blown themselves up. >> what's he going to do with his hair now? now that he's not going to be on tv all the time he can finally have a hairstyle he wants and we are going to miss it. i feel let down. >> martha: it took a while. figured it out, everybody figures it out. gentlemen, thank you very much. good to be with all of you tonight. that's our story from d.c. on this busy wednesday. we will see you back again tomorrow night in new york. tucker is up next. ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." the president has decided that the republican congress during its final weeks in office should fund a wall along our southern border with mexico. that's not a new idea, obviously. trump ran for office beginning three years ago on that very promise. voters agreed with that, they elected him. now he's demanding unequivocally that the wall finally get built. at the same time, and this is not a coincidence, the news media has identified the single most racist idea than anyone in

the history of this country has ever come up with, that is of course building a wall along our southern border with mexico. watch. >> the president went to the heart of what i call his brown menace theory. these migrants, they are dirty people. they bring disease. >> this border wall thing is about controlling the browning of america. >> donald trump is fixated on the southern border as he was the day he announced his campaign. it is not about securing the border, it is about xenophobic, racist, bigoted leafs. >> tucker: that couldn't be clearer. border walls are racist. we know that. unlike border fences. border fences are not racist. they are much easier to climb over and that's why democrats have repeatedly voted to fund them. if you could have lots of border fences and still wind up with 22 million illegal aliens living in the country. we have proved that conclusively over the years. fences are the perfect solution if you're trying to pretend that you care about border security

while simultaneously encouraging much of the third world to move here without permission. fences are awesome for that. but walls, as nancy pelosi has explained, walls are immoral. according to cnn, walls are nothing less then an attack on the human heart. listen and learn. >> and a wall won't solve it. all he's doing is putting up walls around people's hearts. >> we are not a wall away from being better. >> don't waste billions of dollars of taxpayer money in order to build something that will not make our border more secure. >> tucker: that's the other point they keep making. walls don't work. they are totally ineffective except in prisons and the vatican and outside barack obama's house here in washington and almost every upper income neighborhood in america where walls surround the front lines of the homes hillary clinton and beto o'rourke hold their fund-raisers. but among international borders, walls are useless.

a portable would simply create a thriving new market in taller letters. jeb bush used to say that all the time. everyone in power agrees with him. they are not or nodding vigorously from their gated communities. >> we need border security, the wall as a part of border security. you can't have very good security without a wall. >> that is a political promise. border security is a way to effectively honor our responsibility. >> the experts say you can do border security without a wall, which is wasteful and doesn't solve the problem. >> tucker: it's wasteful. walls won't solve the problem. all the experts agree on that. and they have briefed chuck schumer and he's passing on the news to us. okay. but before we accept chuck schumer's claim about walls as fact, just one simple question, what about israel? israel is our closest ally in the middle east, the recipient of our largest foreign aid package by far. pretty much everyone in congress on both sides supports israel or

claims to. many of them are vocal about that support, including chuck schumer. and here's the funny thing, israel has plenty of walls. not just the famous one that people pray at. israel has border walls. some of them tall and foreboding and made of steel. are israel's walls immoral? by nancy pelosi's standards, why wouldn't they be immoral? it's a pretty obvious question, so we've asked it repeatedly of democrats on the show and every single time we get the very same answer to the question, israel's walls have nothing to do with immigration. they are defensive walls, designed to keep out terrorists and suicide bombers. there is no comparison to israel's wall and anything that donald trump is proposing. it's apples and oranges. it's a pretty effective talking point and that's why every democrat repeats it every time. but is it actually true? we got curious and decided to find out ourselves from a knowledgeable source in israel. a short time ago we spoke to david rubin, the former mayor of

shiloh israel. the author of the book trump and the jews. we had a fascinating conversation. watch. >> tucker: thank you very much for joining us. there's a debate as you are fully aware over whether to erect a wall on our southern border to solve the immigration crisis. israel has relevant experience with the exact topic. we'll explain what israel did in response to its immigration crisis and the effect that the wall had on a? >> we certainly do have that experience. it between 2010 and 2012 there were 55,000 illegal immigrants into israel. you have to understand, israel is a tiny country so 55,000 illegal immigrants in just a couple of years is a lot of illegal immigrants. and most of them settled in southern tel aviv, which was already working class, a little bit run down area.

the rapes and murderers in southern tel aviv skyrocketed in those few years. the israeli government under pressure from the grassroots mainly, grassroots protests of the residence from south tel aviv and other towns that were being overrun by these illegal immigrants, the israeli government made the decision that they were going to build a wall, a high-tech steel wall on the southern border, the border between egypt and israel. it was built over the next few years, it was completed, almost completed by 2015. in 2016 the wall was up. 2016 there were 11 illegal immigrants who entered israel and then they raised the height of the wall an additional several feet and in 2017 there

was not one illegal immigrant that made it through the southern border into israel. >> tucker: that is a remarkable story. >> it works. >> tucker: i'm just wondering the political part of this. 55,000 illegal immigrants were describing from africa as i remember, parts of africa. was there anybody in israel who said you are racist for trying to keep them out? >> there was some of that, yes. some of the people on the left were going crazy and having protests and they were complaining that it's a racist thing, but look, illegal immigration is illegal immigration and i don't know if you know this. i was born and raised in the united states. i've been living in israel for 27 years. but the jewish immigrants who

came to america, and i wrote about this extensively in my book "trump and the jews." they came to america as legal immigrants. they came only to work hard and only to be full americans. that was their goal. so i've heard people like alexandria ocasio-cortez from new york, the congresswoman, talking about how the immigrants, the migrants are just like the asylum-seekers, the jewish immigrants who were seeking to escape the nazis in world war ii. it's an obscene comparison i've heard it too many times from the left. so yes, there were some of the israeli left were complaining and even accusing the israeli government of racism, but the fact is that now nobody is complaining. everybody is happy that we don't have illegal immigration with israel. >> tucker: that's an amazing

story and i hope that a lot of people watch the segment. thank you for telling us what happened in your experience there. remarkable. >> you're welcome, good to be with you. >> tucker: thanks. thank you. professor of african-american studies at the university of maryland and a frequent guest on the show, professor, thank you very much for coming on. you just are the kind of amazing story. i didn't know that. tel aviv, 55,000 illegal immigrants working there, working class residents of the towns said crime is going up. governor of israel builds a wall to keep the aliens out and no one in this country says anything. is that immoral? >> i think there are lots of big differences between israel and the united states. first of all, we know that crime has gone down in the united states steadily since 1991. immigrants commit both legal and undocumented commit fewer crimes than americans like you and i.

>> tucker: i don't think that number is true. they commit at a higher proportion. >> we can look that up. >> tucker: we can look that up. separate debate. i want to be totally clear, i support israel's right to protect its own borders. it's a country, it gets to do that if it wants. but why is it immoral when we do it here according to the democratic party, but not when our closest ally in the region doesn't? >> part of this is because of the motivation that mr. trump has brought into the discussion. also the fact that i think there were certain things that the mayor said that were inaccurate. you look at immigration to the united states in the early 20th century whether it was jews, italians, other groups, crime actually did go up. they were blamed for everything. they brought cosa nostra. they were blamed for all of these kinds of things. and when we want to sanitize our

historic memory -- >> tucker: history changes over time and we shut down -- 's because they were all here to work hard. >> tucker: it's all complicated but what's not complicated is that our closest ally in the region, biggest recipient of american aid built this wall in the same people who supported building that wall, i'm one of them, are now telling us that an effort to protect our southern border in exactly the same way as "immoral" and "racist" and i'm wondering what the standard is? >> when you're going around saying people from ourselves our rapists and they commit crimes when you don't have any empirical evidence to back it up. it sounds pretty much like your xenophobic and racist. >> tucker: didn't like trump. >> it's not about trump. i have no feelings about trump as a person. >> tucker: his motives, what he says, a lot of people would like a wall on our border and they are confused because they hear pelosi and schumer say offense is fine, but a wall is immoral. what is the distinction exactly?

>> i think, again, that the fence -- even a fence is not necessarily what is going to lead to border security and i think you and i actually agree. i read your book, which is actually a fabulous book. >> tucker: thank you. >> i will tell you when i read your book the problems that exist with immigration and i think mike pence actually has it correct, actually start in central america. it's not at our borders so if we want to solve this problem and for trying to stop things that the right talks about, the flow of drugs, one of the things that many experts say is a wall or a fence, or any of that is not going to stop that. they will fly drones, they will find other ways. >> tucker: that we need to help them get better, those countries. >> within their borders people awesome stomach oftentimes really don't want to be here. that's the other thing. >> tucker: a couple of things, but i will just focus on one. lots of people try to make honduras a better country. but the country itself, the

government is dysfunctional. that's why hondurans and guatemalans want to move here. so what would be the plan for fixing those countries to the point where they were to have such a high standard of living and be so peaceful that people wouldn't want to leave? is there a formula that none of us know? >> i think the reason that it's dysfunctional -- again, having read your book, u.s. intervention that happened throughout the late '70s and early '80s. >> tucker: you are saying they weren't dysfunctional before the united states, for reasons -- >> i would say the thing that brought people to our borders and that has caused both documented and undocumented immigration has driven that has been the wars that we have created that have cost thousands upon thousands of lives. >> tucker: i agree with you there, but we didn't create those wars. we intervened in them because without it was in our interest. >> we propped up the contra. >> tucker: we certainly did but we didn't create the marxist revolution that has plagued the

country. my question is what does that mean now? does it mean that because we feel so bad about something that our leaders did 30 years ago we have to pay the penance of illegal immigration? doesn't mean we have an obligation to fix those countries? if so, how do we do that? >> i think investment in partnership with the democratically elected leaders in those countries -- >> tucker: where has that worked? anywhere ever? has that ever worked? we spent all this money abroad and it seems to just make the countries more corrupt and the average person more poorer and desperate to come here. has it ever worked? >> i think there are certainly ways we can do this where it would work. and we've always had the goal of colonizing a place where we actually try to help them. i think the best bet is to go and enter into partnerships with democratic leaders. >> tucker: since we are in the reparations business. i'm open minded about everything, as you know. but if we old latin america something, what if they flooded our communities with drugs and killed, i don't know, 50,000,

70,000 people a year? a year, so more people die of drug ods in this country than all of vietnam, americus, over 11 years, what are they are less? anything? >> again, we are going to disagree -- >> tucker: i'm just wondering if it's a two-way street. can we collect for the sentinel epidemic? it seems like we should. >> i think the sentinel epidemic has many layers to it. it's not just coming from central america. >> tucker: a lot of it's coming from china but a lot of it is moving through mexico. what does mexico owe us for killing tens of thousands? >> we were talking about central america. are you saying they're all the same? >> tucker: we have learned recently that nobody is more decent than the people of mexico. the average city is dumb exodus entity and wanted does not feel that way. thank you very much. france, moving to the other side of the globe, facing some of the

worst riots in that country since they chopped off the head of the king. thanks in large part to climate change policy. is there something for us to learn from the fire was raging there tonight? just after the break. ♪ some moments can change everything. you can't always predict them, but you can game plan for them. for 150 years, generations of families have chosen pacific life for retirement and life insurance solutions to help them reach their goals. being ready for wherever life leads. that's the power of pacific. ask a financial advisor about pacific life.

♪ >> tucker: you've been told many times if you watch tv that america needs to join the paris climate accord immediately, pulling out of it was immoral, and to do your part to fight global climate change you need to accept burdensome taxes on the energy you use. it's the least you can do.

but what about the people claiming you need to do this? are they willing to pay their share? in a recent piece in "the daily caller," ran in "the daily caller" news foundation, reporters contacted 31 major corporations and the foundations, and individuals who have endorsed the paris climate accord and they asked a very simple question, simple ones of the most revealing. it is what they asked. if climate change is indeed the existential threat you say it is, would you support a ban on all private jet travel? these are deeply moral people they asked, obviously, they care it in a way that you never will because you are too shallow. are they willing to do this? no, not one of them. mark zuckerberg spent more than a million dollars flying private over the past couple of years. his company didn't even bother to respond. neither did google or apple, or al gore, who by the way flies private all the time.

only two of the 31 companies contacted responded at all and both said they, buckle your seat belts, opposed banning private jets because they use them. you, meanwhile, our sinful for driving an suv to pick up your kids at hockey practice. just so you know. if the people who lecture us really did make sacrifices stop the global warming storage they tell us so much about the rest of us might be inclined to follow their example, but they won't. so when the elites impose new taxes for the sake of climate change ordinary citizens are sometimes driven to protest instead. and in france they are protesting in a very intense and sometimes violent way. here's part of it. [sirens]

>> tucker: that's paris, not a war zone. it dana perino hosts the daily briefing of course with dana perino. great to see you. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: i think the argument over whether climate change is happening is less interesting than the debate over what we do about it and i'm just so struck by the people were telling us, and maybe they are right, i don't know, i'm not a climate scientists, that this is really the moral question of her time, an existential threat to life as we know it. really not making the kind of sacrifices from someone you think sincerely believed the threat was that profound. what he think that is? >> that has been true for all the years that we've been talking about this. i've cut my teeth on capitol hill as a staffer for the chairman of the energy and power subcommittee. when janet yellen came and talked about global warming way back then. i'm dating myself a little bit and even back then you knew

immediately that there were things that may be we could do, but that just the law of physics at this point in time means that you cannot actually just eliminate fossil fuels completely. and here's a mantra that i want everyone to remember. elites care about global warming. drivers care about fuel prices. and politically drivers always win. for all these people that want to go -- the democratic candidates that want to take on president trump in 2020, they will be heading back to san francisco to campaign. they've got to go to iowa first and that's going to happen in february. they need to remember that the things that help them get campaign donations from san francisco and new york, that's not going to work in iowa. in the united states has actually been able to grow its economy and decrease its emissions because we do more, yes, you know how you do more? a growing economy hope to do more because it growing economy

helps you invest in it. places like china have the problem. the more we can do to innovate the more we can help try to solve this problem. but ridiculing people is not going to work. >> tucker: by the way, if you really believed that climate change is all that matters and you're flying on a private plane, you need to really look in the mirror and think deeply. do you think that a carbon tax will become a component of the debate in the next election? >> i nominally think a carbon tax will become a component. i think it will become a litmus test for democratic candidates trying to seek the 2020 democratic nomination for president and they've got to be careful bob thought that. the departed charles krauthammer, very conservative. understood these things very well. the thing is that economists love a carbon tax. it's very transparent, it's very direct. politicians hate a carbon tax for that very same reason. there might be some good reasons to actually do a carbon tax if you work to reduce taxes in another way.

that was charles krauthammer's proposal and i think that you could see that. but i don't think the democrats are going to actually propose a carbon tax that goes along with a tax cut somewhere else. i don't see that happening. >> tucker: calling it the green new deal and the rest of us will try to figure out what's in it. dana perino, thank you for that update. >> remember the mantra. >> tucker: there are more drivers than there are sierra club executives, that's totally true. >> exactly. there you go. >> tucker: great to see you. the left feels entitled to fire you and destroy your life whenever you say something you don't like but they don't feel limited the same way themselves. details ahead. ♪

[deep breath] i receive travel rewards. i visualize travel rewards. going new places! going out for a bite! going anytime. rewarded! learn more at the explorer card dot com. ready tyou better beast on? 'cause it's red lobster's new create your own ultimate feast event! pick 4 of 10 favorites to create the ultimate feast you've been dreaming of. will you choose creamy lobster mac & cheese, tender, wild-caught snow crab... crispy jumbo coconut shrimp,

hey, we never said choosing was easy... just delicious. so hurry in to create your own ultimate feast before it's gone. and be the party hero. get ten percent off when you order red lobster to go. but only for a limited time.

>> tucker: if you grew up in this country remember hearing when you were a kid this is a free country. the constitution gives us freedom in the first freedom, literally, the first number in the bill of rights, is freedom of speech and for generations that was unquestioned here, the most celebrated of our rights. but increasingly it is seen by the people in charge as an annoying relic. don't believe us? try to say something unauthorized in your workplace or on-campus or even on a street corner. why have things changed? because the attitudes of our leaders have changed and we have a small clip that tells you a lot about what they really believe. california congressman ted lieu and he's explaining in this clip

that sadly he is prevented from banning talk he doesn't like by a pesky legal antique called the constitution. watch this. >> i would love to be able to regulate the content of speech. the first amendment prevents me from doing so and that is simply a function of the first amendment but i think over the long run it's better the government does not regulate the content of speech. >> tucker: the cnn anchors nodding of course we all like to regulate speech if we could. over the long run he says it's better not to regulate speech. does that sound like someone who is deeply committed to a free society and its benefits or is it simply a bully admitting that for now the law won't let him do what he wants to do, which is control your mind? i think you know the answer. if the left increasingly is using big tech, threats and public shaming to stamp out political views it doesn't like. they're also ruining actors and comedians and anyone else who

dares to stray from the script. but not everybody is so limited. we learn that today when one cable host used a slur to describe a member of the trump administration. >> why doesn't mike pompeo care right now? are the pathetic deflections that we just heard when he appeared on fox & friends, is that a patriot speaking? or one of the dictators butt bo boy? i'm dead serious, i'm asking. are these the words of a patrio patriot? >> tucker: so the anchor apologized for that remark. but the question is will she be punished? of course we don't think she should be punished. she was saying what she thinks or she misspoke, it happens to everybody. she shouldn't be sanctioned for that, but neither should kevin hart. the left now has a long history is the only faction enjoying impunity for what it says. >> you talk like a sign that which grill and got hit in the head. the only thing your mouth is

good for is being vladimir putin's [bleep] holste holster. >> you give him a robe and you let him to do whatever he wants. this right now, this is my addition for mr. trump's cabinet and also for our regional production of the crucible. and let me tell you i was good. >> tucker: dave rubin hosts rubin report on youtube. everyone watching, has watched. thanks a lot for coming on. just to be totally clear -- >> good to be with you. >> tucker: people able to tell jokes that i don't like and often they do. what i find so interesting is at this moment of peak hysteria about speech we are seeing normal decent totally nonbigoted people destroyed and the rest of us are completely terrified and art and free expression it has totally ground to a halt. no one can be creative anymore. at that exact moment the left still feels totally free to say

things they would classify if others said them as bigoted, what's going on? >> you just nailed it right there. quite literally the oscars can't figure out who to host the show anymore either because they can't find anyone that's politically correct enough or that everyone that would like to do it is now afraid to do it because of the repercussions. but as for the clips that you just played, look, the simple truth of this is showing what the flaw of collectivism, which is basically the idea of judging people based on their immutable characteristics, why it is so terrible and why it is being embraced by the left. you can't be for groups. it actually doesn't make sense because you eliminate the individual every time. so to say you are for gays doesn't really mean anything because then when they want to make a joke about you they will make that joke. or to say you are for women. if that doesn't mean anything. that's a very low resolution way of saying something.

are they for nikki haley? a woman who happens to be a conservative? a strong woman? of course they are not for her, so to view people through this very obvious and, what i would say is really just a dumb lens, you see it drop every time they speak off-the-cuff. it drops because they don't really care about the individual and the ted lieu cliff that you played at the beginning of this. i don't know when the last time i heard something that chilling coming from a government official. it's like the first amendment is the most precious thing that we have in this country. and i could tell you as someone that has been on tour for most of the last year, 20 some odd countries the last couple of months, every single country the people are jealous of the freedoms that we have here, especially the freedom of speech. if you or anyone, regardless of whether democrat, republican, it doesn't matter. if you hear any elected official saying that he would love to get rid of the first amendment, i can't imagine anything scarier in a free society.

>> tucker: very quickly, i don't want to pound on the anchor, i don't even know who it was in that clip, but it was a news anchor who is living, obviously predicated on the first amendment. didn't interrupt him and say i'm sorry, mr. elected official, did you say you would like to control people's speech? >> it's incredible and we are seeing and emboldening of this. it's interesting what you said there. these are the same people that love to shut people down but at the same time they will accidentally -- accidentally -- or they will intentionally say some things. that's been just another one of these sites that turns out a lot of sort of lefty nonsense. they ran a piece today that basically said the title of the piece was something to the effect of conservative gays should shut the eff up. it judging people on their immutable characteristics while at the same time apparently told most people you are their ally. as i always say to you, tucker, every time i'm on your show, what do i tell you? all the disagreements, the

political disagreements that we might have, which we have been discussed on both my show and your show, because you are a staunch defender of free speech i will continue to do this with you whether we agree or not. that's what america is about and that's with these people are just tossing away. >> tucker: if they control your speech than they control your mind. if that's never going to happen. the great dave rubin, appreciate it. new legal filings suggest the fbi misled michael flynn on purpose or to trap him in criminal charges. is that the kind of country you want to live in? for your government tries to lure you into committing crimes? a question worth asking, and we will after the break. ♪ ♪

♪ the greatest wish of all... is one that brings us together. the lincoln wish list event is here. sign and drive off in a new lincoln with $0 down, $0 due at signing, and a complimentary first month's payment. only at your lincoln dealer. and a complimentary first month's payment. let's do the thing that you do. let's clear a path. let's put down roots. let's build something. let's do the thing that you do. let's do the thing that changes the shape of everything...

that pushes us forward and keeps us going. let's do the work. 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. my mom washes the dishes... ...before she puts them in the dishwasher. so what does the dishwasher do?

cascade platinum does the work for you, prewashing and removing stuck-on foods, the first time. wow, that's clean! cascade platinum. ♪ >> tucker: for years now we've heard how american democracy is under siege from a country with an economy about the size of the state of texas but nevertheless somehow has limitless and corrupting resources.

that of course is russia! led by vladimir putin! the question is just how much did russian meddling amount to in the 2016 election? that question has been outstanding for a while but yesterday we got some details. the google ceo appeared on capitol hill and was asked. >> does google not of the full extent to which its online platforms was exported by russian actors in a election two years ago? >> we undertook a very thorough investigation and in 2016 we now know that there were two main add accounts linked to russia which advertised on google for about $4700 in advertising. we also found -- >> a total of $4700? >> that's right. >> tucker: $4700. in other words, about the price

of dinner for five with vodka at a good restaurant in moscow. to put it in terms, hillary clinton's campaign spent about $768 million total and that means hillary spent more than $1600 for every penny the russians spent on google. nobody in washington is rejoicing about how secure our democracy is. that's not surprising because protecting democracy was never the point, undermining it, needless to say, has always been the point. more and more evidence emerges, by the way, that the department of justice may deserve a new name because justice is clearly not the top priority. newly filed court documents show that andy mccabe advised michael flynn not to bring a lawyer to his interview with federal agents in january 2017. slain in explicable, but ironically, agree to that. agents then deliberately chose not to warn him that he could be criminally charged for false statements. then they sprang terminal charges on him after his

interview. jonathan turley is a professor at george washington university law school and he joins us tonight. thanks very much. the troubling take away is clearly flynn should have brought a lawyer. in message to those watching at home. if the fbi's intervening you, bring a lawyer. but do you want to live in a country where the government seeks to mislead you in order to get you to commit a crime? that doesn't seem like justice. >> it does answer the question of who was the last guy believes, trust us, where the government and apparently that would be michael flynn. he also put it in context, right at the beginning -- during the transition and he answered a bunch of questions, a great number of them, apparently in the agents knew that some of those answers didn't fit very well with what they knew. and what's fascinating about the information we have is they made a conscious decision not to raise those with him. there is a certain feeling of a

trap here that obviously he never glued into. this wouldn't bother me as much if they nailed him on something significant. if they had the seven heads in a duffel bag. >> tucker: exactly. >> but instead they nailed him on a false statement about a meeting that was not just lawfu lawful, but not particularly unprecedented. he met with russians as the incoming national security advisor during the transition. that's not unprecedented. spoke to them about policy and he omitted the fact, or he denied that they had talked about sanctions. that does seem like something that you could miss. something that frankly could skip your mind, so the question is, if the agents had raised that with him, would he have corrected the record? i don't know. but at the end of the day, what's really troubling is not just the fact that they proceeded to criminalize it, but that the initial agents apparently did not believe he was intentionally lying and they did not recommend the charge. you now fast forward to where we

are now and i can only imagine what flynn might be thinking reading the recent filings because in one of the footnotes for cohan, the prosecutors note that he came in and made all types of false statements about all types of stuff to investigators and simply says matter-of-factly, he then corrected those statements. i can imagine michael flynn reading this reading well, okay. what happened to my chance to correct? >> tucker: that's so awful. so cohen is clearly a practiced liar and a sleazy person by his own admission. flynn, is not. i don't think flynn is a liar actually. he ran an intelligence agency for the u.s. military. had to be polygraph. how sad is this to destroy a man's life over this? >> it is sad. considering his career as a whole. but he was the unwitting victim of trust. and it is a cautionary word for everyone in washington. >> tucker: our government, we

pay for, we vote for, we shouldn't be mistreated by it on purpose i don't think. you laugh knowingly. you've lived in washington -- >> too long. >> tucker: thank you very much. >> thank you. >> tucker: little evidence against him but the process told pushing evidence against brett kavanaugh claiming sexual harassment. lisa boothe lisa is following td joins us next to explain it. ♪ building a better bank starts with looking at something old, and saying, "really?" so capital one is building something completely new. capital one cafes.

inviting places with people here to help you, not sell you. and savings and checking accounts with no fees or minimums. because that's how it should be. you can open one from right here or anywhere in 5 minutes. seriously, 5 minutes... this is banking reimagined. what's in your wallet?

♪ >> tucker: "sports illustrated" recently on her as an inspiration for the year for the be the first person to publicly accuse larry nasser of sex abuse, and that's fine. he did it. he's a convicted predator and will likely spend the rest of his life in prison. here's the interesting part, to

honor her they had her introduced by professor christine bossi ford, was allegations by contrast against now justice brett kavanaugh remain not just unproven, but lacking any evidence at all, none. so why the pairing? lisa boothe is a senior fellow at the independent woman's voice and she joins us tonight. thank you for coming on. is the idea that christine bossi ford somehow ascended to the pantheon of people we believe unquestioningly? she is like official victim now? >> i think that's what it looks like and i think that's the danger more broadly with the #metoo movement. it presumes that every woman is telling the truth and every man is guilty. and that's what we saw with the brett kavanaugh confirmation hearings. i think that's why so many people like myself took issue with the way that he was being treated because the comparison between the two stories is both intellectually dishonest and it's just wrong. i have no problem with rachel receiving this award. she was unquestionably brave by bringing those allegations against him. there were 300 something women

that stepped forward to also bring forward allegations. 125 brought forward criminal complaints. problem is putting her in the same category with ford, who has no corroborating evidence, no witnesses. if anything, one of her ben's friends, she named, says that she's never met brett kavanaugh, does not were never the party in question and later told the fbi that she felt pressured or at least reportedly felt pressured by ford's friends to change her story. by the time "the washington post" first ran christine ford's story she had already changed her story a few times. her polygraph letter alone has two different accounts of how many people were at the party in question. you remember rachel mitchell, who is the prosecutor that republicans tasked with cross-examining her. cases are very difficult to prove, but this is even weaker than that, so to equate the two is so wrong, so intellectually dishonest and i think a

dangerous precedent to be setting. >> tucker: totally insulting. thank you for pointing that out. lisa boothe, great to see you. one of our friends here and fox invented something for real. he's an inventor. it's now on the market. raising revenues for the family of our country's veterans. he joins us next to tell us what he made. ♪ 12 but you can believe this, real esurance employee nancy abraham. look her up online. esurance, it's surprisingly painless. it's just a cough. yeah right, and i was born yesterday. (indistinct announcement over pa system) i'm a baby! what? treat your cough seriously with robitussin dm max. it soothes in seconds and delivers fast, powerful cough relief for hours. robitussin. because it's never just a cough.

♪ time now for the friend zone, where we bring one of our friends here on the program. chief meteorologist is not only a friend but and presented a check for its $70,000 to folds of honor, which provides scholarships to families of the killed and wounded u.s. serviceman. rated the money come from? umbrellas it turns out. rick, my wife, you gave her one

of these and she's been talking about it ever since which is why i wanted to do this. i'm not a huge umbrella user but she is obsessed with it. why is it different? >> i told you about this idea several years ago. i was just trying to find a good umbrella one time and i thought, why are umbrellas so bad inherently? if there is a good one, i don't know what it is. so i literally took thousands of umbrellas apart in the apartment with a friend of mine who is an industrial designer and tweaked and ultimately found where the weak points were and where we could strengthen the umbrella. in that process, there's a number of things that matter. he wanted to be strong in the wind and also feel good in your hands. there are safety features, so all of the trim is reflective, the logo is reflective in case it's in the dark, in the rain,

and then we made an app that goes along with it so you get alerts on days you need to take your umbrella, and there's a tracking device so if you don't know where you last had it, you hit a locate device and it tells you where we last had it. >> sean: this doesn't feel like something that will be upended by the wind. >> that was the whole point, to make something that was not going to flip out in that first he was. so many times we are buying single use umbrellas, this is an investment that you will have with you for a long time. it's weatherman umbrella.com. >> tucker: and you are are giving a portion of the proceeds to families of those who are killed? >> yes. we partner with folds of honor, we give $5 of every umbrella to folds of honor. and you know the amazing work that they do. we sold 14,000 umbrellas and we were able to give them a check

for $70,000. >> tucker: you can catch the full version of the interview on foxnews.com. that's it for us tonight, will be be back tomorrow at 8:00 p.m., show that is the sworn enemy of lying, prosody, groupthink. and if i seem out of sorts it it's because there was an invasion on our own set. i've been here 23 years and this is an invasion. >> that's a very good point. great to see one person, great show as always. you actually have a calendar, and -- that is so not true. i'm going to buy you a calculator so we can get this straight. that's her christmas gift of this year. great job and good to see you. >> sean: welcome