hate trump media. the most corrupt in the media outlet and tell us why. and your answers right here on this program.kikikikikikikikiki. ♪ >> tucker: this is a fox news alert. just moments ago the office of the special counsel, robert mueller, denied a report that ran last night in buzzfeed. that story said that president trump had ordered michael cohen to lie to congress. the story set off a full day of speculation in washington for members of congress and the media that impeachment and indictment might be imminent. now, to repeat, the special counsel is denying the substance of that story. welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." this is moving very fast. a remarkable day. trace gallagher has more on what is happening. trace? >> and this really is the bombshell, tucker. breaking right now as you

said robert mueller's special counsel, a spokesperson, has knocked down this buzzfeed report quoting now buzzfeed's description of specific statement to the special counsel's office and characterization of documentation and testimony obtained by this office, regarding michael cohen's congressional testimony are not accurate. that is critical because, remember, the buzzfeed report laid this at the door of the special counsel saying, quoting again, the special counsel's office learned about trump's direct tia for cohen to lie to congress through interviews with multiple witnesses from the trump organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a kach of other documents. one of the reporters who wrote the piece admitted he never saw the alleged damning documents but he still maintained that his reporting was rock solid. listen to him. >> . i am rock solid. my sourcing on this goes beyond the two that are on the record. it's 100 percent patent.

>> 100 percent except president trump says it's 100 percent didn't happen tweeting, quote: lying to reduce jail time, clearly referencing michael cohen's three year prison sentence. white house deputy press secretary hogan gidley added this comment. watch. >> this is absolutely ludicrous that we are giving any type of credence or credibility to a news outlet like buzzfeed. >> and he is right. buzzfeed does have credibility issues, including multiple accusations of plagiarizing and stealing original content. a pew research survey also found the publication to be unreliable and, of course, buzzfeed published the uncorroborated and i salacious steele dossier which was labeled an unverified smear of president trump. even democrats eager to impeach the president had to qualify their comments today saying if the information is true. watch. >> know whether the new

report about cohen being told a lie by the president is true or not, we'll have to ask mr. cohen that. >> yeah, cohen is supposed to go back before congress next month but his legal advisor lanny davis says he might be having second thoughts about that. remember, 24 hours after buzzfeed broke this story, nobody matched the reporting. and now we know it's because it wasn't true. tucker. >> tucker: just unbelievable. just unbelievable. if you have been by a television today you have seen a level of frothy hysteria that really i have never seen in 25 years of watching. trace gallagher, thank you very much. andy mccarthy is a contributing editor at national review. he is the former chief assistant u.s. attorney in new york, and he joins us tonight. andy mccarthy, this is not -- i think most of us were at least taking seriously the possibility that this story was rooted

in fact. now the special counsel's office, which has commented on virtually nothing for the past two years is knocking it down. what is your reaction to this? >> well, i think the most important thing, tucker, is the power grasp grab of the buzzfeed story is the one trace gallagher honed in on. and the reason that's important is because what the trump response to this, if there were any credibility to it would want to be is that you can't believe anything that cohen says because is he a pervasive serial liar. but the way this story was teed up, it was that mueller had developed independent information. >> tucker: right. >> and corroborated it, pieced it together himself and then he confronted cohen on it. not. it's not a thing where cohen is peddling this information. if i were the white house, that would have been the part that would have alarmed me the most. and that's the part that it

appears that mueller has blown up. i think the big hesitation that those of us who watch this sort of thing and did this sort of work prosecutor work for a living also couldn't get our brains wrapped around is that when when -- what a prosecutor would normally do if he thought there was a conspiracy between trump and cohen to lie to congress, is you would have cohen plead guilty to conspiracy to obstruct a congressional investigation and then have him in court when the judge asks what did you do that makes you guilty say i was involved in this conspiracy with the president. he told me to lie to congress and i went on ahead and did it. >> tucker: exactly. >> you didn't see anything like that in the charges against cohen. >> tucker: so where could this story have come from, do you think? by my reading of it, and it was parts of it were unclear by design, but it left the impression that this was an

allegation directly from the office of the special counsel. where do you think this information came from? >> yeah. the word that stuck out to me, tucker, when i read this was the word an oddly enough. they say at the beginning of the story that are the two sources are connected to an investigation of cohen, which made it allusive whether they were talking about the investigation of cohen, meaning the special counsel's investigation. so you don't know, coming away from this are these a couple of guys who, you know, are in the loop enough to get briefed on law enforcement investigations but are not in the core of mueller's team? it's very hard to make a judgment about that. but, i can only tell you from, you know, i was fortunate enough as a prosecutor to work on a couple of cases that were pretty high profile cases. and if you asked the number of people who now would say

to you that they worked on those cases and were of a case agent on the case, there is probably more people that would say it than were, you know, than saw bobby thompson' home run. there is an awful lot of people. they have lots of information. >> tucker: right. it's like there were 50 million people who claimed to have been at woodstock. why would the special counsel's office weigh in on this tonight in the way that it did? >> i'm really pleased that they did. i think that probably this is the sort of thing that could really compromise the president's ability to govern. i think a lot of us who have been troubled by this investigation from the beginning think that there has been too much deference to investigative secrecy and not enough acknowledgment that when you have a special counsel investigation, it really makes it very difficult for the president to govern the country, which is a much more important thing than investigative

secrecy. i think here, perhaps mueller saw that this was really harming the president and was just flat wrong, so he felt compelled to say something. >> tucker: what do you think of the reaction by members of congress today to this story? >> well, you know, it's so political now. you know, each side, the democrats in particular, who have just been, you know, deranged about trump from the start, anything that seems like it's blood in the water, they just go berserk over. i can't be surprised by anything anymore. >> tucker: amazing. it's an amazing moment. still trying to shift gears here. andy mccarthy, thank you very much for your insight into that. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: dan bongino a former secret service agent the author of-spy gate, the attempt to sabotage donald j. trump and he joins us tonight. dan, i think this shouldn't be as surprising as we are

saying it is. one of the reporters who by line on this story seems like a real reporter to me. he is a real reporter and seems like a decent one. the other guy, whose name is on the story, jason leopold is a political activist with a long history of making reckless and unfounded charges. he is the guy who reported in 2006, i believe, that karl rove had been indicted and that turned out to be false. he is not a journalist. again, he is a political activist. so, what does this tell us about the credibility of buzzfeed or any publication that would employ a guy like this to cover a story this central? >> yeah, tucker. there is also some other allegations out there about leopold, about plagiarism, this is real black eye for the media today. now, as you know, tucker, buzzfeed has been involved in a significant fake news campaign before as well where they were the first runs to run with the

dossier, which really was the initiation and the flash point for this whole investigation. tucker, this isn't really a good day. you know, listen, i'm a supporter of the president. i don't think that's a big secret. but, we do need a free and fair press or some semblance of it, tucker. and even though i do my best to call out instances of militias malfeasance and misfeefns in reporting. this story today is a significant black eye for the media outlets all over the country. you know what? it shows that donald trump is correct when he says that a lot of times these people are at a minimum the enemies of truth. i think that's a pretty accurate statement at this point. this story was devastating. i mean, you saw it, people were frothing at the mouth all day over this. there were calls for impeachment there was a guy on another network making nixon like allegations over his twitter account to hundreds of thousands of people. this does the country absolutely no -- this was really a disgrace. >> tucker: it was revealing.

the story was tough. let me be completely honest about it. if that story had been accurate, i think it would have been very hard for the administration to survive it i mean, the story, again, alleged that the president had directed his personal attorney to lie to the congress of the united states under oath to commit perjury. so that's not -- that's a crime. that's a felony. so it was a very, very serious story. but the reaction from the press, it turned out to be a false story and always a story that was not corroborated. there were no names in it. the reaction from the press all day long was finally. it was like christmas. we got him. we have been working for two years to get him and we finally got him. i wonder if that's the role of the press. that seems like the role of political consultants to me to get a politician. >> well, tucker, i'm not in any way trying to be self-laud tore and pat myself on the back there were red flags as a former federal agent all over this story earlier in the day. let me point out, too. why would donald trump lie and initiate a crime, which

you are correct instructing michael cohen to lie if that happened, which now looks like it obviously didn't, is a crime. why we instruct him to lie about a noncrime, a building project in moscow, tucker, is not illegal. there is nothing illegal about it part of the story made no sense. secondly, think about, this tucker. you were in journalism before. you know, you have the scoop of the century right here, right? and you give it to buzzfeed and to a reporter at buzzfeed with a checkered path? what does this say now think this through in the audience. this was probably some kind of a canary trap. it was probably someone feeding false information to sniff out some leakers on the inside of the government and the only people eager enough to pick up this ridiculous story was this discredited guy at buzzfeed with a history of militias action i --malicious action in e journalism field. i could be wrong. it could just be a bad source. this says to me it was probably a canary trap. this guy got suckered into the whole thing. there were red flags all

over the story if you were paying attention. >> tucker: rufnt reasons the country is so volatile right now nobody trusts people in authority. some of our institutions have been discredited and part of the reason they are discredited is nobody is held accountable for screwing up. you have the support of tens of hundreds of millions of business. buzzfeed has a huge market cap, okay? and they are the ones who printed the dossier without verifying any of it. it turned out to be false it turned out to be a political document. and then they run this story and you sort of wonder at a certain point buzzfeed has only been around for a few years and they have run two of the biggest what appear to be hoaxes of this moment. is there any accountability? at all? >> i don't think so. the only accountability is that the public -- tucker, journalists have one job, just one. to get the facts right. when you don't get the facts right and the public overwhelmingly upwards of 80% to 90% of conservatives

don't trust you, you know, that kind of says like you suck, pardon my language. it's like if your job is to sell cars and you don't sell a car you are fired. the media's one job is to get the facts right. when 90% of people in the political party say you are not telling the truth, that's the ultimate barometer temperature of your #epic failure. tucker, this isn't even it. they failed on the nike flynn story the deutsch bank story, the wikileaks don jr. story. mcclatchey on the prague dossier of cohen's story. the drapes nikki haley story in the "new york times." it is just endless. and the public trust in the media is gone. this is not a good day for the country. >> tucker: that's what it is. you know, the root of it is understandable recognizable to anybody who has ever supervised reporters. i have supervised a lot of reporters. i always told them i have got pretty strong political views but i always say to the reporters if you're too angry, if you hate the person you write, about orme if you love the person you write about, you shouldn't

be writing about that pinner because you can't see things clearly and you are very likely to make mistakes because you are blinded by your own emotion. if you are the editor assigning this piece at buzzfeed and you are assigning it to a guy who a political activist transparently and with a history of getting things wrong and making things up and plagiarizing, that's crazy behavior. that's reckless behavior. why would you do that? >> and, tucker, even worse is these stories that are mistakes that are not properly he had kitted or not properly supervised or not proper live fact-check are so traps apparently obvious there was a missing. you had one of the reporters admit he hasn't seen the evidence. i mean, this is journalism? and the stories, tucker, are never ever misdanny takes winner-take-all dreaded air quote are never mistakes that are pro-trump. that's got to say that something is wrong. and believe me, i don't want pro-trump mistakes. i want fair confirm. i'm simply suggesting when a litany of stories of trump

two years in office right now which are bombshells, are continuously debunked, in just an incredible fashion, embarrassing the media and they are anti--trump, you have got to believe there is something wrong in "america's newsroom." but they just have no ability to self-reflect. >> tucker: so true. >> it's like the truman show, tucker. they are jim carrey from the truman show now. >> tucker: this guy who was a newspaper reporter won a pulitzer prize seems like a straight air crow guy he gets the double buy line with this nutty leopold character who everyone knows is not a reliable narrator to put it mildly. i can't imagine why he accepted writing a story with this other guy. very turned out to be a big mistake. i guess. dan, thank you very much. good to see you. >> thanks a lot, tucker. good seeing you. >> tucker: tonight's news completely upends what we thought we were going to talk about tonight and virtually that everyone in washington has believed for the last 24 hours. it's especially surprising

because the mueller team has been so very hesitant to comment on anything in public. anything about the investigation or reporting about the investigation. fox chief national correspondent ed henry has been following all of this closely for more than a year now. he has perspective for us. >> tucker, you are absolutely right. robert mueller has been accused by conservatives of leaking and being out to get the president. have you heard the witch-hunt claim and allies, some of them democrats have said for a long time he doesn't comment. he doesn't weigh in. he is trying to be fair. and so for him to insert himself is extremely rare and tells you this story is 100 percent not true. why is that a big deal? well, because we had commentator after commentator come out today on other networks. and there should be a accountability as you suggested at the top. and as a reporter, i'm getting kind of angry about this because as journalists you said you have instructed a lot of reporters over the years, and you have. and you know another thing

we instruct reporters and colleagues and we talk about numerous is yonewsrooms, if trua big deal. how many times have you heard it today tucker. over and over again. if true, this is a big deal. if true, it could lead to impeachment. well, if true that ed henry robbed a bank, he is in serious trouble. i didn't rob a bank. you don't have any evidence of it and i think the most important part of the robert mueller statement is not the first line, but the second line where he talks about the idea that there is evidence collected by the special counsel's office is not true. that's significant because what every critic of the president was hanging this story on today was that it's not michael cohen, a admitted liar his word against the president it's emails text messages and other things in the trump world. now robert mueller is saying i don't have those text messages, those documents. again, we have to be careful. we he have to see. we can't overcorrect the story as well. bob mueller's investigation is still ongoing. we will see what he has.

>> tucker: i agree. >> let's not say the president is in the clear tonight. let's not impeach him as a whole bunch of people did over the last 24 hours. my final point on this is axios, which is, again, supposed to be a very credible organization. they have a lot of credible people there i was just reading as i was listening to you and dan bongino, they had this all outtake a few hours ago go how what's really, really bad for the president is that donald trump jr. has exposure. when you look at the story, and i'm looking down because i don't even read you the whole quote. the buzzfeed story said that done jr. and ivanka and other family members had exposure. well, if the core part of the story about their being evidence that the president directed michael cohen to lie is bogus, the stuff about don jr. and ivanka must be bogus as well. so, why do we have so many people in the media who seem to be part of some sort of a lynch mob. let's indictment donald trump jr. let's say -- let's bring all these people down? how about we wait for the facts and take a deep breath and follow the facts on the

story which is what we are supposed to do as journalists. >> tucker: first thing i did this morning, first thing when i woke up was called around. i woke up early, too. i called a bunch of people i know and said this story looks really bad and if it were written about me i would be very concerned. i got back word that they didn't seem concerned. i didn't talk to nibble at the white house but i talked to people who did and they said they don't seem worried at all. either they are lying. [laughter] or they really -- they know something that i don't know or that's not reflected in the story. what's the effect since you have been in journalism so long, both of us worked at another network 20 years ago, have you seen our business change. when trump exits the stage at some point and all of this is over, what's left of our business journalism? >> the honest answer is as i simply don't know. i mean, i think, to be fair, we should push back when the president shouts fake news and says fake news is the enemy of the american people. i know some people. >> tucker: he is right.

>> as a journalist i will be honest with you i will give you a blunt direct answer i don't think that's helpful. on the other hand, the critics of the president should wake up. the fact of the matter is when you keep producing fake news and it's not just buzzfeed and the story. my point is cnn and everyone else, when you wake up this morning the president is about to be impeached if true, of course, they had that little caveat. that's just as bad as the original story. you are supposed to have credibility. i just simply think that people hanging it on this if true business, the more fake news you create, the more fodder you are giving that man there, the commander-in-chief to say, you know what you? are fake news. like i said, i'm trying to be fair and honest, fair and balanced as we say here and say that when the president says that, sometimes that's not fair. sometimes it is folks. because there are a whole bunch of people who are creating fake news. the more you do it, the more the president is going to say it and you know what? the less credibility as you secretary of defense many in the mainstream media are

going to have. >> tucker: so you often here people in washington say and no one has more contempt for the pluck than people live in the city. you often hear them say the morons out there in the great middle of the country believe these conspiracy theories and flakey websites for these news. i often say to my stfl why do you think they are doing that and turning into alternative news channels because you are running stories like this. why would they believe you? >> i was having lunch with a democrat that you know today and i was pressing on this point. i said well, what if this buzzfeed story is not true snnd at person said something to the effect well, but russia, you know, russia though, they impacted the election. and i said why is it always this fall back it becomes if you are not winning the argue; you are not sure if the story is true it's this fall back on russia, russia, russia. we talked about it many times. it seems to be a convenient excuse for democrats about why they lost the last election. folks, it's more than two years ago. we are now in the middle of a government shutdown.

the president is talking about crisis at the border. i was filling in with martha tonight. we led not with this story because it broke halfway through the show. an american record, as you know, tucker, has now been set. the most number of central americans, or anyone from any background to break into america successfully, more than 300 central american migrants and, yet, we have a large number of people in the media and large number of people in the democratic party saying it's a manufactured crisis. that's fake. it's not manufactured. it is a crisis. i'm not defending the president. but, you know what? he is right that there is a problem at this border. look at the photos. don't listen to me. don't listen to the president. look at what is actually happening. and, yet, every time you talk about something, well, russia russia, something happened. they threw the election. and yet another story about that is not true. so credibility is suffering. >> tucker: really quick, ed, has buzzfeed responded to the statement to the special counsel's office? where do they go from here? >> while i was on the air any put out to be fair to them they put out a tweet that said the special

counsel is now denying our report from last night. so, and then they posted what that statement is. so, in fairness to them, they are, at least to me, in the early stages, look like they are being transparent about the fact that there is a dispute. but, i'm not going to give them thatch credit. yes, they are being transparent now. they should have been more transparent last night about the sourcing and also to get back to our conversation about newsrooms. how do you publish the story? i mean, i know that the story i'm refreshing my memory from last night 10:00 p.m. eastern. it said something about the special counsel not denying it maybe the special counsel didn't know they were going with the story. i don't know all the particulars. but you have got to get the facts before you publish it it's fine to be transparent now but they could not go with the story until think had it nailed down. by the way on cnn this morning one of the two reporters saying this is 100 percent true. look at cnn new day's twitter account still have the tweet up there with a long segment quoting the reporter from buzzfeed saying this story is 100 percent true and by

extension they were suggesting this is really bad for donald trump. well, you know what? >> tucker: i was stunned. i listened to it stuck, involuntarily stuck in an airport this morning. why do they still play that crap at airports. >> don't they pay? >> tucker: yes. >> i have seen that on tucker. >> tucker: thank you. appreciate it this turned out to be understatement of the evening be huge issue of buzzfeed's source. i'm getting word as of this hour buzzfeed is saying we stand by our reporting. even though the apparent source of the reporting, the person would know is now denying it guy benson has been watching all. this political editor at town hall.com and of course co-host of benson and harf. what do you make of this. >> huge issue for buzzfeed tonight. i'm a little bit taken aback at this development that you just reported that they were standing by their reporting because, if that's what they are doing, they are

contradicting robert mueller and the special counsel's team. are they calling them liars? because they put out a statement very clearly, they know the cards that they hold. they are the special counsel's office. >> tucker: right. >> they know what they do and do not know. for them to say the way the story was reported is not accurate should be case closed. i would imagine, i guess buzzfeed probably in a bit of chaos here tonight. one more piece of this ronan farrow an investigative reporter at the new yorker he tweeted something very interesting. he said i can't speak to buzzfeed's sourcing. but, for what it's worth, i decline to run with parts of the narrative they, meaning buzzfeed conveyed based on a source central to the story repeatedly disputing the idea that trump directly issued orders of that kind. of that kind meaning to lie under oath to michael cohen. so there's ronan farrow who is saying i got wind of this and some of my best sources were telling me no, trump did not do this. buzzfeed went with it.

and here's my question, tucker, because i was listening to your conversation a moment ago with ed henry very carefully. i would like to know at this point who were these two sources that are quoted by buzzfeed? if they have been given false information and now they have got egg and mud and everything else ought over their face, it would seem, i think it's now time journalistically to burn the sources. tell you was who these unidentified law enforcement sources were. >> tucker: exactly. >> who gave you the information that was so apparently inaccurate that robert mueller and his team took the stunning step of coming out on a friday night and putting out a denial of the story. if you're going to stand by the sources, i'm a bit mystified by that i think we now, as the american people, have a right to know who are these people and what did they tell you and why? >> tucker: of course. this is an ongoing theme and you sigh pretty frequently in the media which demands as i think we should

transparency from people in power. show us your tax returns. who did you speak to? where were you on the night of july 29th. whatever. >> sure. >> tucker: when caught making mistakes dlirktly or accidentally refuse to account for them. ntsb leaknbc leaks its own tape with billy bush its own reporter and won't comment on what it did. in the case of buzzfeed, doesn't that publication have a moral obligation, ben smith its editor have a moral obligation to tell us where did you get this? you mislead us, you lied. you made a mistake. how did this happen? >> right. so that's the point. if you want to believe that the problem here is the sources. and if the sources aren't good, that obviously reflects on the outlet that ran with those sources without attribution. if the core argument that buzzfeed is going to make is he would were told false things and ran with it and looks bad for us. you would think they would want to hang those sources out to dry.

>> tucker: exactly. >> if you were that wrong they should come out and tell us they have given up anonymity. the quid pro quo here of not listing their names and acorinthing their nameattributis gone what happened here and the mueller statement they put out. as of now it would seem they are quasidoubling down here and they said stay tuned. believe me, we will. >> tucker: i wish they would stop calling themselves journalists. run your little cat pictorials and stupid little -- whatever you are thinking in brooklyn stop calling yourselves journalists and stop playing in a world you don't understand which is what they're doing. guy benson, it's infuriating. it makes -- it really does devalue the currency that the rest of us trade in, i would say. great to see you. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: the press spent the entire day as you watched reporting on buzzfeed's dishonest report. impeachment, indictment, maybe a waves of indictment. maybe everybody goes to jail. looks like not at least for enough to. ethan is a progressive radio

host in california and frequent guest of the show. he joins us tonight. i mean, ethan, could this be -- let me rephrase the question and make it a statement. this is an example of people believing what they wanted to believe. >> well, i think there was some of that however, i want to say something right up front. it's an interesting and odd day when i agree as much with dan bongino as maybe even more so than guy benson right now. because, dan is right. we have to have some trust and faith in journalists. and there is a problem right now where journalists want to be opinion host. and they blur the line because it's exciting sharing your opinion. you and i love sharing our opinion. >> yes, we do. >> >> it's important to base it on facts and have faith. it's important to parse the words of the attorney here, the special counsel, he didn't say false, 234069

accurate actually in a legal contest is very different from fall. we don't know and in slight deference to buzzfeed at this point because i'm deeply disappointed in this news coming out but some slight deference to buzzfeed which is hey, let's figure out what isn't accurate before we throw all of it out. maybe there were pieces that were right. >> tucker: right. >> what pieces weren't. i think it's important to understand what is wrong about it? >> tucker: look. you make a fair point. there's a lot we don't know and i am not going to get over my skis and speculating about what did or did not happen. >> i don't think russia is the primary threat we face going forward. that's obvious. specifics in this case are unknown to me. you are right we are going to find out a lot of stuff we don't know. but to have someone who would know, the special counsel take this extraordinary step of refuting at least to some degree the story tells you must have been pretty wrong. why else would he do this because is he covering for trump? probably not, right?

>> yeah. i mean, this is absolutely astounding as i was coming in and seeing this news come across, i might -- my jaw might have been dropping open because mueller doesn't talk. his team doesn't talk. >> tucker: exactly. >> for him to come out and talk right now it's a huge deal. >> tucker: i'm sorry, i am being told we are out of time. we blew a break we are going into a hard break. ethan bearman it's always great to see you. >> thanks. >> tucker: we'll be back after this ♪ ♪

>> tucker: welcome pack. kind of an amazing night. washington for the last 24 hours discussing impeachment, indictment, multiple indictments, all of the speculation flowing from a story that broke last night on buzzfeed, a website famous for its cab videos wading into the political realm with a piece claiming that donald trump ordered his personal lawyer, michael cohen to lie under oath to congress. that, of course, would be a felony. that would be on destruction of justice, that would be grounds for, in fact, impeachment. tonight, right before we went on the air, in a move that has really no precedent at all, robert mueller's office, which never comments on anything, issued a statement unbidden saying in effect the buzzfeed story is wrong. now, we have a response from buzzfeed. this is from the editor ben

smith who has been a guest on this show. the person who put the now famous discredited dossier into circulation he says this in response to the statement tonight from the special counsel coaxman we and it by our reporting and the sources who informed it and we urge the special counsel to make clear what he's disputing. in other words, ben smith is saying let robert mueller correct our story. does, perhaps, the onus lie with ben smith and buzzfeed to make certain that what they reported last night is accurate? it sounds like it is not accurate. we'll find out whether their stories were telling the truth in the coming days. in the meantime terry turchie deputy assistant director of the counter-terrorism division of the fbi and he joins us tonight. terry, we originally asked you to come on tonight to talk about border security. but, before we do i want to ask you your response to this back and forth between buzzfeed and special counsel's office. what's your take. >> sure, tucker, well, i'm on the skeptic because of income law enforcement. i think it's kind of pretty

simple. when you take the election and you take the house and you now convert all the committees that you have to investigating various aspects of the president of the united states, then your lifeblood has to be to react to story. you are going to see more stories plant sod that all these committeest can have a lot of work to do. i think this is just more of the same. and i think we can expect more of this because quite honestly, the electorate in some places is putting more and more progressives and self-described socialists in positions. and ironically, years ago when i first got into the fbi, one of the missions of the fbi in its counterintelligence efforts was to try to keep these people out of government. why? because we would end up with massive dysfunction and massive disinformation and mast massive misinformation. that's where we are at today. i'm glad i don't live in d.c. i don't know how you start to separate this and make head or tails from it but it's a mess. >> tucker: i mean, look, if

you believe in socialism. if you have got some program you want to impose on the country. tell us what it sand explain how you think it works and make the case for it these people are so stupid and so emotional, so overwrought that they think that the key to run the country is an endless series of gotcha stories criminalizing political disagreement. i mean, it's the least straightforward way to run a government, i would say. let me just ask you about the original topic that would he wanted to talk to you about tonight. that's border security. you heard the new speaker of the house say the other day that she, in place of a physical wall, would like some sort of high tech nonphysical quasimagical wall a digital wall on the border? and that that would be more effective somehow than an actual wall. do you think that's true? and why do you think she is saying that? >> well, first of all, i don't think that's true but i think it's pretty easy why she is saying that in fact, i will say this. if donald trump called nancy

pelosi tonight and said look why don't you give me $5 billion for a technological wall along our border, she would say no, you know, we could probably start talking about that and the reason is simple. the democratic party is simply owned by the techno democrats in silicon valley. i worked in pal and had many kinds of contacts with silicon valley and you could see this developing them. the silicon valley depends upon cheap labor. they love the b 1 visa program. national lab. this is a national entity. they like to be the visa program. they were making no bones about it in meetings we h look, we can get people cheaper than having to bring in young american kids who he would don't think are as good as scientists that's bologna, i think. they own the democrats and the democrats in turn have to do things for them. i mean, take a look at just every symptom and every indicator whether it's elon musk and the fact that he is a billionaire because of all

of these government contracts and all of these ideas, the government funds or solyndra or the fact that president obama and hillary clinton and dianne feinstein and all of those people they have a march out to silicon valley dinners and 1,000 a plate lunches and all of these other things. they have to deliver and return. the silicon valley for the democrats is the new union. people scratch their head and wonder what have the democrats done? why have they abandoned some of the midwestern states and the people they used to represent? because they have no money anymore. the silicon valley has the money and quite honestly now they are pumping this ideology in. so people that they're helping get elected. it's very, very dangerous. because the silicon valley topic is completely wrapped around the axle of intelligence services from the chinese to the russians, even to our friends, some of the friendly nations. the french said it best one time. a number of years ago this said look, sure we are friends with the united states, but we have our own interest. and we will rely on dealing with our interest and make

sure that we take care of those before our friendship. and that's pretty much how all of these places look at it. >> tucker: i have never heard anybody say what you just said. pushing a digital solution to everything is in effect a payoff to campaign contributors. enough to that you say it out loud it's so clearly true that i hope you keep saying it. >> i want to remember something. when you put all this technology and the government loves to buy it one or two years later it needs to be replaced with the latest, best upgrades. it's a constant billion-dollar enterprise. >> tucker: we have been scammed for 20 years by big tech and it's just dawning on us. it's unbelievable. terry turchie, you are the cutting edge of that. for sure you figured that out first. thank you very much. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: we'll be right back. ♪ ♪ i am a family man.

i am a techie dad. i believe the best technology should feel effortless. like magic. at comcast, it's my job to develop, apps and tools that simplify your experience. my name is mike, i'm in product development at comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome.

♪ >> tucker: really kind of an unbelievable night in the news business. a report last night from buzzfeed news and let'sed a air quote around the word news accused the president of the united states of ordering his personal lawyer former lawyer michael cohen to lie to congress. he encouraged perjury. that would be a felony and impeachable offense. all day long have you heard people on television speculating about this. prefaced with if true. but now, after we have spent literally 24 hours imagining the president being dragged and changed to in chains to hea. robert mueller's office out of nowhere issued a denial of the buzzfeed story. buzzfeed meanwhile has issued a statement just about 20 minutes ago daring the special counsel in effect to fact check their

own story. insanity. chris, a radio host, former aid to chuck schumer, he joins us tonight. so, chris, i wonder, i mean, my primary interest in someone who has spent his life in the media. my jaw is almost open full time watching it. i wonder if the people who woo step forward and say you know what? we shouldn't throw allegations around prefaced with the phrase if true. if it isn't true we shouldn't be alleging it. is that fair? >> that is fair, frankly. i think that media outlets, when they get a story like this sensational story like, this they should try to confirm it before they run with it on their own using their own reporters and their own editorial standards. i don't know the editorial standards are at buzzfeed and, frankly, the special counsel doesn't ever talk to choose this moment to talk suggest that that story is completely untrue. i have heard some people parsing words saying that it's inaccurate, whatnot. but, we haven't heard from mueller. but this should also, you

know, this should also ease concerns about anybody in america who think that robert mueller is not going to be fair to the president. this shows he is a man of honor and if he sees something that is way out of line, is he going to call it out. so, you know, kudos to robert mueller for stepping in because this really was a sensational story and all the if trues were, you know, if it was true, this would have been one of the most horrible things we have heard so far and absolutely led to impeachment hearings at the very least. robert mueller did the right thing. he stepped. in i think the news media needs to take some ownership of the mistake that was made here, particularly buzzfeed. and i think all the media outlets that ran with this really shouldn't future do their best to confirm these stories it on their own. you know, before they go and spend 24 hours talking about it. and you would think, you know, i was digging around 3:00 this afternoon when no one else had confirmed this story where are we at with this? this is buzzfeed. i don't really know their standards. i know ben smith. i think he has been a decent

reporter most of his career. i don't know what kind of editorial background check they are doing on these sources. >> tucker: right. just, just, just to confirm for the record, i mean, ben smith is a joke i think anyone who knows ben smith will confirm that is he a smart but obviously dishonest reckless person. he ran and anyone who knows him will confirm that this is the same outlet that deviated from the cat slide shows long enough to run this steele dossier which the same news youthlets youth os absorbed as if it was true. donald trump was paying hookers to urinate on him. do you remember all of this? this is not new ground. we have plowed this ground already like lunatic cat slide show website runs unconfirmed salacious router that turns out to be false and cnn pretends that it's real. >> i think they have a obligation right now if their sources did burn them and if as bank said this is

some sort of canary trap they should reveal those sources and call those sources out and say, look, these guys lied to us according to the what the special counsel has said tonight. they should make a deal about this. i think this is. >> tucker: that's fair but that's a totally fair point. >> the silver lining in this story though tonight is that this shoul should reaffirm peope on the flight mueller is going to be fair. i hope that is actually the message they are taking away from it tonight. i think america -- >> tucker: i don't think. [laughter] this is so funny. >> when we finally read the report we should all understand it. >> tucker: okay. i don't think you have to be a man of extraordinary integrity toy find buzzfeed ludicrous. i think small children find -- buzzfeed is prima facie ludicrous. it's an absurd website and so it doesn't mean that you are a man of amazing honor and you call out buzzfeed for being as ridiculous as it is. >> the president's attorney

general nominee said that mueller was a man of honor and a friend of his. but i don't think most americans heard that. but, tonight, they heard him loud and clear when he pulled back this statement. so that's twice in one week that the right should be reassured in him. >> tucker: really quick, amy klobuchar of minnesota at the barr hearings the other day said something almost -- almost seemed like she had read the buzzfeed story before it ran. she said what obstruction of justice, perjury be impeachable offense she asked barr that almost like a predicate setting up the story. do you think she read the buzzfeed story before it came out? i'm guesting? >> no. there has been lots of claims of obstruction of justice of the comey firing, other things that could be disputed. >> tucker: maybe. >> obstruction of justice. that's been thrown around for the last year and a half. >> tucker: you are right. you are right. it did seem. >> probably. >> tucker: probably it did seem a little too perfect. we will find out, i hope.

>> i think we will. i think we will get that report sooner rather than later. i think americans should read it and take it in and understand it before they judge it. >> tucker: chris hahn, thank you very much. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: amazing night. assisted suicide is growing in popularity in america. who benefits, exactly, from treating the old and the sick as expendable? could it be insurance companies trying to save money? maybe it's not a civil rights issue. maybe it's a way to save a buck. stay with us. ♪ ♪ . .

>> tucker: one of the clearest measures of any society is how it treats its weakest members, the poor, the sick and the dying. it says something about us then that assisted suicide is rising in popularity in america. seven states plus the district of columbia. sick patients are now allowed to kill themselves with the help of a physician. this is called compassion but it's easy to see what is

actually going on. killing sick people is now just as valid as treating them. one of the most vulnerable have become our most disposable. a lot of people who back thidecent.do you think an insure company would rather pay for years of cancer patient or suicide pill. part of what is going on here. patient rights action fund and joins us tonight. kristin, thanks very much for coming on. >> thank you. >> tucker: you have seen this firsthand, tell us what you think the rise in assisted suicide is really about. >> my husband j.j. hanson was dlged with terminal brain cancer in 2014. he dedicated the last three years of his life to fighting legalization of assisted suicide we saw that it puts those most vulnerable at risk losing their lives to mistakes

abuse. >> tucker: the financial incentives to kill people rather than treat them are so overwhelming that why wouldn't we slide very quickly down that slippery slope. be these perverse incentives for insurance companies to deny patients the care they need and offer assisted suicide instead. being his caregiver i was constantly going to battle health insurance companies to get them the treatments j.j. needed we had good health insurance and assisted suicide wasn't legal in our home state of new york. and what we're seeing in states that have legalized assisted suicide is that that's exactly what's happening. health insurance companies are denying patients coverage for the care they need and offering assisted suicide instead. that's not a choice. that is not compassionate care. when assisted suicide becomes legal. it will always be the

cheapest medical treatment. >> tucker: i have got to think that sick people, particularly the terminally ill will feel some kind of obligation to suicide to spare their families the financial cost or they are going to come under pressure from insurers to kill themselves. people looking out for sick patients to keep the insurance company pay in this case? >> so, proponents of assisted suicide insist there are adequate safeguards. what j.j. and i saw was that these laws abandon vulnerable patients like j.j. who can experience depression at any point following their diagnosis. >> tucker: right. >> if you look at oregon, the state that this has been legalized the longest in the united states, pain and suffering never makes it into the top five reasons why patients are choosing assisted suicide. their main end of life concerns are fear of being a

burden, loss of autonomy, inability to do the things that they used to enjoy. those are all valid and concerns but not reasons to kill yourself. >> tucker: exactly. no, that is exactly right. thank you for reminding us of that and reminding us we have a duty to love people even as they are dying. kristin, thank you very much. good to see tonight. >> thank you for having me on the show. >> tucker: that's all the time we have, we'll be back monday night the show that's the sworn enemy of lying pomposity, smugness and group think. an amazing night of news. stay with fox sean hannity is next and most important of all have a great relaxing and happy weekend with those ♪ [national anthem] ♪ [national anthem]

♪ [national anthem] ♪ [national anthem] ♪ [national anthem] ♪ [national anthem] ♪ [national anthem] ♪ [national anthem]

♪ ♪ robert mueller special counsel has knocked down this buzzfeed report. this really is the bombshell. >> i am rock solid, it's 100 percent patent. >> these buzzfeed reporters cannot agree whether they saw the documents or not. >> this story today is a significant black eye from media outlets all over the country. people were frothing at the mouth. they were calling for impeachment. >> announcement from the southern border from the president. he will be live from the white house. >> pransd new photos a massive group of migrants. largest group ever to break into the united states. >> humanitarian crisis. it's causing a lot of problems not only from the migrants but for the agents and american public. >> president trump scoring a big win in the form of a summit sequel. >> president set to hold a