspector general will likely fault fbi leaders for moving too slowly to review a batch of hillary clinton's e-mails in 2016. the fbi new about the e-mails found in anthony wiener's laptop in 2016 but waited until october to get a warrant to review them. the i.g.'s report is expected to

blast the fbi for this tardy response, which may have reflected an effort to deal the e-mails under wraps. that it's it for us. sean hannity is next. hi, sean. >> sean: can we pan in a little? they have this back so far, i can't see the teleprompter. >> where are you? >> sean: pan in and help us out here. that's all right. the people understand this is live television. good night, tucker. welcome to "hannity." this is unbelievable. the nefarious deeds that we've been telling you about are being exposed. this is the worst abuse of power corruption scandal in american history. it's all coming out. everything we've been telling you. the president rightly demanding to know how pervasive the spying was and who in the bomb administration was involved.