might get windy. have a good shift. fire pit. last use -- 0600. i'd stay close. morning. ♪ get ready to switch. protected by flo. should say, "protected by alan and jamie." -right? -should it? when you bundle home and auto... run, alan! ...you get more than just savings. you get 'round-the-clock protection. story. >> martha: exactly. good night, everybody. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening, welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." here is a not so theoretical question, when is it okay to pay off female accusers? nbc news has had no problem doing it over the years on behalf of grabby tv anchors, but now that donald trump is accused of doing it, nbc tell us that is a felony. how exactly does that work? we will explain just ahead. first, even by the high standards of 2018, it was afi bizarro day here in washington, the president invited democratic leaders chuck schumer and

nancy pelosi into the oval office. turned on the cameras, and informed them he was ready to shut down the federal government in order to get a border wall. here's what happened next. >> one thing i think we can agree on is we shouldn't shut down the government over a dispute, and you want to shut it down. >> the last time, chuck, you shut it down. >> no, no, no. >> i don't want to do what you did. >> i will shut down the government if i don't get my wall, none of us -- >> you want to put -- >> you said it -- >> you know what i will say? yes. if we don't get what we want, one way or another, whether it is through you or military, there anything you want to call, i will shut down the government. >> okay. i disagree. >> i am proud to shut down the government for border security, because the people of this country don't want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs pouring intoh our country. i will take the mantle. i will be the one to shut it

down. i'm not going to blame you for it. the last time you shut it down, it didn't work. i will take the mantle of shutting it down. >> tucker: body language any indication, chuck schumer has never hated anything in his whole life more than he hated that moment you just saw. weirdly, in washington, there is always a scramble to blame the other side for government shutdowns. that is not what happened todayr you just heard the president said he would be proud to take responsibility for thesi government shutting down because a wall is too important. >> president trump: we needca border security, the wall as part of border security. you can have good border security without the wall. >> that is a political promise. border security is a way to effectively honor our responsibilities. >> the experts say you can do border security without a wall, which is wasteful and doesn't solve the problem. >> tucker: by this point in the exchange, not a single person watching at home was tempted to change the channel. it was just too compelling. the president himself appeared to be enjoying it.

pelosi was not enjoying it. she complained the world was watching her argument in real time, but the president would not relent. >> we came in here in good faith, and we are entering into a discussion in the public view. >> president trump: is not bad, nancy. it's called transparency. a situation where it is not easy for her to talk right now, and i understand that. i fully understand that. we can have a good discussion, and we will see what happens.ll but we have to have border security. >> mr. president, please don't characterize the strength i bring to the house democrats is one big victory. >> elections have consequences, mr. president. >> tucker: it was an amazing moment. the president as a best when he was fighting for the principles he ran on, but tweeting is not making policy and threatening a shutdown is not the same ass shutting down the government,

or as getting a wall built. the president has made that threat before. in march, signed a spending bill with no wall funding, said hen would never sign a bill like that again. in july, he tweeted this, "i would besh willing to shut down government and the democrats do not give us the boat for border security, which includes a wall." a september budget showdown came and went with no shutdown and no wall. this, december 2018, is the president's final chanceis to gt a border wall, central to his campaign in 2016. that will never happen while democrats control the chamber of commerce. we will see what happens. in the meantime, richard goodstein joins us, an attorney that advised bill and hillary clinton. we are happy to have him. get the theatrics of it, amazing, we don't know whether pelosi and schumer knew theree were going to be cameras there. that will become clear in the coming days. it is clear that the democrats adamantly opposed the wall. but they are for a fence. what is the difference? >> the signature promise was we are going to build a wall and

mexico is going to pay for it we just had a nafta deal signed, his opportunity to get mexico to pay, and he didn't. can we at least suspend any belief that he is going to make good on that part of the promise? can we agree on that? >> tucker: i think the rest of us are interested, not just in the rhetoric, but we have 22 million people here illegally. that is a disaster. everyone agrees. the latest estimate is 22 -- tens of millions here illegally. our borders are not secure. i democrats said they are for af fence, but against a wall. pelosi told us last week the wall is "immoral." what is the difference between a fence and a wall? why is a fence okay but a wall is not? >> i will quote john kelly in his confirmation hearing. "a physical barrier in and of itself does not do the job, we do not want to keep playingf goal line defense against people owning it from another country." again, can we agree when the president says "we are starting, we built a wall," that is nonsense.

we have those prototypes sitting in the desert. for months and months and months and he was supposed to pick one, and he hasn't. >> tucker: we can agree with what i have said a million times on the show, he promised to build a wall and we should build one. what is he asking for now, i agree with you, but he is asking for the money to pay for the wall that he promised. the people want, the people voted for that, 64 million people. >> most people voted against him. >> tucker: why aret, democrats -- i don't understand what the v opposition is. it's wasteful, okay, this is a party that supports headstart after 55 years -- why do they support a fence and not a wall? i'm honestly being sort of a simple person. explain it to me. >> when there was a bill that passed the senate back in 2013, both from orrin hatch, lindsey graham, marco rubio, for comprehensive immigration reform, it included beefing up border security. i didn't call for a wall because, as chuck schumer said, the experts believe the wall, like israel had, would it be

wouldn't be effective here, for a variety of reasons we could spend the whole segment talk about. >> tucker: is a moral? >> no. because i think the people coming into israel are blowingpl people up in a way the immigrants are helping pick our food. that's the difference. >> tucker: some are picking food, some are committing crimes. israel built the wall because they want to know who is coming over from the territories because it's it's country. this is our country, so it is not a moral when they do it, but it is immoral when we do it. a fence is okay but a wall is not okay. >> what is immoral is spending money on something you know is not going to work. the experts -- john kelly was up -- >> tucker: not one year. >> john kelly was up for department of homeland security secretary, and he said the wall was not going to build from sea

to shining sea. >> tucker: here is the point, whatever we are doing does not work. you know as well as i that the fear with the wall as it will work, and will prevent voters from coming over from latin america to bolster the fortunes of a party that actual americans don't really like that much, which is the democratic party. >> that's a caricature. >> tucker: what's the real answer than? >> it's not that. even the bill that the democrats passed. it would have passed the house, incidentally and had 15 republican votes in the senate, called for a very protracted period of time before people who were already here get citizenship. >> tucker: normal people are like, we don't have control of our borders. a wall is not the whole answer. >> donald trump brags about the fact, all these people being stopped. he has to get his record straight. has it worked or not worked? he can't even be consistent. >> tucker: i'm here to defend the country, not a politician. illegal immigration is actually spiking right now.

there are lots of reasons for that but the fact remains that it's true and it's bad for our country. we've never tried a wall. a lot of republicans are against aa wall because they are for a illegal immigration. because their donors are for it. i get it. i just want to know what thet argument against a wall is. all the things we spend money on, why not try the wall? "no, that is immoral," why? >> i'm not saying it's immoral, i'm saying it's impractical. i'm not the expert, nor are you, but the people who are say it is impractical.he e-verification, getting employers not to hire people who are here illegally. that would be effective. >> tucker: democrats are opposed to universal e-verify. >> democratic votes in the senate. >> tucker: there is no universal democratic support for that because their donors make money from undercutting american wages with foreigners. come on. >> in the bill that passed with every democrat in the senate in 2013 and would have passed the house -- >> tucker: so you think pelosi

is foror universally verified. we are going to punish employers if she is for that? they are illegals. no, she is against that. >> nancy pelosi has said from the start, back then, if you bring up that bill that passed the senate. >> tucker: they are all against it. can you see the frustration where we fund other countries' border walls and call themer virtuous, americans are like, we want to protect our own country and shut up racist, you are immoral, do you see the problem? >> that would be a problem foror it is true. >> tucker: it's totally true. >> the democrats want to beef up security along the border. that's a myth. i know that plays to the base. it happens not to be true. >> tucker: how did we get illegals here that democrats are protecting? how did that happen, therefore they are for illegal immigration, duh. >> tucker: there's no no community of people. there are hispanic people who voted for trump, all kinds of different views. just because people are one ethnicity doesn't mean they'll have the same views, you know

what i mean? >> of course, that is true of every. obama deporting millions of people, the notion that democrats are unwilling to deport people -- happens not to square with the facts. >> tucker: we've got all these people here and i see nancy pelosi telling me i am a moral for wanting fix it. >> i think, give her a chance to get a bill passed in the house, we will see. >> tucker: i hope you'll come back. richard, good seeing you. thank google ceo came to capitol hill you. today, congress asked him a lot of questions. did he answer any of them? one of the republicans to do the questioning joins us next. ♪ will it feel like the wheend of a journey?p working, or the beginning of something even better?

when you prepare for retirement with pacific life, you can create a lifelong income... so you have the freedom to keep doing whatever is most meaningful to you. a reliable income that lets you retire, without retiring from life. that's the power of pacific. ask your financial professional about pacific life today.

♪ >> it is being built right now, big sections of wall, and we will continue that. one way or the other, it is going to get built. >> tucker: president trump, a wall on our southern border once again becoming the central debate in the congress. are republicans ready to rally behind the president in their last weeks before yielding power to the democrats? congressman jim jordan is a republican, represents the stats of ohio, joins us tonight. thank you very much for coming on. he would be willing to shut down the government. democrats on the hill united behind him in this? >> republicans think the president is doing exactly what he said, that is what we should be focused on. when the president said to senator schumer, "i will gladly take that mantle," i think he was saying he would gladlyus and proudly take the mantle of doing what the voters we intended to do, which is build a border security wall. the freedom caucus in

particular, we took a position last night, tucker, we support t the president, $5 billion for the border, and let's reform asylum laws while we are at it, that will address the problem.si >> tucker: for frustrated viewers watching at home wondering why the centralre promise of the campaign still remains unfulfilled, was it the speaker of the house, paul ryan, who prevented this from happening for the last two year years? >> our leadership not pushing hard enough and paul not pushin? hard enough, and also democrats are for open borders, they want to abolish i.c.e. their party's champion in the last election, secretary clinton, what does she run on? a borderless hemisphere. it is all part of that. but the president today i think made it pretty darn clear he's going to stand firm and focus on doing what we were elected to do and i always say we make this job too complicated. that is a basic thing to focus on. don't get too complicated, just do what you were elected to do. we were elected to build a border security wall. >> tucker: i think that is exactly right.

the ceo of the google came to capitol hill today. you asked, i thought, the most interesting question of the entire hearing. about a leaked google documentd that shows a google employee bragging about turning the latino vote out in 2016 to help hillary clinton win. you asked them about this. what did you think of his answer? >> i don't think he gave an answer. in that email from the head of their multicultural marketing division, she actually says he gave us a shout out. the complement her from a place to work and then he said i don't know anything about what she did. there were two sentences key, she said "we were trying to get the latino vote," and the keyword in both sentences were "in key states." that makes it political. they were focused on the latino vote in key states. which means, we all know this, competitive states. he frankly wouldn't answer the question,t so i said, who is right, who is wrong? did you say it, did you do it? he never got around to answering that. that underscores this took place, and they don't want to talk about it. >> tucker: you have evidence t

of the most powerful company in the world working actively to subvert our democracy, to borrow a phrase you hear in capitol hill. in the middle of a presidential election. were democrats upset about that? >> that's my concern, 3.5 billion searches per day done on these platforms, most of those are done on google. and if they are having this kind of bias, and their key people are focusing on helping one party at the expense of the other, that is a problem. never forgot, we have seen this not just with google. i know personally, this summer there were four republican members, four conservatives, shadow banned by twitter. and congress, there are 435 in the house, 100 in the senate, but only four, gates, meadows, nunez and jordan get shadow band. twitter's response is it was a glitch in our algorithm. really? what did you put in the algorithm? nheir names? this is the kind of response we get from these folks, with the power they have, 3.5 billion searches per day, all the people on twitter every day, they have this kind of power and they

won't admit bias in front of usn when we see it in an email leaked from google itself. that is a concern, that is why we have the hearing.g. that's why i pushed him. i wish we would have gotten a little more in the form of an answer from him. >> tucker: these companies operate as "platforms" under an exemption given to them by the united states congress under the communications act, u you are aware of this.s why not take that away tomorrow? >> we should. there are a couple of bills we should look at and think about actually taking that away.k congressmen have bills, they would say you are no longer a neutral platform. when they are making and limiting points of view, you are now a publisher, you are, in effect, a newspaper. if that is the case, there is a different law to govern you, ane you are no longer immune from liability. we may have to move in that direction. we may have to look at breaking these companies. i don't know.

what we do know is there's a problem, at least there appears to be a big problem, and we need to highlight that and then look, what is the solution? it may be just that. >> tucker: congressman, great to see you tonight.t >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: are you a bigot if you're concerned about immigration levels? if so, the entire planet is bigoted. we have a new survey on global attitudes toward immigration, and it turns out you are not alone, not even close. it's unbelievable. that is next. ♪

if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and a high risk for fracture now might not be the best time to ask yourself are my bones strong? life is full of make-or-break moments. that's why it's so important to help reduce your risk of fracture with prolia®. only prolia® is proven to help strengthen and protect bones from fracture with 1 shot every 6 months. do not take prolia® if you have low blood calcium, are pregnant, are allergic to it, or take xgeva®. serious allergic reactions, like low blood pressure; trouble breathing; throat tightness; face, lip, or tongue swelling; rash; itching; or hives have happened. tell your doctor about dental problems as severe jaw bone problems may happen or new or unusual pain in your hip groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. speak to your doctor before stopping prolia® as spine and other bone fractures have occurred. prolia® can cause serious side effects, like low blood calcium, serious infections, which could need hospitalization, skin problems, and severe bone, joint, or muscle pain. are you ready? ask your doctor how prolia® can help strengthen your bones.

it's proven quality sleep. the new sleep number 360 smart bed, from $999... intelligently senses your movement and automatically adjusts on each side to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. and the best gift of all? a silent night. how smart is that? smarter sleep. to help you shed those sugar cookies, get a running start on the holidays, and take it all in with the patience of a saint. queen sleep number 360 smart beds from $999. plus 48-month financing. only for a limited time.

and if you get lost, just hit me on the old horn. man: tom's my best friend, but ever since he bought a new house... tom: it's a $10 cover? oh, okay. didn't see that on the website. he's been acting more and more like his dad. come on, guys! jump in! the water's fine! tom pritchard. how we doin'? hi, there. tom pritchard. can we get a round of jalapeño poppers for me and the boys, please? i've been saving a lot of money with progressive lately, so... progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. but we can protect your home and auto when you bundle with us.

♪ >> lie from america's news articles, on mike tobin. shooting has left three people died and two of them are injured. the city of strasburg calls itself the capital of christmas. french investigators are treating the incident as a possible terrorist attack and a manhunt is underway for the suspect. authorities say they have identified the suspect who had a criminal record and was on a watch list of potentially radicalized individuals. president trump's former national security advisor michael flynn saying tuesday he should not serve time in prison for lying to the fbi in the investigation into collusion between russia and trump's transition team. flynn argues that his career in service to the nation and his cooperation with the investigation since he pleaded guilty should earn him probation and community service. on mike tobin, now back to tucker carlson tonight. for all your headlines, log on to foxnews.com. if you are watching the most powerful name in news,

fox news channelil. ♪ >> tucker: most americans, according to surveys, don't want more immigration into this country. most are used to being denounced as racist for having those views. it turns out, they are not alone. hardly. a skepticism of immigration is a trait they share with virtually everyone else on the planet. pew research survey people and 27 different countries on the question of immigration. and not a single country, that includes mexico, south africa, sweden, not a single country did they find a majority that wanted more immigration into their country. the question must be asked, is the entire world racist? victor davis hanson is a fellow at the hoover institution, he joins us tonight. thank you very much for coming on. we have been told for many years that elites have an attitude of immigration, open borders are great, the rest of the world shares this attitude with them are enlightened and

only dumb people in ohio and alabama disagree. these numbers show that is not true at all. >> no, it's not. the dissatisfaction comes because of the sheer numbers. we have one fourth, almost one fourth of the world's immigrants right in the united states. somewhere between 45 andnd 60 million. people don't feel the melting pot and the integration, assimilation, is working. by intent. they look at countries that send people all over the world, china, india, mexico, turkey, and they lecture people on theil supposedly civic duties and those of the countries that are least likely to allow immigrants to come into their own nation. it kind of poses this question, if it's so unpopular and people didn't vote for this, why does it continue? i think the answer is whether you are in california or nevada or paris or london that theog

administrative, progressive elite feel that they can take the short-term unpopularity because they are changing the demography. you mentioned that with a prior guest, they are creating a reason for larger government subsidies, entitlements, and fealty with newcomers who don'tn process themselves into the assimilation process. i think they also signaled they are moral people, their wealth or their influence or their position insulates them from the ramifications of their own ideologies. they don't put their kids in schools with 50% non-english speakers, in the case of california. they live in gated communities, they don't feel they are going to experience the downside firsthand. instead, they say racist xenophobe, and that disturbs d people who don't make their feelings known unless a poll asks them.gs >> tucker: these are the very same people, always lecturing us about democracy. so you would think they would care about what the majority wants, because that is the central principle of democracy. but they don't care.

>> they don't care. they don't live in democracy. they believe people are ignorant and that they need an elite to guide them. they don't really talk about the existential question, that is why our 250 million people on this planet moving in different directions? it is always nonwestern to western, or from nonwesternized to westernized. the left that oversees this process never says to themselves, wow, if you have a constitutional government, o if you promote rationalism, if you are tolerant, free-market economics, you don't have gender apartheid, people want to come. if they would just advocate that menu outside of the west, we wouldn't have this problem. they have this weird situation where they welcome people in,f and as soon as they get in, they trash the country that they want to live in and they romanticize

the country they have abandoned. it's bizarre. >> tucker: victor david hanson, no one puts it better than you. thank you very much for that. >> thank you. >> tucker: republicans in congress seem to be about to pass a major bill to reduce criminal sentences and release prisoners. what is in it, and is this what the president's voters voted for? we will tell you after the break. ♪ fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely.

but allstate helps you. with drivewise. feedback that helps you drive safer. and that can lower your cost now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? ♪ >> tucker: a major criminal justice bill is being debated right now in the congress and could be on the brink of becoming law. the president is pressuring senate majority leader mitch mcconnell to hold a quick vote on this bill that would reduce penalties for many federal crimes and allow prisoners to win early release. democrats have pushed for this for many years. suddenly, it is a top republican

priority right before they give up the house of representatives. a senator, a republican from arkansas. he has been paying close attention since day one, thanks for coming on. there have been no public hearings on this bill, at least recently, the rest of us are a little confused. people like me that think there are parts of the system that should be reformed don't know a lot about the details of this bill. open-minded, but uninformed. inform us about what is in this bill. >> we have a problem in this country. prisoners should be given a helping hand in prison to get back on their feet once they paid their debt to society so they won't be a menace to society. they passed a bill that is the first step toward that. in the senate, it has become an early release and sentencing reduction bill. as you mention, up to 2500 series drug traffickers are going to be released almost immediately, within weeks or months of the bill passing. these are the 2500 that were so dangerous, not even barack obama would commute their sentences.

it is an almost mathematical certainty that someone is going to commit a heinous crime if this bill passes. >> tucker: that wouldn't include fentanyl dealers, right? fentanyl is so widespread, it is lowering life expectancy in this country. they would not be eligible for this, would he? >> whether they are eligible for early release under certain provisions of the bill, others, almost every drug trafficker, methamphetamine, cocaine, would see sentences reduced, sometimes up to half.ck that is going forward. there will still be a lot of serious offenders let out of prison's within weeks or months of the bill passing.ti that is one reason it is so dangerous to public safety. >> tucker: i have a list of various crimes, people convicted of these would be eligible for early release under the terms of the bill from a couple days ago. strangling a spouse, providing firearms to federalgo prisonersn

prison, rioting in a correctional institution, assault with intent to rape, and other violent crimes. why would anybody include those crimes? i thought it was only nonviolent offenders who were getting easier treatment here? >> tucker, that is a very good question. i could give you more, carjackers or bank robbers. there are serious nonviolent offenders, as well. i'm surprised the democrats are prepared to vote for a bill that is going to cut michael cohen's sentence of up to a third. even the president said they should lock him up and throw away the key, but the democrats are supporting a bill that would cut his sentence by a third. a surprising based on theirrt rhetoric of late. >> tucker: crime was out of control in the '70s out '80s, crime dropped off a cliff starting in the early to mid '90s, and we are enjoying the fruits of that. do you think this bill will

reverse the trend and make this country more dangerous? >> unfortunately, tucker, ie think that is a real possibility. you are releasing thousands of serious repeat, in some cases violent, offenders within weeks or months of the bill being passed. it is almost certain they will commit terrible crimes.r in the future, you are slashing sentences for drug dealers and other offenders up to half, and sending a message we are taking for granted the gains we have made, as you cited, from a crime wave in the '70s and '80s, got tough on crime, extended prison sentencing, we took away discretion liberal judges had. i worry this will mean dangerous streets for our families. >> tucker: is there a way to reform elements that need to be reformed, help reduce recidivism, and not open the gates and let dangerous people out? there is no way to get todi something sensible? >> of course there is, tucker, and i support the efforts. for instance, federal prisons,me

we could support ged programs, job and career technical training programs, mentoring, counseling, especially faith-based programs. we don't have to, in return, slash sentences for drug dealers, we can offer and encourage prisoners to take them. >> tucker: will it still pass? >> we will see what happens. i, for one, will not let carjackers and bank robbers out early. if another senator wants to do that, answered his voters forba the crimes that result, that is his or her prerogative. >> tucker: senator, thank you very much. tom cotton from arkansas. good to see you. >> thanks. >> tucker: we still haven't found any evidence of collusion, collusion with russia! but now petty campaign finance violations are felonies. that is what they are telling on other channels. we have details after the breakt ♪

that's why we designed capital one cafes. you can get savings and checking accounts with no fees or minimums. and one of america's best savings rates. to top it off, you can open one from anywhere in 5 minutes. this isn't a typical bank. this is banking reimagined. what's in your wallet? if your moderate to severeor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio®, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio® works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract, and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio® may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain

infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio®. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio®. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach.

♪ >> tucker: the hysterics on cable news, don lemon and the rest, seem more floored and jumpy than usual, there is a reason for that. they have uncovered the president's crimes. not russia collusion, despite years of searching, no evidence that that happened. the horrifying new mystery they have uncovered is not about putin, it is about sex. here's how "the new york times" describes it. "president trump directed illegal payments to wad up a potential scandal to threaten his chances of winning the white house." in other words, trump paid off former girlfriends. let's assume that happened. if we don't know for certain that it did. we need videotape to prove it but for the sake of debate let's say that it did happen. why would giving money to women be considered a crime? because, federal prosecutors and their lackeys on television are

telling us, trump was running for president of a time, therefore these payments constitute a campaign finance violation, even though the money didn't come from his campaign. that is the argument they are making. there is no precedent for that, to put it mildly. bill clinton tried to cover up his affair with monica lewinsky. by giving her government salary. nobody suggested that was a campaign finance violation. even when presidents have admittedly violated campaign financela laws, impeachment and felony charges never enter the f conversation. barack obama, c for example, in 2008, ran for president, his campaign was found guilty of campaign violations involving nearly $2 million. that is almost ten times the payment trump made. no one was prosecuted for that. the obama campaign got off with a $375,000 fine to the fcc. 1998, chuck schumer was caught taking $1 million in "excessive contributions."ch he also failed to properly disclose a $6.4 million in expenses. the consequences all of this?

schumer paid a fine.qu as you start earlier today, schumer is still in the senate. senator john edwards, meanwhile, funneled up to $1 million in donor money to his mistress in the middle of a presidentialal campaign. he never spent a day in jail for that. he wasn't sleazy, he wasn't a foiminal.mp for some reason, you haven't heard any of that background on nbc recently. the good people of nbc news are disgusted by what donald trump did. paying off a female accusers? that is just wrong!! as nancy pelosi might say, it is immoral.l. it is not something nbc would engage with or tolerate, ever. except, possibly, under extreme circumstances. on those occasions when hiding the sexual misbehavior of its, high paid anchors seemed important to quarterly earnings, or when accused rapist harvey weinstein called in a favor, or other times too.

but those were entirely different circumstances because donald trump was not involved. trump is a very bad man, even though trump once actually worked at nbc and made tens of millions of dollars for the company. again, that was different. it is all very different what io happening with donald trump..an mark penn has been in washington a very long time, long enough for perspective. he worked for bill clinton among many others, he joins us tonight. what i was struck by in all of this was how very close this seems to what the congress has been doing for an awful long time, paying off accusers. >> ironically, in this return back to 1998, again, little things happened, 268 settlements in congress, many of them presumably done during the election period. if this was a true precedent, we would have to lock up scores of congressmen. lock them up now. where the felony convictions? >> tucker: what do you mean? paid two accusers, mostly women i would assume. whose money was that? >> that was taxpayer money they use for those settlements.

those settlements, if you follow the logic of this, would be campaign contributions, which is why the logic of this is broken. these are personal expenses, they relate to people and what they did or didn't do. in the congressional case, a lot of wrongdoings. in the trump case, no allegations of wrongdoing in the consensual affairs, nor were they have changed the state of the election. inin fact, the money paid to stormy daniels would never have been reported before the election was held in any event. >> tucker: you say people on capitol hill, who took taxpayer money to pay off sex accusers, in election years, are now saying the president is a felon for doing the same thing with his own money? >> i think they're going to have a problem if they push impeachment and there was a settlement in our office that could havee affected one of ther elections. they will be asked the question, did you or someone in your office because a settlement to be enterede into sometime in the year of your election and are you i fell now if donald trump

is a felon? >> tucker: why isn't -- the very story is amazing to me. i don't know any details, i don't know if anyone does. why aren't news organizations relentlessly trying to figure out why more than 200 settlements took place, and with a valid and were taxpayer dollars used for it?h >> a little bit of discussion on this, but on both sides, congress buried at the issue because it would affect both parties. it's going to come up unless what happens here with trump reallyly goes to the right cour, which is it was personal behavior and not a campaign violation. >> tucker: you've been here so long in washington, does hypocrisy get so profound that it destroys the people who engage -- can you say something that is so hypocritical that dr. strikes it on in the ofd av set? >> you see it every day. i didn't like '98, and i don't like what is going on today, for the very same reason. you can't remove presidents for these reasons. he can't find problems to get them out, let the people have

their elections, let democracy have its will. the american people have a way, if they do it right, they do it again. they make a mistake, they take it back. >> tucker: you have been a democrat, appearing on this show, they have to be people -- you must talk to democrats still, of course you do. they have to be some in town who think, we have a lot of power pretty soon, and the standards we have set may be applied to us, and maybe that is not a good thing. is anyone thinking that through? >> most people are thinking get trump. it is pretty clear the prosecutors who got cohen on tax evasion and plead on this, then put it in the sentencing memoen fingering the president, none of which they should have done, clearly out to get theen president. democrats are happy with that. republicans were happy with getting clinton. i would just like people to do elections.re hypocrisy rains 100% on this issue. >> tucker: last question. since you lived through a special counsel investigation

when he worked for the clintons, how dumb would you have to be to allow another special counsel investigation to unfold? will any president in american history allow a special counsel investigation? >> the clintons were very upset they agreed to that special counsel in the first place because of what happened. trump never agreed to it. the irony here is congress left the statute lapse so they would never be another independent counsel. and then rosenstein created this creature that didn't have judicial supervision to go ahead and have free reign to go after the president. >> tucker: totally extraconstitutional office, not overseen by any elected official at all, which is unconstitutional by definition, was allowed because one guy at doj wanted it? >> not only that, because of the power that mueller has, you think you would be the kind of official that should be approved by the senate. that is why there has been aou question to the legitimacy, because he appears to have

unlimited power greater than the u.s. attorneys, who are approved by the senate. >> tucker: i wouldn't want it on my house, that is for sure. mark penn, thank you very much for that. great to see you. w nbc is extremely upset the president may have paid off a former girlfriend. we should keep in mind, nbc, the same people protected harvey n weinstein, they also made its own payoffs to people who said they were victims of harassment. again, still very upset over the president's response to what are, in effect, extortion threats.r >> they say trump directed, that is the word, lawyer michael cohen want to cover up campaign contribution in the form of payments to two women with whom he had sexual relations. >> top republicans are dismissing the allegation that donald trump directed his former fixer, michael cohen, to make illegal hush money payments to two women in the 2016 campaign. it is incredible to me, this is despicable.

>> a transaction in which a porn star was paid off. >> there ain't nothing simple about that. >> let's remember, these payoffs are about the president having affairs with women. soon after his wife had a baby. >> tucker: joe concha writes about media at "the hill" newspaper. looking at the shock on chris matthews' face, someone might have paid off an accuser.lo i could tell he was wounded, distressed, that happens in washington. how did these people, they are very gentle souls at nbc, never seen anything like this. >> you talked to mark penn in the last segment about hypocrisy. with matthews, in his case, he had to pay off a woman with whom he had made sexually inappropriate comments, that number was $40,000, the network argues it was much less. a separation compensation -- a transaction -- it was made. nbc has problems, we all know

about matt lauer.io mark halperin, who should we should not some forget, he was not with nbc at the time but he was let go from the network last year, usually on morning joe. harold ford, jr., morning joe as well. this is the same network that spiked the harvey weinstein story that they took to another publication and won a pulitzer for. here is irony, by the way, the person who was supposed to review the work to see if it should go to air or print or not had to pay off $1 million, nbc universal had to pay on his behalf, after he was accused of sexual harassment. that is per a september "daily beast" report. " remember the "access hollywood" i could go on and on. tape? that tape gets out to "the washington post" before the presidential election, investigation never done and never told why or how that tape got out. hypocrisy? yeah, it is pretty much everywhere. >> tucker: i've been in this most of my life, i know all of p the people involved, they are the last people that should be

judging other people's sex lives.w i'm not attacking anybody, let's stop lying for a second. this is literally the last group hein america that ought to be judging other people's lives. does anyone on other channels, maybe it is just too hypocritical, maybe we should pull back a little bit?do no? >> report it, but don't be so pious about it. cbs doing a report, clearly yous have les moonves there. fox had its problem, as well, the difference i see between nbc and others, fox did an investigation, and some of the most powerful people at your network are no longer there. that is the way it has to be done. when these things happen, investigations, in nbc's case, i they did it themselves. people in power are going to be goingio n anywhere. >> tucker: they never did a real investigation, it was all a fake investigation. they never had anybody from outside looking to any of the

allegations. >> exactly.. look, as far as what we are seeing with the russian investigation, that is the russian investigation, not the campaign finance investigation. mark penn brought it up, monica lewinsky, 1998, if you go after a president and say it reaches the level of impeachment to remove him from office over trying to cover up an affair, and clintons case, lying under oath, know what happened post impeachment? they did impeachment, they just didn't remove him from office. his approval rating, 73%. you better make this about collusion between trump and russia, because if you go any other way, the media place -- use the word, so pious about it. you better remember the boomerang effect was extraordinary as it pertained to bill clinton. >> tucker: nbc needs an independent counsel to get to the bottom of what is going on there. >> special counsel. >> tucker: great to see you, joe concha, thank you very much. >> good to see you see you.

>> tucker: we will be right back. 1998 ♪ with my hepatitis c,

i felt i couldn't be at my best for my family. in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured and left those doubts behind.

i faced reminders of my hep c every day. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. even hanging with friends i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret, i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all common types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b, a liver or kidney transplant, other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions, and all medicines you take including herbal supplements. don't take mavyret with atazanavir or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. common side effects include headache and tiredness. with hep c behind me, i feel free... ...fearless... ...and there's no looking back, because i am cured. talk to your doctor about mavyret. but there's no way to avoide that mi...s pmi, hey! this'll help. rocket mortgage® by quicken loans® makes the complex simple.

there's also origination fees and... this takes care of it, thank you. yeah. understand the details and get approved in as few as eight minutes. >> tucker: that's it for us tonight, here's sean hannity. ♪ ♪ >> sean: hi and welcome to "hannity" on this breaking news night. let's go back to november 8, 2016. you, we, the people, shocked the world. you voted for a fighter, ao disrupter, someone who keeps promises he made to you, and someone will stand up to washington, the establishment, smashed through bureaucracy, and actually get things done. and it's working. tonight, president trump is on offense, determined it to fund

the wall on our southern border