senator grassley, always good to see you, sir. thank you very much. we will be watching tomorrow. >> thank you very much too. >> martha: that is "the story" on this monday night, the hearing for william bar will get underway, we will see you tomorrow night at 7:00, coming up next, senator colson ready to go, coming at you from d.c., we will see you tomorrow, everybody. have a good night. ♪ ♪ >> welcome to tucker carlson tonight, we want to bring you the latest on what was a remarkable story that broke latn "the new york times," in no time to address at the end. according to what our apparently high-level sources within the department of justice in 2017 the fbi secretly began an investigation into whether the president is in fact a russian agent, the fbi apparently believe that president trump could be a one-man sleeper cell. personally taking direct orders

from his handlers in moscow, and working from within the oval office to subvert this country. the fbi said that they believe that could've happened. so they spied apparently on the president of the united states. while, shocking, does not even begin to describe the story. nothing like this has ever happened in this country. these allegations are literally without precedent, that is not an overstatement. and the allegations are not tru true. the fbi did not find that donald trump is an fbi agent, no charges were filed against them. none will be, but an equally important question remains unanswered. how did this happen? deciding the sitting president should be investigated for treason is not a small thing. officials within the fbi had to push for this investigation. and then marshall evidence to justify it. legal leaders had to sign off on the whole thing, all of that happen. but on what grounds exactly? that's what we would need to

know in order to understand thi this. well, thanks to the "times" story we have some sense of the answer. if you are imagining a secret transmitter discovered hidden in the lincoln bedroom, no. think again. there were no cloak and dagger clues in this case, apparently. the fbi assumed that donald trump might be a russian agent not because of anything he did in secret, but because of things he said in public. very public. a standing on the stage on camera while running for president. here's one of them. >> there is nothing that i can think of that i would rather do than have russia friendly as opposed to the way that they are right now. wanted to be nice if we actually got along as an example with russia? i am all for it. >> tucker: that was then candidate trump speaking at a press conference in july of 2016. according to the fbi the words that you just heard are evidence that president trump might have betrayed the country. that is their view. but there is another way to look

at those words. maybe trump is right. russia is a nuclear armed power on the other side of the planet, it does not have the power to invade the united states. it cannot close international shipping lanes, it does not seriously threaten our key allies like japan or great britain. is there some reason, then, that we should inherently be in conflict with russia? is there more over a vast public support in this country for fighting a proxy war in syria with the kremlin? and how many american parents are anxious to send their kids to die for the territorial integrity of ukraine? an issue that we are supposed something is very important. outside of a few neighborhoods in washington, not very many people, it turns out. so trump did raise a fair question at the press conference in 2016. in washington saying that out loud is considered treason. >> vladimir putin policies almost being parroted by donald trump. you had trump say only nice things about putin, he never

spoke ill about russia. >> tucker: never spoke ill about russia. that is the evidence the united states senator holds up to prove that the president may be working for our enemies. so maybe trump does like russia, who knows? by the way, he is allowed to if he wants to. if that does not make them evil. it means that he disagrees with prevailing orthodox in d.c. that is okay. we're supposed to have spirited debates over questions like this. but no longer. policy differences are now criminal offenses. cnn professional dumb person max boot listed 18 reasons that the president may be a russian spy. if you look at the reasons they are political reasons that boot does not agree with. firing jim coming, pulling out of syria, criticizing the european union. an supporting populace. to the war caucus in washington succeeded in criminal dissent

from the agenda. if this was happening any less to developed country, we would know what to call it. it is an attempt at two. a political leader gets elected on a platform that law enforcement agencies do not like, so they try to put them in jail. it happens all the time and other places, now it is happening here. inside trump activist lisa page described the fda's thinking in her closed-door testimony before congress. russia is the most dangerous country in the world, page reportedly said, because russia works to "weaken our ability, america's ability, the west ability to spread our democratic ideals." so spreading our democratic ideals, that is what the iraq war, the most important thing that america does. the him one thing we must to fend at all costs paid when it fbi lawyers start like a neo-propagandist? no wonder max boot is on board with us. the entire media and political

classes are with max boot and lisa page too, they have lost their minds. this past september nbc news breathlessly reported that russia was using "sophisticated microwaves to cause brain damage to u.s. diplomats in cuba." that sounds like something that those dastardly russians would do just because, well, now, months later scientists have determined that the kremlin probably had nothing to do with that. the real culprit, noise from crickets. and not even russian crickets, in the short tailed crickets, nonslavic critics. whatever. the media did not correct it, they moved on. they know who the bad guys are, evidenced as not to deter their story line. russian espionage is so widespread in fact that to the act of denying that you spied for russia is no confirmation that you did. watch. >> well, the president's tweet trying to make the case that he is not a russian asset really

undercuts his own defense. the president's tweet could not have been scripted better if it was written by hooton himself prayed to somebody has to have told the president that undercutting the fbi, insulting past presidents, members of the u.s. government, and criticizing their actions to keep us safe is advancing russia's mission, the own intelligence committee has said that those vy things are exactly what russia is after. so in the president's response, he is really making russia's job easier. >> tucker: you say that you are not a russian agent, therefore you are a russian agent. who puts these people on tv? that is a question we should think about. over the weekend, speaking of television, jeff stoker declared that anybody who is not spreading fear of russia is doing the bidding of russia, he did not say that himself, he really speaks in public, instead he sent his marionette out, as he often does to deliver the message. >> i was watching "good morning

america," and they lead with snowstorms and scares animals and other stories, and not this, i just keep wondering if the public is ill served if we do not make it really clear what the stakes of the story are, how can you not lead with this drama? >> i think plenty of times we lead with this drama. >> tucker: [laughs] to the unit heads to the steps of the palace reading the proclamation, message received, thank you very much. but is a medias problem really that it does not talk about russia enough? it does not seem like that is a problem. >> whether the president was working for russia. >> whether donald trump was secretly working on behalf of russia. >> whether trump was secretly working on behalf of russia. >> whether president trump was secretly working on behalf of russia. >> whether the president was secretly working with russia against america. >> whether trump was secretly

working on behalf of the russia -- >> whether trump was secretly working on behalf of russia. >> whether president trump was working on behalf of russia. >> whether president trump was working on russia's behalf. >> whether the sitting president was secretly working for russia. >> whether president trump was working for russia from the oval office. >> tucker: does every show on cable news have the same writer? well, yes, the dnc. you have heard the script so many times that it is like background noise. muzak in an elevator, we do not pause to ask the obvious question which is does it make sense? does what they are saying add up that president trump is doing the bidding of russia? if you are russia, let's say that you are vladimir putin, how would you undermine american interest? you will probably try to get america stuck in costly foreign wars. he would look at iraq and afghanistan and say that those wars have made america much weaker. why not try to replicate that experience and say syria and libya? you might encourage america to

do that. you might encourage the u.s. to adopt a self-destructive energy policy. you have the american government sharply written strict oil and natural gas and then with the environment, so that they produe less energy, why would you do that? because global energy prices would rise and the u.s. would have to import more. who would that benefit? russia, a petro state, their economy is guaranteed on energy. and president trump, weird behavior for a secret agent has on the opposite of that. to the united states for the first time in my lifetime is an energy exporter, in fact the largest producer of oil and gas in the world, is that good for russia? no, it is not. who is pushing the opposite? it is a left. they are pushing a green new deal that would have this country shutting down oil and gas wells across the nation. huh? someday we will look back in shame and confusion and wonder how so many supposedly smart people went completely off the deep end. that is the task for future

historians. for now, it is time for some radical transparency. last fall the president ordered the declassification and release of carter page's fisa as publication. how did an american citizen who clearly did not act as an agent for russia have his phone's tapped and his email read by the federal government? on what basis? we have a right to know that. we still don't. so the president ordered it. he also ordered the unredacted release of all text messages related to their russia investigation sent by jim comey, lisa page, peter strzok, instead of releasing them the department of justice dithered for reasons that were not clear, the president got distracted and we have never seen those documents. it is obvious that the reason for not releasing them is not for the security, they leak the information about the fbi investigation to "the new york times" on friday. they have no problem leaking information when it helps them. they have not been released because of documents might

embarrass the fbi. this and the shadow investigation has caused vastly more harm to this country than any russian facebook ad. the president should order the declassification of all documents related to this. it is clearly an abuse of federal power. if you want to restore confidence in the federal government, bring in some sunlight. tell the doj to do that. and if doj personnel refuses to do that, fire them. and replace them with people who understand that they serve elected leaders, which is to say the electorate, which is to say voters, the people, and not the other way around. the president appears to be afraid to do this. he appears to be intimidated by his own employers, but why? what can official washington doo to him now? : a russian agent? repair to impeach him? they arty have. andy, i don't want to overstate this, but recent investigations in the times story for the investigation to a sitting president, it seems like fbi

officials disagreed with the policy on russia, is that an appropriate pretext for a criminal investigation? >> no, it is not, tucker, it is not appropriate for the fbi for any investigation, and listening to your monologue, it occurs to me that you know, since the soviet union fell, it has been the purpose of this government s of both parties to treat russia as if it was england. and i remember the obama debate with mitt romney where mitt romney suggested that russia was a greatest geopolitil enemy, and obama mocked him for that. in a conversation with medvedev, who is the cat's-paw for president putin, saying that he is not being heard, as soon as i get by this election i will have flexibility. imagine if trump had said these

things? but msa listening to that, it seems like trump is a guy who was left without a tear when the music stops, because everything that was regular and fine is now trump, i'm sorry, russia is back to the cold war, and i find russia to be more of a threat than you do, but the fbi is not supposed to be doing policy. that is not their job. >> tucker: why was there nobody -- there is a lot that we do not know, but from that story and nobody has contested the basic facts that i have seen, officials and the fbi sat down and decided that it is unacceptable for an elected leader to come to the policy conclusions, therefore there must be some sinister motive, why did no one in the fbi say, wait a second, this is not our job, we are not allowed to do this? >> because they did not start doing it in may 2017. in may 2017, tucker, all they did was as a formal paper matter

they open an investigation specifically on trump. but it was the same investigation that had been conducted for a year. i keep going to the steele dossier. you mention the warrant that they have on carter page. that was mainly on the steele dossier. the steel dossier is not about carter page and not even in a moscow hotel, the theory of the steele dossier is that trump personally and the kremlin are in a conspiracy, and espionage conspiracy to subvert the election so that president trump can get in and t was what they went to the fisa court with in order to get a warrant on carter page. so the theory behind this, if you look at the steele dossier, guys like paige, paul manafort, and cohen, on the trump side ofe

conspiracy and the kremlin side of the conspiracy, the whole thing is about trump. it always was about trump. and all that happened in may of 2017 is that they went over in their files on something that they had been covertly doing for over a year. >> tucker: you are the only one i have heard make that point, it is a really smart point, andrew mccarthy, thank you so much for that. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: a former cia officer and a whistle-blower that knows the government very well, thank you very much for coming on tonight. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: you read that story in "the new york times" on friday, tell me if it ratified or contradicted what you arty believed about how government works? >> oh, no, it ratified what i believe about government. first of all, andrew mccarthy is exactly right. this is what the fbi does. and it predates 2017 by at least a year. do not forget, tucker, that the

cia has counterintelligence center that works very, very closely with the fbi's counterintelligence division. so just imagine at the end of 2016, jim clapper and john brennan and jim comey sitting in a room saying, we don't like donald trump's position, we should open an investigation and let it leak out later that he has a russian spy. the fbi did this to henry wallace in the 1940s. they did it to martin luther king and the '60s. after george mcgovern in '72. if they do not like you, they call you a communist or a russian duke and let the propaganda and the press take over. speak to why would liberals, of all people stand by and allow that to happen? wasn't this their fever dream? that some unaccountable cabal of bureaucrats in the state would subvert democracy, why are they saying something about this? >> because they hate donald trump that much, they do not to like the man, they do not

like his policies. and they see the only way or the best way to unseat him as using what we call the deep state. >> tucker: what does this mean for future presidents? if kamala harris, pick a candidate gets elected next time or the time after that? can any president really believe that his or her bureaucracy will not try to and the presidency? >> no, that is exactly what the problem is. and what we need here is a robust congressional oversight, which we have not had in decades. it should be up to the senate and house judiciary committee is to put a stop to this kind of nonsense before it even forms its own life. they could have some other note in the crib and they did not. >> tucker: they are tearing it on. always great to see you. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: with the government shutdown continues, america's border is remaining a mass,

ms-13 gang members using a loophole to stay within this country's borders. that is next. ♪ is your house? -i know, it's not much, but it's home. right, kids? -kids? -papa, papa! -[ laughs ] -you didn't tell me your friends were coming. -oh, yeah. -this one is tiny like a child. -yeah, she is. oh, but seriously, it's good to be surrounded by what matters most -- a home and auto bundle from progressive. -oh, sweetie, please, play for us. -oh, no, i couldn't. -please. -okay. [ singing in spanish ]

-please. -okay. each day justin at work... walk. and after work. he does it all with dr. scholl's. only dr. scholl's has massaging gel insoles

that provide all-day comfort. to keep him feeling more energized. dr. scholl's. born to move. and our shirts from custom ink help bring us together. we order custom ink to welcome new employees, personalize team shirts, and even for company events. the design lab is so easy to use. we just upload out logo and if we have any questions, customer service is there to help. seeing our team together in custom ink gear is an amazing reminder of how far we've come as a business. - [narrator] custom ink has hundreds of products to help you look and feel like a team. upload your logo or start your design today at customink.com

>> tucker: a vicious ms-13 attack is being blamed on america's immigration loopholes, ramon lopez, allegedly took part in a an assault on to new york high school students, both of the alleged assailants were detained at the border in 2016, but since they were unaccompanied minors at the time, they were allowed to settle in this country while awaiting deportation, of course they were never deported, nobody

ever is. without that catch and release policy, the crime likely would not have happened. mark morgan, head of the border patrol under president obama, dismissed by president trump, you should keep in mind. and thank you, mr. morgan very much for coming on tonight. is it too much to say that this is a real-world example of what can happen if you have a dysfunctional immigration policy? >> that is absolutely right, tucker, and i think you said it right. it is about the immigration process in this country up cross the board is broke. this is a great example. if they could look this up, the flora's decision, that is what mandates united states border patrol to release minors. only a few a day, and they have to release them regardless if they have been properly vetted to, or if they have a parent in the united states, they have to be released into the united states. >> tucker: that is a judicial

ruling, a court came up with that decision, has congress ever acted on it? since clearly that is crazy, why does the united states congress not fix it? >> that is a great question, another reason of me breaking my silence, because congress could fix this in 5 minutes if they wanted to. before he was a cheapo border patrol i was with the fbi. and i supervised ms-13 gang force in southern california. we used to catch amongst a surveillance wires and they would laugh, ms-13 gang members would laugh at how easy it was to go back between the mexico and u.s. border. >> tucker: we have had a number of debates on the show with democrats who say there is something bigoted about criticizing ms-13 and somebody who has worked to apprehend ms-13, how would you respond? >> that is ridiculous, i know that this may be controversial, but when the president referred to them as animals, i absolutely said that is correct. those ms-13 members, and i can tell you, again, because i have worked and i up and there is a chief, i can tell you that i've

been to the detention facility is where i've walked up to the individuals that are so-called minor 17 and under and looked at their eyes, tucker, and i said, that is a soon to be ms-13 gang member, it is unequivocal. >> tucker: their victims are mostly immigrants themselves? >> that is another untold story that is absolutely correct. they absolutely pray on their own. >> tucker: if you cared coming you would care about that. mr. morgan, thank you very much. great to see you. >> you bet. >> tucker: california has been staying up late, thinking of new ways to make life harder for normal people, the ones who have not moved to idaho yet. we will tell you what they are doing after the break. ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. >> tucker: over the weekend and a group of republican lawmakers and their many consultants agonized over the future of the party. they are worried because republican sheriff of national elections are shrinking, why is that? they say because of the shifting demographics and the g.o.p. must win over more and no minority voters and to survive, including hispanic voters, that is probably true. how do you do it? and the geniuses you run the republican party in washington that thinks there is only one way coming anymore illegal immigration. you need to give amnesty right away to those people who are already here illegally. democrats needless to say are tearing from the sidelines, they agree with this strongly, it helps them. but isn't it factually true as a

political matter? it is worth thinking about that, a closer look at the numbers suggest that hispanic opinion on immigration is a lot more complex than they are telling you on television. at the harvard harris poll last summer found that the majority of hispanics want stricter enforcement of america's immigration laws. according to a pew survey, meanwhile, only 14% of american hispanics think our country needs more immigrants. fully a quarter believe that america has too many immigrants already. the most anti-immigration hispanics of all are those who are foreign-born, less educated, and speak mostly spanish. why is that? it is obvious, these are the very people who face the stiffest competition over wages from future waves of lower skilled immigrants. so it turns out that opening the borders is not the key to winning the hispanic vote. so what is the key? well, maybe allowing parents to raise their own children. how about that? it turns out hispanic voters are

for that passionately. one pew survey showed that 73% of hispanic and americans believe that it is better to have one parent stay home to raise children rather than having both parents work. that is well above the national average on the question of about 60%. hispanics put their belief into practice too. 38% of hispanic mothers stay at home when their kids are small. that is 9% above the national average. think about what that means in a minute in political terms. three quarters of hispanic voters believe that a parent should stay at home to raise children, but less than half can actually afford to do that. that means there are millions of hispanic parents who wish that they could be at home raising their kids, but they can't be because they can't afford it. so here is a crazy idea for the republican party and its legions of overpaid consultants, why not work to give these voters what they want most? why not run on a platform that

unites children with their parents at home? 19 unhappy social activist on twitter would not like this, but who cares? those people are miserable and pathetic. and there is no reason that they should have this level of control over our society. how about ignoring them for once? republicans ought to make a giving parents the choice to raise their own kids or parties top priority. hispanic voters would love that. voters of all colors would love that. why wanted to they love that? nothing would make this a happier country. now we had to california, once the greatest place to live in the world, and becoming tougher to live in california by the day. what is happening? trace gallagher is on the story for us. >> how about a new water tax, tucker? governor gavin newsom said what the water tax would cost caliper in your residence, but a similar proposal by jerry brown would've run residents $0.95 a month. that was demanded after failing

to get support and the legislator. he says this time around the eft is aimed at providing clean drinking water in the rural towns and cities, but the association of california water agency says that the texts unnecessary, because estate as altar meant funding solutions, and to the harvard jurists tax association called it an example of "california's knee-jerk reaction to default to a new tax whenever there is a new problem." california has artie banned plastic bags and straws, now paper receipts are on the chopping block. one democratic state lawmaker wants to make it illegal to give out a paper receipt unless the customer specifically wants one. supporters say paper receipts are coded in unhealthy chemicals. by the way, if this passes, each violation would result in a $25 fine for the businesses. >> tucker: [laughs] that will work. a trace gallagher, great to see you.

author and columnist mark steyn joins us tonight. sometimes you hear an idea that is so brilliant it is a transformative idea, like when galileo got back from stargazing and it makes sense pet i was walking on market street in san francisco, and their people passed out and all over the sidewalk. an attic occurred to me if only they would ban paper receipts all of this would be better. >> yes, i think so, as trace was saying, this paper receipts contain a chemical called bpa, h quantities can cause birth defects. and clearly that is why california last year had the lowest fertility rate and its entire history, because people were not having any births, because they are eating too many receipts. if you go to a beverly hills restaurant. and the waiter says, do you want the curly endive salad? and the lady says i will just have the receipt and a glass of

water. just bring me the receipt. i had a 40-receipt a day habit, i used to buy packs of cigarette just so that i could eat the receipt. i actually think that there is a serious point and then spread to the beneficiary would be the twitter guy who also makes these little square machines that you see, which issued the electronic receipts. and if you think about it, tucker, just as social media has meant that news and information and knowledge is dressed in the hands of four are five companies around the world now, imagine if actual money just came under the control of the same four or five people who control social media. i would rather have a paper received then the twitter guy controlling receipts. >> tucker: that is not actually a crazy thing to say, because there are as you know proposals every year to do away with paper money and to make everything paperless.

so why at a time when big tech has shown no respect for the first amendment, freedom of association, really, any right at all, they hate communist china. why would we trust them to control all of the commercial transactions? >> because i think that to the same reason there is now a generation of people who think that this is entirely normal. i mean, i don't want to go all electromagnetic post on you, but one of the problems with that is that if that ever does happen, we will be going back to the mid-19th century. but with a population that no longer knows what people knew in the mid-19th century. including that it sometimes helps to be able to have paper receipts. it sometimes helps not to deliver more and more of the daily functioning world into the same four are five companies. >> tucker: i actually had not put those together. but i should have. that is why we are always so grateful to have you on. mark steyn, a genius.

>> think you a lot, tucker. >> tucker: thank you. the latest fbi revelation, friday in "the new york times" we learned that the borough did not agree with the president's policy on russia, they accused him internally being a spy for russia. the democrats are okay with that? last one after the break. ♪ 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. 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. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. 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. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you.

♪ >> pursuing that investigation were people that have been caught that are known scoundrel scoundrels. i guess you could say they are dirty cops. >> tucker: that was the president today responding to the story on friday that the fbi charging investigating him as an spy. that happened. nobody can test that it did prayed how was the democratic

viewing this development? joining us a lawyer, good to see you tonight. >> think you for having me. >> here is the core of "the new york times" story, they watch him on the campaign trail in 2016 and i am quoting from a press conference in july 26, 2016 in florida. there is nothing i would rather do then have russia friendly as opposed to the way that they are right now, wouldn't it be nice if we actually got along with as an example, russia, i am all for it." he said that as a view of all americans, and they said he must be working for a pollutant, what is wrong with that? >> here is where you and most democrats disagree, as dick cheney said, what the russian state in the 2016 elections was an act of war, this is unprecedented, you talk in your opening monologue today about what is unprecedented about donald trump, we could spend the rest of the show, not just a segment listing all of the things that he has done siding with putin in helsinki

against our intelligence agency's. is unprecedented. >> tucker: there is no question that he has a different view in washington, the ones that have destroyed our -- and never got no prison as a result of what they have done, but as a factual matter, is there something wrong? if i was dozing on the air, i kind of like russia. or i think that they are a lot better than china, what that make my loyalty to america suspect? would that qualify me for an of fbi investigation? >> no, but if you said please deal from hillary clinton, please steal from her, that would actually, and then you actually knew the intelligence agency that the russians were stealing from her, and then using it hundreds of times, and we do not know what else he has intercepted -- >> tucker: we do not know. we do know. we do know. let me ask you this, do you think that it is within bounds

for the most powerful law enforcement agency in the world to see a politician they do not like, open investigation into whether he committed treason? discover that he did not commit treason, and then weekly existence of that investigation into the press? do you think that that is an okay way to conduct business within the executive branch? are you comfortable with that? >> the predicate is that he did not commit treason, which is aiding and abetting your enter mean come on the public record we know that he kind of house. whether that rises to the level of anybody in congress. >> tucker: you do not agree with president trump and the russia policy, i have no interest in seeing the fbi investigating an investigation into you for disagreeing with me, because i'm not a fascist. but i'm wondering if you think it is okay for law enforcement agency to investigate a politician who is disagreeing with, finding no chargeable evidence, and leak the fact that they investigated in order to discredit him, are you

comfortable with that standard? >> tucker: we do not know that they have not found chargeable evidence. >> tucker: why do they not charge him? >> let's see what mueller has to say. >> tucker: this is not mueller, he is running a separate investigation. this is independent from mueller. if they did not find anything, is it okay even if they did, should we not learn about it in the filing of charges? is it okay to discredit politicians using a enforcement agency, is that cool with you? do when say filing of charges, i think that probably prosecuting a sitting president is not something that is considered appropriate. that is what impeachment is for. so you're predicate for your assertion about misconduct by the fbi is something that i just do not -- and i think most democrats, and most of the public does not subscribe to. >> tucker: what is the standard going forward? so president harris three years from now will have views that i do not agree with, if i see the fbi investigating her for having those views and being too close to it was pakistan, or whatever,

and they do not charge her come up with a leak that they think she was a cause a quisling, that is totally fine? >> if they had their way to change the united states election and she consorted with them and her son david, and her son-in-law david, and her campaign chair was an aid to the use pakistan government, and actually change the -- and helped, yes, i think it is. >> tucker: can i ask one last question? do you think that it is immoral for me as a parent to say i do not think that my son should fight for torah material integrity for ukraine, or am i working for putin if i think that? >> bloke, tucker, people have different views as to what is the standard by their flesh and blood should be committed to the defense of the united states. >> tucker: why should i care? about whether -- i'm not saying, i am an american, why do i care? >> because if you look at the

russian press, i think that your believing that donald trump is sorry and a stooge, and they can get away with things in the ukraine. >> tucker: why do i care? i am not calling for the investigation of ukraine. oh, they are going to invade liechtenstein next. >> i think that they are -- that we know that they are meddling in brexit and the elections in france. >> tucker: now they are invading england, okay. richard, thank you so much. great to see you. we're still waiting breathlessly for the release of the mueller report, for some it is anticipated like the rapture, a religious event to that would expose and destroy the incubus that is donald trump! >> i personally think that what mueller is heading to is not only the indictment, because remember that there may be more. he is not going to -- there may be more coming down the pipe, but also a report that discloses the extent to which trump and

his family are compromised by the russians. >> tucker: compromise. how do i get to be a cnn analyst? others more cautious, that mueller could be a disappointment in the end. >> people who are closest to what mueller have been doing, they cautioned me that this report is almost certain to be anti-climatic. >> tucker: can start, an independent counsel, author of the book "content mmr, the clinton investigation" he joins us tonight. thank you for coming on. i'm not sure which i am rooting for, the anticlimactic version of the report or the report to that answers questions, but if it turns out that the report does not find the president colluding with russia, and goes and in other like magic another direction, shouldn't there be some apology for coming up the wheels of government for two years? i am serious, and destroying public -- >> i know that you are, tucker.

>> i understand, i have a different view. and that view is that mueller should bring this to a close. we have needed to know the answer about collusion for a long time. i think that he knows the answer, and i wish that we would know that pretty darn soon. because i goes to the heart of american politics. and the relationship with russi russia. but here is why i am not subscribing to the anti-mueller view, all of the republican leadership agrees, let them finish their work. bill barr, the nominee who superbly qualified is now saying, let him finish his work, and that's what i want him to do, i will say -- >> tucker: there is no group that i respect less, i'm just saying as an american, why wouldn't the interest of the country and come a brief -- come before all of this stuff? >> because bob mueller has been fighting stuff that needed to be found out, specifically the 13 russian individuals and you have

read those indictments, telling a very powerful story about alleged in the appearance, it is an indictment, but this goes to the fundamental point, that it does not have one word in the 35 pages and one indictment that suggests collusion. so there is interference in the trump administration. so leave the administration aside, their sanctions to russia and russian individuals because of the interference. i hope that the report will in fact be a report that is consistent with the department of justice practice, which is you do not bring scurrilous charges, you did not make charges against people and reports. you either charge them, that is to say that you file an indictment, or you don't. and i think that that is bob mueller's ultimate responsibility. listen, one of the many problems

as you know what the independent counsel log that i served, is that it called for them to go to the house of representatives for purposes of impeachment. let's get the justice department out of that business entirely. >> tucker: just leaking against people they do not like. >> that is terrible, in fact, let me comment on that. >> tucker: very quickly if you would. >> when i read "the new york times" article, my first reaction was we need an investigation right now as to who leak to this. we think we know. what was their motivation? and why the timing? this was many months ago. there is been no evidence to support this outrageous charge against the president. >> tucker: can start, thank you very much. >> my pleasure, tucker. >> tucker: kelsey gabbert from hawaii is running for president as a democrat, some of reform policies diverge from those in washington, trying to destroy and attain her.

interesting. we have details after the break. ♪ and need cold medicine that works fast, the choice is simple. coricidin hbp is the #1 brand that gives powerful cold symptom relief without raising your blood pressure. coricidin hbp. has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us. it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. ♪ since you're heading off to dad... i just got a zerowater. but we've always used brita. it's two stage-filter... doesn't compare to zerowater's 5-stage. this meter shows how much stuff, or dissolved solids, gets left behind.

our tap water is 220. brita? 110... seriously? but zerowater- let me guess. zero? yup, that's how i know it is the purest-tasting water. i need to find the receipt for that. oh yeah, you do.

>> ♪ >> ♪ >> tucker: it's been close to 2 months but the yellow vest protests in france are going on. it began as a protest against a gas tax. now they have a new enemy. speed cameras.

protestors destroyed 60% of the speed cameras in france. you might think global warming and speed cameras are not related but they are. in switzerland they worry about melting ice caps. speed cameras actually increase accidents by making people slow down aproppedly. the goal of cameras is not to help you but to take your money. this is government hurting you on purpose for its own gain. our leaders and media don't care. they don't drive their own cars. now the yellow vests of france are angry because the government stopped treated the will being regular people as a top

priority. instead of spending time screaming at people in restaurant, knock over a speed camera or two. you might be helping somebody. they don't fight the system. they will fight to preserve it. back in america. democratic congresswoman kelsey gabbert announced she was running for president and she was has been savaged as the left. she was a veteran of the iraq war. she was accused of bigotry for opposing gay marriage in 2004 when barack obama and hillary clinton and every other democrat opposed gay marriage. what is this really about? this is not a defense of kelsey gabbert or endorsing all of her views. i am watching this and thinking when did kelsey gabbert get to be the enemy of everyone.

what is going on here? >> i am not a supporter of congressman gabbert's candidacy. there are some real concerns raised about the real left about the support of the war on terror but what is going on is 2fold. in 2016, she resigned from the democratic national committee because she accused debbie wasserman schultz of cheating on behalf of hillary clinton and supporting bernie sanders. democrats hate her for that. they hate her because she is questioning washington orthodoxy that both political parties support including why we continue to try to change the regimes of countries far away like syria and prop up regimes that make the world hate us like we do in saudi arabia? for better or worse, she dev

ica deviates from the washington consensus and it's difficult to put her in a left wing or right wing box and that's what washington hates the most. >> tucker: there is something dishonest about the way they attack her. if you don't like her foreign policy views, just say so. they just attack anybody who deviates from their own dumb ideas. you have noticed this? >> there is one particular smear that is persuasive that is central to sustaining the united states as a country at endless war. if you don't support a particular war that washington wants to remove a particular leader you are accused of being a supporter of that dictator. in 2003 people against the iraq war were accused on this network

and others as well of loving saddam hussein. people who opposed the intervention in libya in 2011 were accused for being apolling onnists and kelsey gabbert is asking why we are spending a billion dollars a year arming rebels we don't know and trying to remove the leader of a foreign country and engageing in policies that are worsening the security of the united states. you can criticize her, but to accuse her to be a best friend of al-sa di is idiotic. >> tucker: it's the kind of argument that ends the argument. thank you.

that's it for us. we will be back. tomorrow night 8 p.m. the show that is the sworn enemy of of lying, pomposity, smugness and group think. we hope you will join us then. have a great evening. guess who is next? we will turn to him 9 seconds early sean hannity. >> sean: people say how many seconds extra did tucker steal from your show. greenwald is an interesting guy. i like that. the whole debate about what is described as media. we know the networks and the newsroom and cable chance are fake news and have agendas. there are people that are non-political. welcome to "hannity." time for a bombshell "hannity" watch on the deep state. this takes a lot of explaining. we will make it understandable and break it down for you. it's the abuse of power and corruption. we have been telling