♪ >> tucker: good evening, and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." the state of the union address is still scheduled to take place next week but it's not clear where it will be delivered. the speaker of the house nancy pelosi has said the president is not welcome in the house. the latest on that just ahead. first, there was a brief moment, a small window at the beginning of this weekek when it seemed possible that our media establishment might look inward and learn something useful about itself humiliation was the best teacher and definitely humiliated in the space of a few days two separate high profile news stories turned out to be utterly fraudulent. first, buzzfeed announced that former trump lawyer michael cohen had been coached to commit perjury by

the president of the united states. the cable news caucus immediately erupted in glee finally we got him until robert mueller's office weighed in to point out that the story thrilling as it sounded wasn't strictly speaking true. i so that was embarrassing. and then, just 24 hours later, our entire ruling class, united as one, to crush a group of catholic school boys from kentucky who had apparently behaved disrespectfully toward an american indian man here in washington. a short video clip on social media appeared to tell that story.ia the only problem was there were other, much longer videos of the very same event and they revealed a very different truth. the students from covington catholic did not harass anyone. in fact, they were the ones being harassed, ouch. various media luminaires swiftly deleted their scolding tweets.in some even apologized for them for getting it wrong. self-awareness made a rare appearance in the national press corps. but the moment passed quickly. it is always painful to

concede your mistakes especially the mistakes you make because have you allowed mindless stereo types rather than facts to shape your understanding of the world.ou nobody wants to admit that. it's much easier to blame others and so the media did just that yesterday, "the washington post" ran a story that summed up the new consensus on the covington students. here it is. "viral story spread, the mainstream media rushed to keep up, the trump internet pounced. got it? the real villains here are not the journalists who pushed for innocent kids to be expelled from school and punched in the face. the real bad guys are the people who are offended by the fake story. they are the ones who, quote. pounced. that's what bad people do in "the washington post" headlines. they pounce. so, having absolved themselves of any wrongdoing and recast themselves as the real victims here, the media went back on the offensive against the covington students. one of those students, a boy called nick sandmann made the mistake of going on nbc this morning and here is

what happened next. >> do you feel from this experience that you owe anybody an apology? do you see your own faults? have you looked at that video and thought about how it felt from the other's perspective? in other words, there were a lot of you, a handful of the others? do you think they might have felt threatened by a bunch of young men kind of beating their chests? do you think if you weren't wearing that hat this might not have happened or it might have been different? something aggressive about standing there, standing your ground. >> tucker: yeah. there is something aggressive about standing there. failing to move is a hostile act. we can't have people standing still in public places. get a move on, son. that's what nbc is tell us. just kidding. nbc is actually fine with people standing around. most people anyway.

go ahead and make the case for loitering laws and see what happens. nbc will attack you as a fascist before you finish the sentence. nbc doesn't think that i people like nick sandmann should stand in place is quote, aggressive. george orwell imagined a world like this 70 years ago in 1984 for the disfavored, orwell wrote the smallest g thing could give you away a nervous tick, unconscious habit of muttering to yourself.on to say wear an improper expression on your face was itself a punishable offense. there was even a word for it on face crime. nick sandmann committed face crime on friday. just something about his face. something aggressive and sneering. a for that crime some of our superiors don't believe that nick samman ought to be allowed to speak in public. let msnbc explained. >> there was this attempt to give a fuller account of the young man. and i think a lot of folks were asking the questiono

when -- why do we always do this in these sorts of cases when white boys are involved? we give privilege to these white kids. he can sit down with savannana guthrie and redeem himself but then there are all of these other folks who we just presume, you know, who aren't so innocent. >> tucker: privilege. that's the real problem here. nick sandmann has too much privilege. so says the tenured princeton professor with the cable contract. that professor by the way works nine months a year for n a guaranteed salary that puts him in the top 2% of all wage earners in this country. t his day job has so few demands that he can spend most of his time sitting around a tv studio wearing makeup and still the victim of nick sandmann's privilege. the ivy league professor has far less privilege than nick sandmann who is a catholic school student from one of the country's poorist states. way less privileged doesn't even compare that's the case they are making. let's be honest.

this entire conversation isn't really related to what happened outside the lincoln memorial last friday. the people who are angriest at nick sandmann and his classmates don't actually care what happened there they don't even know. they haven't watched the video.th they don't plan. this is not an argument about facts, evidence, truth. it's an argument about identity. the kentucky students are being attacked for who they are not for what they did or didn't do. the sooner the rest of uso.t understand that the sooner we will understand what is at stake here. everything is at stake here. most specifically our ability collectively to live at peace in a multiethnic society. there is no longer anon overwhelming majority group in this country.ov it a diverse country as we are often told. there is nothing wrong with that. but it takes thoughtful leaders to pull it off. the presumption of equality as a prerequisite for a diverse

country. once people start believing that some groups are inherently inferior to other groups, they have more privilege. they shouldn't be allowed to stand in public. there is something about their faces we don't like. when people start thinking that, the whole project falls apart. people start hating each other. and not hating each other for their opinions, we could fix that. people's views evolve over t time. political divisions can heal and often do. but, fights over identity do not. they are different. identity does not change. it cannot be moderated or controlled. it's inherent. we're born that way. when we go to war over who we are, it is a permanent battle. it is a disaster that lasts for generations. identity politics will destroy this country faster than a invasion. you is should know that as you see them push it relentlessly as they relentlessly do.o. victor davis hanson is a senior fellow at the institution and he us tonight. thank you very much for coming on. we have really passed the stage where we are debating what these boys did or dididnt not do or other participants in the moment did or did not

do. this is really a debateid about whether some groups are good and others are evil. is there any resolving a debate like that? >> no. i think one side wins and one side loses. we are in a age of relates there is a big truth and predicated on your race and gender and class. and then there is littleth things like facts, testimony, actual events and impeerism and that doesn't matter. in that divide these students had nothing going for them.er they were white. they were male. they were catholic.. they were at pro-life demonstration.mo they had hats on and mr. phillips had everything going for him. it didn't matter whether heit lied about almost every circumstance that he was involved in. the 8 videos could not be corroborated with what he said in various interviews.us but, he poses a diehard hero in vietnam that had fought for swimmery little brett kavanaughs like these kids. once that narrative took over, that was the truth. and had the kids been a

minority ancestry or had they been at a pro-life -- pro-choice or had pussy hats on or female and had mr. phillips been white and a real combat veteran who was, you know, humming a country western song and did the exact same thing, then all of these people would have weighed n a different manner. >> tucker: that's right. >> they wanted to get in on the social media lynchia mob because they understood that they could virtue signal and the preponderance the sin terrific call force in this era we live in is withce identity politics. t whether it was mr. morrisy, the disney producer who was actually tweeting that they should be put in a wood chipper and then illustrated what would happen to them, he understood that the disney corporate world would reward that behavior and if he had did something else they wouldn't and they would excuse that if he was wrong. >> tucker: can i ask this, this is so we bewildering because this way of looking

at the world allows people to protect what they have. so here you have a tenured guy with a job at some mediocre university job for life very high paying describing some kid from one of the poorest areas of the country having more privilege than he does. that is ludicrous. everyone nods inod agreement he is privileged we are not live here on tv. how does that stand? >> because they don't believe in anything.g. they understand -- they put their finger in the air and they see where are the career rewards and where is the downside in the downside is not there. because they want to get ahead early and they want to get mean on their social media.a.he and then they not only feel better about themselves but then people admirer them. that's where the career we regards are to be found. what -- how does it benefit you, tucker, to say i think these kids, we should looknd at the evidence and give them the benefit of the doubt just likeul we should give mr. phillips an adjudicated on the evidence.

then you are old fashioned and supporting the old racist, sexist class order. and there is nothing in for it. most of the money, thef universities, the professional sports, entertainment, popular culture, it's all on one side. and people make the necessary adjustments. that's what this was all about.t. it's about a higher truth. it's social justice. quality result rather than an opportunity. and we are not empirical anymore because that's for losers. that's where the rewards are in society.. even congressman omar understood that. everybody understood that. and that's why they wanted to get on record as early as they could and as mean as they could that unquestioned. just like the mob and the french revolution around the 1790s. the jack emerald sphere phase or ancient athens get in on extremism then today's extremism putting somebody's head in a wood chopper is yesterday's passe moderation

and just a spiral. >> tucker: you are absolutely right. >> it's going to continue until somebody stands up and says i'm not going to take this s anymore. i'm going to say what i want. shame on you and you are going to be fired. you are going to be sued and held accountable. we haven't gotten to that point yet.>> >> tucker: i hope we get there soon. professor, thank you very much for that. >> i do, too. thank you for having me, tucker after being vilified by the press, the covington students and their families faced a wave of harassment and threats. yesterday the head of the high school had to cancel class does these students have any resource, any defense? when the strongest members of our society try to crush them? well, this morning on "fox & friends," louie robert barnes warned that media outlets could be sued if they don't retract the slander against these students. watch.et t >> by friday, everybody needs to retract and correct any false statements they have issued about thesey kids. that includes any major member of the media. that includes any major celebrity.

that includes anybody with a substantial social media platform. if you have said anything false about these kids, they are willing to extend to you a 48-hour time period. a period of grace, consistent with their christian faith, for you to have a confession and get redemption and retract and apologize. if you do not, then next week you may be a defendant in a lawsuit. >> tucker: all right. no idea if that guy know what is he is talking about. our next guest does. libby lock is an attorney who represented a woman after she was defamed in the famous rolling stone fraternity gang rape story which turned out to be a fabrication. thanks very much for coming on. you have deep experience in this. thee broader question is how do the weakest members ofem our society, high school kids defend themselves when the strongest people in our society those with tenured positions on cable tv shows defame them. what is the recourse? >> they can bring claims for false. there are a lot of potentialfe

defendants here that they could pursue. you know, with all due respect to mr. barnes. some of the ideas i have heard him express are not viable action. you can't bring a class action for defamation and can't sue a congresswoman for tweets that she made. >> tucker: that's relevant we have a new democratic member of congress who accused these boys in tweets of things that are clearly not supported by the evidence on videotape. so they are lies. they can't sue her?re >> no. she has absolutely immunity under federal statutory law. and this is exactly where these students need to takeee donald trump's invitation, president trump's invitation and go to the white house and encourage president trump to open up the libel laws. >> tucker: why would a member of congress, if i -- as a private citizen, attack someone, say something that i know is untrue, and accuse them of a crime, for example, i can be sued but a member of congress can't be. >> something called the west fall act creates blanket immunity for all federal employees including members

of congress for stupid comments, false comments. all sorts of different claims that you could bring against a member of congress. an employee or another normal citizen are exempted for federal employees. and there are some claims that federal employees can be brought against them but defamation is not one of them at this time. and this is where donald trump, president trump should really fulfill his campaign promise to open up the libel laws here. this is one of the areas where federal law prevents mr. sandman and his family from getting recourse against the democrat member of congress. >> tucker: so if an employee of a news organization writes something that is proveably untrue and damaging, to someone much weaker than he is and that happened a lot over the weekend, that person's news organization is not responsible for it, right? >> well, they can be. they absolutely can be.

here he is a private figure. he is not a public figure. you are not going to have the "new york times" vs. as you will van burden would not apply to him as a private figure. liability here is on a negligence standard. that's a much lower standard. and, the media outlets who publish this stuff and didn't reach out to him for comment i think they have real legal risk here, tucker. >> tucker: would you recommend to the families of these boys whose lives i think it's fair to say will be overshadowed by this. this deeply unfair, would you recommend that they pursue a legal course? >> absolutely. they should hire experienced defamation counsel. not just experienced lawyer but someone who knows this area of the law and who can really evaluate legal claims. it's what we did in the uva case looking at federal vs. state court which jurisdiction because, look, this is an area where you don't want to swing and miss. because, if you lose, even on a procedural issue. it's going to be reported as a vindication of the truth of the defamation. >> tucker: libby locke, one of the most successful

lawyers in this small but important field. thank you. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: nancy pelosi has ended for now the traditional state of the union that takes place before the joint session of congress. the battle with the president and pelosi continues. trace gallagher has the very latest on that. hey, trace? >> hi, tucker this state of the union standoff fully materialized today. it was back on january 3rd with the shutdown already underway that speaker pelosi first invited president trump to the house chamber on january 29th. then on january 16th, pelosi wanted the speech delayed over security concerns. now the secret service, and dhs have knocked down those concerns and the president today sent pelosi a letter saying in part, quote: i will be honoring your invitation and fulfilling my constitutional duty. that's when pelosi responded by disinviting the president, quoting again. the house of representatives will not consider a concurrent resolution authorizing the president's state of the union address. that written back and forth led to this verbal back and

forth. watch. >> nancy pelosi or nancy as i call her, she doesn't want to hear the truth and she doesn't want to hear, more importantly, the american people truth. >> the government is still shut down. i still made the offer. mutually agreeable date as our original date was mutually agreeable. >> meantime the president is now looking for alternative venue for his state of the union address. tucker? >> tucker: trace gallagher, well, the entire federal government has ground to a complete halt over a few billion dollars for the wall. where could congress find that money? we will take a close look at the federal budget. some ideas ahead ♪ amazon prime video is now on xfinity x1.

so when you say words like... show me best of prime video into this... you'll see awesome stuff like this. discover prime originals like the emmy-winning the marvelous mrs. maisel... tom clancy's jack ryan... and the man in the high castle. all in the same place as your live tv. its all included with your amazon prime membership.

that's how xfinity makes tv... simple. easy. awesome. >> the federal government shut down for more than a month is now key point of contention in this debate isn't really funding for a border wall. it's funding for maybe a fifth of a border wall. a total of about $5 billion. so let's say you are not jeff bezos to do or have prospective troubles on how to get 5 billion. well, to start with it's about 1/8th of 1% of the federal budget and to put that in perspective that's less than the amount of money taxpayers send to ivy league colleges every single year. in 2017 report from open the books found that from 2010 to 2015 the 8 schools in the ivy league received about 41.6 billion in government support. that's about $7 billion per year. now, you are probably thinking well i'm sure all

of that went to important scientific research. no. w most of it was in the form of grants.es also included billions in special tax breaks including for their endowments. the ivy league's combined endowments total more thanvy $120 billion of 2017. now, in a normal nonprofit foundation they are required to spend a certain percentage every year 5%.on ivy league or all university endowments can keep it growing completely tax free in perpetuity.ow meanwhile have tuitions gone down? now they have not, they have risen faster than the rate of inflation. who is benefiting fromse this? in ivy league those schools are run or attended by the connected and well-off. what you see here is a very familiar syndrome the rich are getting richer and you are paying for it. so here's an idea. a why not eliminate their indefensible tax breaks and use the savings to fund a ewall? if the price is really what you are bothered by. is billions of dollars a

year to people who are already rich really a better use of taxpayer funds than protecting the country? we will let you think about it. from 2007 to 2013, the small business administration gave more than 160 million to loans to country clubs, yacht clubs and golf courses.lo that's true. the va meanwhile has spent $20 million buying art. so what's more important to you those expenditures or a secure border for the country you live in? it doesn't really matter l what you think by the way. washington hasr already made up its mind and they honestly don't care what your opinion is, you can still have one if you want at least for now. if a wall isn't built, we can't necessarily expect any help from mexico in keeping our border secure just the opposite. a new central american caravan is rapidly growing in size. the mexican government meanwhile has made it easier to obtain humanitarian visas to allow these migrants to move northward to our southern border as they are right now. meanwhile, in washington, there are a few cracks, tiny ones but maybe significant

forming in the democratic coalition against a physical barrier on our border. democratic congressman collin peterson says congress should give president trump the money he wants for the wall because it would be helpful and as we just said we spend a lot more money on far dumber things. mark with the border patrol and joins us tonight. mr. morgan, thanks for coming on. this news from mexico is interesting and kind of unexpected. you wouldn't think in thes middle of a crisis like this. mexico supposedly our ally would be working against our interest but they seem to be. why? >> absolutely.co i was thinking about this the past couple days, they really went from incompetent bystanders to facilitators. that's what happened with thisst f latest. >> tucker: the mexican government. >> the mexican government, absolutely. t it furthers and it really identifies what the problem is on this side. it's different and that's why the president is right when he talks about national security issues. as well as humanitarian. on the humanitarian side, the loopholes in our asylum

walls and judicial decision acting like incentive for those to come to this country illegally. now we have mexico, again, now they have gone from incompetent bystanders to facilitators to help those individuals come here. it's just outrageous.inra >> tucker: considering the mexican economy i don't think it's an overstatement dependent on the united states both for american citizens living here trade, along the border. why wouldn't the u.s. government say no, you can'tde do this or we are going to punish you? >> that's exactly right. that's one of the narratives. exports working all things national security, humanitarian crisis on the southwest border. tucker, that's what they have been saying for a very long time. t decades. if you go to leadership. go to dhs they have been trying to work with mexico and enforce them to get skin in the game and force them to be proactive participants in solving this problem instead of now beingin facilitators. the wall is a great thing.s it's a great start. we need that absolutely need it now. a we also have to continue to drive and force mexico to do what they should. if they don't, the problem

will continue. >> tucker: why do you think c of the coverage and this is not an attack on the mexican people. many of whom are great people. the mexican government is corrupted. the last president has just been accuse of taking $100 million from drug traffickers. no question it's corrupt. why does the american media act like the mexican government is morally superior than us? >> goes part of the false narrative makes me so angry. we haven't talked about the mexican cartels alive and well and thriving and warring over the corridors. why is that? because it's real. corruption is real. their control of the mexican government is real. we have to stop denying that and tell the american people the truth about the issue. and the mexican government, they are part of the problem. >> tucker: seems really clear and thank you for saying that so clearly yourself. appreciate it.ha democratic party has changed an awful lot. so all of a sudden you see the party's top contenders in 2020 issuing apologies for past ideological sins.

i'ms. sorry i believed that. thank you, sir, may i have another? dana perino has been watching very carefully and she joins us after the break to discuss. ♪

>> momma loves you juan, bullies don't win. i said baby they don't.s because we are going to go in there and we are going to beat [bleep] [cheers] >> tucker: dick gephart is gone forever. democrats are back in power.

some of then look nothing like the democrats youan remember. and some of the most radical are taking spots on key committees. the congresswoman rashida tlaib you just saw reeving there on the video on the house oversight committee joined by alexandria ocasio-cortez of new york. will they be very different from the democrats they replace senior fellow lisa booth joins us for a a preview on that. >> hi, tucker, how are you? >> tucker: i'm mesmerized by the tape we just played. >> exactly. as you mentioned she will be one of the new members ofye the house oversight committee. they have the broadest authority to investigate and so that's really going to be the primary committee that's going after the trumpe t administration and trying to, you know, see what they can come up with, right and just today the house oversight committee who is chaired by elijah sent a letter to the white house saying they are investigating the white house over the way that they give out security clearances. so they are looking into michael flynn, jared kushner, and a variety of

other members of the administration. elijah cummings has also said that they are going toij be looking into things like president trump zero tolerance policy with immigration. also scott pruitt his time as e.p.a. director. so the oversight committee is going to be incredibly aggressive. c you can see that too by some of the members like rashida tlaib and alexandria ocasio-cortez who were named to be part of this committee dan kildee who is part of the steering committee which is the committee that t chooses the members that are going to be on committees said that he chose these members because they are going to be aggressive in going after the trump administration. >> tucker: do you think that's a promise we should take seriously? w >> 100 percent, tucker. [laughter] think about it this way, tucker. so the democrats only have control of the house, right? there is only so much legislation can you really move forward. most of the bills passed in the house are going to go die inas the senate. what do you do as a body? their objective is going to be investigating the trump administration. this is going to be the primary goal of house

democrats and, remember, too, alexandriaa ocasio-cortez, i think we have this tweet if we can put it up there. she put tweeted out to donte jr. i have a notice that don jr. has a habit of posting nonsense about me whenever the mueller investigation heats up. please keep it coming junior it's a very large brain idea to troll a member of a body that will have subpoena power in a month. she has put out there via twitter what her objective is as oversight committee.ve trump administration should a lot of negative headlines, this is what democrats are after and the next two years here. >> tucker: settled the question of whether aoc runs her own twitter account answer yes, she does. >> i think she does. that's a safe bet. >> tucker: lisa booth, thank you. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: the race to pick a presidential democrat candidate is already underway almost every major democrat in the world has joined it already. several thousands it looks like. any democrat that's been around longer than five years has a major problem to

confront. the party has changed so much since then that whator do you say about the things have you said before? they are totally out of step. apologies are in order, in other words. joe biden recently apologized for supporting laws against crime. >> i know we haven't always gotten things right. barack and i finally reduced the disparity in sentencing which we have been fighting to eliminate in crackht cocaine versus powder cocaine. it was a big mistake that was made we thought when we were told by the experts crack never go back somehow fundamentally different. it was not different. but it's trapped an entire generation. >> tucker: joe biden suddenly an expert on crack. [laughs] he believed the experts when his knowledge of crack he already had. he just needed to behind his personal knowledge of crack. that was speaking to al sharpton's group. you can't make it up. kirsten gillibrand senator of new york was a moderate. she once supported the

existence of borders. now she is atoning for that support. watch. >> well, i don't think it was driven from my heart. i was callus to the suffering of families who want to be with their loved ones. people who want to be reunited with their families. i really regretted that i didn't look beyond my district and talk about why this is an important part of the united states' story. >> tucker: dana perino the most beloved person at fox news obviously hosts the daily briefing with dana perino. if i were giving advice to the democratic party, i would say wait a second, revolutions and a certain point. awere is no reason disavowing something you ultimately embraced, support for law or borders. maybe slow down a little bit. is there any market for someone who says yeah i thought it i stillng think it? >> like if you are playing monopoly you cannot -- do not -- you go straight to jail basically. i mean, do not pass go. do not collect $200. the ticket to the starting20

gate is an apology for things you have held in the past. kamala harris hasn't quite apologized for her criminal justice background. but she did say that she was sorry that her staff had done those things, right? she is inching up towards it. >> tucker: she apologized for her staff. that's close enough. >> somebody that hasn't -- actually hasn't declared yet mike bloomberg. he is the only one who has not apologized yet. is he still standing up for his positions like stop and frisk in new york city that he thinks helped make this city safer. i think you are going to continue to see this. i think that a lot of this activity and attention on early primary is really interesting, right? but it's masking some problems that the republicans have and they better pay attention to because the energy is there on the left. and so they better focus on it in particular on the economic message. the democrats are

formulating a push back against the trump economy which would seem to be his strongest point for re-election. but they are going to try to make it his achilles heel. >> tucker: i agree with it democratic populism whether you like it or not is the future. not a question of are why went to get it, we are going to get it. it get it really disruptive radical and crazy or something that helps the country. give me your quick, i'm interested, particularly from you in your view of what is going to happen to the state of the union address next week? where is it going to take place? >> i wish i had been on last week because on tuesday last week i thought i wonder what's going to happen? i bet she has the power to invite or disinvite. if the government is shut down, it seems weird to have the state of the union when the government it shutdown. he should have said to her okay i will come and give a state of the union when the government is reopen. we will revisit that. he can always do that.

she has all the leverage right now. roy blunt earlier today on my show it used to be a couple weeks ago that both parties thought they were winning. now both parties think they are losing. if you look at the polling that came out today, it is president trump that is continuing to take water on this. so i don't think the state of the union address obviously is not going to happen next tuesday. i hope that it happens at some point because, you know, it's a nice american tradition. greg gutfeld my colleague totally disagrees. he does not want to go to d.c. and see the speech. i do think the president of the united states, you know, he can give a speech anymore, anywhere. he has the power and the trappings of the office that give him that ability. >> tucker: that's exactly right. >> he can do it anywhere. >> tucker: dana perino you are always welcome in washington, state of the union or not. always great to see you. >> thank you, bye. >> tucker: here is some interesting fact since voter fraud does not exist and we know that and we are required to believe that. if that's true then why does one of america's largest cities have more registered voters than it has adult citizens? huh.

maybe someone can explain that to us after the break. ♪

♪ >> tucker: voter fraud is impossible. it never takes place in america and only crazy people believe otherwise. you know that because you yve been told it again and again and again. and that's why we don't need any safeguards against it. or investigations into it or voter i.d. laws. and that's why extending voting over the course of a month is no problem at all. the only people capable of threatening american elections are macedonians with laptops and facebook accounts. that is all true. except it's not true. it's not even close to true. it's a full blown lie like a

lot of things they tell you. how do we know? california is currently purging voter rules after settling a lawsuit from judicial watch. one of those group's findings is los angeles county had more registeredup voters than it had adult citizens which even if you are not a math major doesn't make sense. guy benson is a math major and town hall reporter, host of a famous radio show. he joins us tonight. >> i was not a math major. i want to make that extremely clear. >> tucker: you could have been a poetry major and it doesn't make any sense, does it.fo >> no. so what judicial watch was an investigation and they found that in the state of california at large they had 101% of their eligible citizen adult population register to vote. >> tucker: that means they are doing really well then. >> hey, bananas like gang busters. then in los angeles county i it was 112%. so, judicial watch has done legal actions like this in a number the states. they have had successes in courts in ohio, in kentucky,ts

and now california as well where they basically said you guys have to clean this up. this is b not okay. and so, there will be a purge of the voter roll. that word is used as a scary buzz word on the left but you have to legally remove people. >> tucker: correction to the voter roll. >> you are purging ineligible or dead voter from the rolls. >> tucker: that's bias against the deceased, isn't it.fr that is very bigoted towards the living. which i think is part of the election law. again, i'm a lawyer here. like i'm not a math major either, tucker. i think, again, we shouldn't overplay the problem of voter fraud but it does irk me over an over again, it is a complete figment of our imagination and any concern w about it whatsoever has to mean that you are dead set on disenfranchising large groups of people. what a we are seeing in this

lawsuit and with the government has been forced to do, it proves oversight. to be >> tucker: all widespread voter fraud in my lifetime that i'm aware of it has benefit you had the democratic party. if you thought it was reversed, if widespread voter fraud was perceived to benefit the republican party, do you think we would be more vigilant in trying to prevent it. >> i suspect the cultural elites would have a different view on this issue. lot of the verbiage that surrounds the question wouldio be turned on its head. i will point out and this is actually an interesting side bar to the california issue. one example of apparent serious allegations of voter fraud was in north carolinapp recently, congressional race in i believe the ninth district which benefited a republican. >> tucker: huh? >> what happened there there was this practice that was illegal in north carolina called ballot harvesting where third parties can go and collect absentee ballots and there is chain of custody issues. that was manipulated to help the

republican win. that seat is now in jeopardy. they might have to hold a new election. >> tucker: for the record say i'm totally opposed to it. >> the reason i brought itup up is ballot harvesting absentee ballots is actually legal in the state of california. >> tucker: that's crazy. totally completely crazy. guy benson thank you for being on that. >> my pleasure. >> tucker: great to see you. >> sure. the purpose of the investigation was to find russian agents in the united states. that's what they told us when it began. but that has long ceased to be its purpose. it's now a permanent federal investigation into anyone who has publicly supported the president or made other unpopular political noises. whether that person did anything wrong, colluded with russia, irrelevant. being the subject of a federal investigation, anyone who has been that can tell you is enough to wreck your life. roger stone has learned that lesson. he has not been indicted for anything. he says though that being investigated by mueller has pushed him to the brink of bankruptcy. h roger stone joins us tonight with that account. roger, thanks very much for coming on. >> tucker, thank you very much..

>> tucker: the details of the investigation, are back and forth on tv every dayy and will have, i suppose, decades to figure out exactly what was about and your place in it.ig but, as of right now, you have not been indicted or accused of any crime, much less with russia. >> i appreciate the opportunity to be here. i have been under a two year microscope in which everyle aspect of my life has been examined. my personal life, my family life, my private life,in my business life, my political life.li and, that has been an extremely draining process. at least 12 of my current or former associates have been browbeat by theoc fbi or dragged before the grand jury.nn literally millions of dollars have been spent. i believe all my emails,

text messages, phone calls in 2016 and since have been scrutinized. and to date, there is still no evidence of russian collusion, wikileaks collaboration, or any other illegal act in connection with with the 2016 election or anything else. this has been financially devastating. theleaks from general -- from the special counsel's office have devastated my private consulting business. in december i lost my health and life insurance. unable to pay the premiums anymore. i had to sell my car. it was a 2006 but i had to sell it nonetheless. a small fund i had put aside for the college education of my grandchildren derived from my book sales had to be liquidated. i am this close. in all honesty i struggle tolo pay my lawyers first and foremost. pay my rent. pay my taxes. it is not a fun existence. >> tucker: it's unbelievable. you are in your 60's is my

understanding. and you have no money whatsoever. you don't even have health insurance. and you have not been informed that you're going to be indicted much less been indicted. do we even know what the crime is they are alleging presuming they are alleging anything? >> it's very hard to say. you have a run away special prosecutor who is accountable to no one. the house intelligence committee democrats keep insisting that i have perjured myself. that's a lie. aere were lies told the day i testified. adam schiff said, for example, the fbi did investigate and examine the dnc servers. my system is both accurate and truthful. i'm not even allowed to have a copy of it, tucker. i'm not even allowed to examine it. my lawyers can go examine it in a sealed room in washington but they are not allowed to take notes. four and a half hours of voluntary testimony. so, as i say, the financial cost has been more than a half a million dollars. projected to be

substantially more because i'm being sued by the democratic national committee for nonexistent russian collusion. i'm still being investigated by the senate judiciary and intelligence committee and now congressman schiff is gearing up a new investigation, still having come up with nothing. i have had to rely on the legal defense fund. stone defense fund.com. it is only through the help of good citizens and patriots and supporters of the president that i'm able to fend these people off.up >> tucker: i just wanted, before we get the mueller o report, i just wanted this on tape, on the record, they better charge with you the kennedy assassination at the end of the day or anybody. that's the point. i'm not here to defend you personally. i'm here to defend all americans who are not indicted by having their lives destroyed by somebody who is not accountable to anybody. total outrage i think.es roger stone, last word? >> it is, certainly. here's the most important thing, tucker.

no matter how much pressure they put on me, no matter what they say, i will not bear false witness against donald trump. i will not do what michael cohen has done and make up lies to relieve the pressure on myself. you know, my god and a great wife and my great family will see me through this. >> tucker: honestly, i would hope the integrity if thee roles were reversed and a democrat were in the white house and this was happening to one of his supporters who had not been accused of any national security violation that i would defend his right not to be destroyed. i really mean it roger stone, god bless.cc a >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: well, a college professor in wisconsin has turned a political science course into reeducation.av we have the documents and we will speak to onef of the students after the break. ♪ -whoa. [ indistinct talking ] -deductible? -definitely speaking insurance.

-additional interest on umbrella policy? -can you translate? -damage minimization of civil commotion. -when insurance needs translating, get answers in plain english at progressiveanswers.com. ♪ -he wants you to sign karen's birthday card. it's a high honor.

♪ >> tucker: political indoctrination is replacing teaching in many college classrooms, but sometimes it's useful to see just how bad the rot is and just how unimpressive the people involved are. deeply unimpressive. case in point, a professor at the university of wisconsin has been caught diverting a course on the presidency into a screed against the trump administration. his name is kenneth mayer.

his syllabus for the american presidency spent an entire paragraph ranting about russian collusion, testimony from michael cohen, . a student in that class joins us tonight. thank you very much for joining us. are we overstating this syllabus in its ludicrousness and doctrinaire democratic talking points or is that really what it was? >> it's good to be with you, tucker. i took one glance at this syllabus and had to double check and make sure that i was in an actual academic course and not in a course called trump derangement syndrome 101. it was unbelievable, the amount of overt bias this professor explained in what was supposed to be a course description. >> tucker: it's not even interesting. this is like midday sunday afternoon, third string msnbc guest talking point stuff.

>> absolutely. the part that rubbed me the wrong way -- there were numerous things. first of all, it's an oversimplification and misrepresentation of what trump supporters actually stand for and what they appreciate about the president. the complete lack of discussion about all of the policy accomplishments and achievements of the president, it servesab to -- to sway students to kind of form this certain perspective of the president that now -- >> tucker: so what if you dissent? what if you say, look, i came to this class to learn about the history of the american, presidency, you're giving me this cnn crap instead, why don't you stop and teach me what happened? what would happen to you if you said that? >> i am sure that i would be penalized for that. it's not the course that i y signed up for. i signed up to take a critical objective look at the history of the presidency of the united astates. now, if this professor is going to, you know, spew unfounded

claims, claims that have turned out to be largely false, i mean, this is something that needs to be addressed, not only by the dean of students, acknowledged by the professor, but i hope that this, you know, shows students who are uncomfortable with this kind of bias in the classroom that they need to stand up and use their voices. >> tucker: it's not even smart. they're not even smart. all the smart people, i guess, sm finance or something. they are all getting rich on private equity. all the dumb kids wind up teaching at the university of wisconsin.um >> the political posterizing is unbelievable. it's not just me. democrats and republicans alike have reached out to me and said this is unacceptable behavior, that the professor needs to acknowledge that he's wrong. students have messaged me and said they have had to change their opinions just to get an a in the class. i'm certainly not the first person that does happen to. >> tucker: i bet you are not. he'll learn about tenure.

greatuc to see you. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: we'll be back tomorrow, 8:00 p.m., the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, smugness, and groupthink, and mediocrity, which is really the story of the people in charge. in the meantime, sean hannity from new york. >> sean: we got a new word. mediocrity. tucker, great show. there is always something. welcome to "hannity." this is a huge news night. for the first time in history, a sitting u.s. president has been disinvited from delivering the state of the union address from the house chambers. in a letter, speaker pelosi wrote that she would not authorize the president's speech in the house until the government reopened. this is an unprecedented political ploy, obvious for what it is. it comes just days after speaker pelosi falsely claimed that the shutdown related to security concerns, that that would delay the joint address. that was a lie. and pelosi's newest letter makes zero reference to security, only a demand to reopen the government, only on her terms.