2016 election. we want the find out exactly who these people are that have defamed and slandered me on massive scales never seen before. >> thank you, devin nunes, good to see you tonight. tucker is next. see you tomorrow. >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight". when the founders of this country designed the american republic something we're grateful for, but not everyone was impressed by it at the time. much of europe scoffed at the idea not just because they were monarchists, even free thinking people of the time. contemporary liberals were worried it wouldn't work. they didn't think it would. they thought democracy was a weak system. at some point they believed unscrupulous politicians would come to power, change the rules in their favor and establish a one-party state. what began as government by the people inevitably would become

tire knee. that's what they said at the time. it hasn't happened. for more than two centuries this country relied on our institutions brilliantly designed and durable institutions to survive as an intact democracy and we have through a civil war, two world wars, great depression, 9/11 and more. all of those events put great stress on our system. none broke it. then came 2016. donald trump's election convinced many on the left that our associations no longer work. they must be torched and replaced by a system that will prevent trump and anyone like him from ever being elected again. that's their goal. they're starting with the judiciary. at least four leading democratic presidential candidates have suggested packing the supreme court of the united states. enlarging its size, adding more democratic appointees, making it political, a tool of elected officials rather than an independent branch of government. here is elizabeth warren explaining that changing the court is a form of revenge for the crime of having a

republican president. >> first they steal a supreme court seat, they turn around and change the rules on filibuster on the supreme court seat and so it swings back around to us what will we do? my answer on that is all the options are on the table. >> apparently cory booker got the same talking point. >> eric holder the former a.g. is talking about expanding the number of people in the united states supreme court beyond nine to get more progressives. where are you on that? >> i think we need to fix the supreme court. they stole the seat. i would like to explore a lot of options and term limits for supreme court justices might be one thing to give every president the ability to choose three. >> tucker: keep in mind that for a century and a half the court has been limited to nine justices and has worked just fine.

some of the court's decisions have been wise, others misguided and some appalling but americans trust that the court is a real institution and on the level. that trust in the court and other institutions keeps this country stable. would the public have trust in the court once it becomes an arm of the democratic party? who cares what they think? what people feel is not a concern for them. they want their power back now and forever and to abolish the electoral college. they're circumvebts award the presidency to the winner of the national popular vote. democratic presidential candidates strongly approve. >> the electoral college. >> there is a lot to that. you had an election in 2016 where the loser got 3 million more votes than the victor. there is a lot of wisdom in that. >> we should have national

voting and that means get rid of the electoral college and everybody -- [applause] >> tucker: in fact, the electoral college hasn't favored one party or another. in 2012 it favored the democrats. if it was tied in the popular vote barack obama would have won. the electoral college keeps the country from becoming a colony of chicago, new york and california. a union of equal states, not a collection of provinces that revolve around a few powerful cities. it discourages the rise of factional parties. the best argument for keeping electoral college is simple for 230 years it has worked better than any other country's systems in history. but because it didn't help the left when a presidential election two years ago they want it gone forever. along with it any restrictions at all on who can vote.

violent felons, illegal aliens and even children. whatever it takes. >> i myself have always been for lowering the voting age to 16. i think it's really important to capture kids when they're in high school and interested in all of this. when they're learning about government to be able to vote. >> tucker: the supreme court and electoral college restricted to citizens, burn it all done. what else stands in the way of the left's quest for power? how about the senate. left wing saying senate should be abolished. the first and second amendment, they hate those. speed bumps on the way to total control. relics of time. supreme court could get rid of them and maybe they will. keep in mind. once your institutions have disappeared, it is nearly impossible to rebuild them. a former staffer of chuck schumer joins us tonight. chris, i understand why democrats were shocked that trump won, appalled by his

presidency. i get it. i don't think burning down our core institutions like the electoral college or supreme court is an tans that is going to be worth it 100 years from now, do you? >> well, you couldn't just burn it down. first of all remember president trump getting rid -- president trump was for getting rid of the electoral college before he won it. now he loves it. it doesn't make it wise. i think we should have a national debate about whether or not there should be national voting at this point in time in our lives. in 1989 an electoral college may have worked. we've had two presidents in the last 20 years that loose t the popular vote and won the presidency. how many of those can you have? >> tucker: it's frustrating and i'm being sincere i understand why it's frustrating. it is a democratic republic and you want the majority's will expressed. on the other hand getting rid of the electoral college would mean this country is basically run by three states so it would

mean newsom and bill deblasio would be important and everybody else can go suck an aid. do you want to disenfranchise rural america at a time like this? why would you do that? >> well, both new york and california have recently had republican governors so to suggest that a republican couldn't win those states is not really looking at the facts as they stand. the third largest second -- the second largest state is texas which always elects republican governors lately. so i think look, we've got three states that are actually economic engines and the population centers of this country whose wills are not necessarily demonstrated both in the electoral college and the united states senate which needs reform, too. it is absurd to me that california has the same vote in the senate as idaho does. >> tucker: that's the way it's set up and has always been. there are reasons for it. you are attorney and you know what those reasons are.

>> absolutely. >> tucker: they're not hap az ard or random. it kept the country stable. you have had only one civil war in a continental country with a vast population. that's hard to pull off. the electoral college and everybody is represented. democrats lose an election and we don't care what rural america thinks. we hate them. they're dying. and we want to disenfranchise them further, really? >> i'm not for disenfranchising anyone. if you had a national elections new york's votes would count as much as ohio's votes, a much smaller state than new york but their votes matter more. people don't campaign in texas, new york and california but in ohio, pennsylvania, wisconsin, michigan. they should campaign there. it goes both ways. i hear what you've saying. we need to have a balance and a long conversation. amending the constitution. nobody can do it with the stroke of a pen.

it would require a national consensus how to change it. >> tucker: i guess what i'm struck by, though, is that after two years of lecturing us how trump is a threat to institutions, none of which he has changed despite the hysteria about it. democrats are saying let's pack the supreme court. are you joking? get rid of the electoral college and let illegal aliens and children votes? who is destroying institutions here? >> i'm not for packing the supreme court. i'm not for allowing non-citizens to vote in federal elections. i'm not for lowering the voting age at this point in time. but i do think we should have some more democratic -- >> tucker: do something -- you should be banned from australia you're so right wing. chris hahn, welcome to our set. good to see you tonight. thank you. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: it took this countries centuries to -- tradition the left is attacking

in 2009. it is the party of reparations, presidential candidates say americans should be rewarded or punished based on their skin color. >> so i believe it's time to start the national full blown conversation about reparations in this country. >> i have long believed that this country should address slavery, the original sin of slavery, including by looking at reparations. why wouldn't you compensate people who were property? >> tucker: professor of african-american studies at the university of america. thank you for coming on. i agree slavery is america's original sin and has consequence. but what do you do about it. because it's not a very racist country. we've had a ton of intermarriage and even more immigration over the 150 years since slavery ended. how exactly would this work?

how would you decide who gets rewarded and who doesn't? >> number one i don't think we should think of it as a reward. we should think of it as a debt being paid that has benoed for a long time. the idea of reward or punishment is -- >> tucker: who gets the money? how do you decide? if it's a policy you have to make real decisions. >> what people are calling for now is actually what john conyers has been calling for. a national conversation how you would dispense this, what is the right way and -- >> tucker: that's -- everyone always calls for conversation and no one wants to have them. i always do. let's get super specific. who gets the money and who pays for it? if my ancestors came in 1980, am i on the hook for paying? if your an cess tears came in 1975, do you get the money? >> no, this is for the

descendants of slaved africans. if your ancestors came in 1960, it would not necessarily fall under this. but what i will say is -- >> tucker: it wouldn't at all, right? >> the idea this is something being paid by individuals rather than by the united states of america, we're talking about the country's debt that it owes to descendants of enslaved africans. >> tucker: the people who live here would be paying for it. no one alive participated directly but a ton of people who are descended from the union soldiers trying to end slavery or who were the children of immigrants. would they be on the hook? the answer is yes. let me ask you the most basic question. if we did this -- i'm not even arguing against it. would the slate be clean. could we try to become a less racial society and end affirmative action and preferences in hiring? >> first of all when we talk

about reparations for the most part we talk about the economic issues that are involved or that came from the institution of slavery. now, when we talk about affirmative action and many of the other programs that have been used to address discrimination, a lot of times they are used to address discrimination right now. the other thing is about discrimination. >> tucker: we pay reparations but keep affirmative action. >> affirmative action the primary beneficiaries despite what you will hear from abigail fisher and jennifer congratulations and the other people who complain. the primary beneficiaries have been white women. not african-american. >> tucker: the system has been scammed by no other. nobody should be a been fishary. >> there is no evidence of warren. >> tucker: she was the first tenured law professor of color.

>> that's what racist people say. >> tucker: she wasn't american indian. she exploited somebody else's culture and i'm the racist for pointing it out? i love that. >> i didn't call you a racist. >> tucker: i know you didn't. >> other people do but i don't call you that. >> tucker: great to see you as always. thank you for clarifying. you can always have those conversations on this show. >> thank you so much. >> tucker: rising tuition rates and student loans are strangling america's middle class and hurting a generation of young people. has our academic elite become part of the problem with our economy and with our dwindling and dying and besieged middle class? there is a solution. we'll tell you what it is after the break. everyone's got to lis. when it comes to reducing the sugar in your family's diet, coke, dr pepper and pepsi hear you. we're working together to do just that.

bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar. balanceus.org woi felt completely helpless. trashed online, my entire career and business were in jeopardy. i called reputation defender.

they were able to restore my good name. if you're under attack, i recommend calling reputation defender. and consider joining their groundbreaking campaign to give every american the right to remove old, inaccurate search results by going to righttobeforgotten.org. vo: if you have search results that are wrong or unfair, call reputation defender at 1-877-492-6705.

the latest inisn't just a store.ty it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome. >> tucker: student loans have become the single biggest burden weighing down young people in this country. total student debt in american exceeds 1 1/2 trillion and it gets bigger every year.

successful young people are getting longer to get off the grounds, get married, buy a home and have children. millions more are mired in debt servitude. this is changing our society. young people are not leaving their parents' homes when they do they live with roommates. delaying as we said marriage. some are not having children. colleges, though, by profound contrast are doing great. if you haven't seen how great they're doing, drive out and take a look at one. why are they so affluent? they hike tuition every year and no consequences. with the money they've funded a building boom that lasted for decades. top administrateives live like lords enriched by student surfs. the cost of college is distorting our society in a way that's unsustainable. the last time we proposed a simple fix. make colleges share the risk by co-signing student loans of their students. if a student can't pay the debt college is on the hook.

we have a professor joining us now. thanks very much for coming on. so this seems like something that somebody would have proposed a long time ago. i can't find a record of that. not sure why. if you and i go into business together, we assume we're going to share the up side but also on the hook for the down side if it goes in the wrong direction. colleges have this amazing deal where it's only up side for them. they get federally backed student loans that make them incredibly rich. if the kids don't succeed once they leave, its he on them. why is that fair? >> tucker, let's talk about the upside of education. the upside of education is people who are educated earn substantially more money. they are more likely to be employed, they are less of a burden on social insurance programs like unemployment and disability. and that provides benefits to the student but it also provides benefits to the government, to the government budget in the form of higher income tax revenue and payroll tax level and the benefits to

the government in the form of higher revenue and lower costs are actually larger than the benefits to the educational institution in the form of tuition. we have the government -- >> tucker: that's true, a lot of what you said is true. you want an educated workforce. a lot of people benefit from college in the sciences. i would never deny that. but the student loan bubble is larger than any other form of debt other than mortgage debt right now. and it's clearly crushing an entire generation of young people. colleges as you know, you work at one, are richer than ever. why shouldn't they share in the risk? why should taxpayers be on the hook for the debt and colleges assume no responsibility for it? what's the answer to that? >> if they were sharing in the upside as well as the downside colleges would be being paid more. as far as the size of the student loan debt 1.5 trillion put that in context household

net worth is $104 trillion according to the federal reserve. the present value of government spending if you just do a discounted -- >> tucker: are you arguing that student debt >> this economy is 1,000 trillion. >> tucker: those comparisons don't mean very much. i don't think your argument with student debt isn't exerting downward pressure on the way people live. it is distorting the society. >> it's helping people to live better but they earn more money. if you look at household net worth and income and look at any measure people more highly educated are doing better than people less educated. the way to finance that is student loans. >> tucker: not everyone who goes to college don't get highly educated. thousands take women's studies courses and become women's

studies majors. they are not situated to succeed well in the marketplace. let me give you an example. i picked this off. baylor university in next, president ken starr. compensation $5 million a year. the average debt for someone graduating from baylor $44,000. the average early career pay for a graduate $54,000. so you tell me if those numbers make any sense at all. the college gets rich, kids assume massive amounts of debt and there is not an economy to support them and pay off that debt. why aren't they getting scammed >> most people do pay off their loans. student default rates public or private nonprofit are only 6% to 7% and recovery rate is 80%. programs are profitable for the federal government. >> tucker: you shouldn't have any problem co-signing for them. if it's a good deal why wouldn't you co-sign.

>> without even getting into all of the benefits to tax revenue the problem that we have, tucker, is really under investment in education. higher earnings, more innovation, faster economic growth and countless studies show it. >> tucker: as someone who lives in this country i can tell you the studies are a crock because young people are now socialist because of it. >> to get back to your question about university pay since you talk about socialism and whether we should be concerned about presidents making too much money. there is a market for managerial talent. >> tucker: i'm sorry we're out of time for this segment but i didn't think we would find someone who would defend student debt. you will. and i hope you come back and we can talk about it in greater depth. thank you very much for joining us, professor. another professor at king's college in new york chairs the

business and finance programs and thank you for joining us tonight. you heard one of your colleagues in the same business anyway argue student debt is a great deal. doesn't hurt kids at all. colleges have no responsibility to put any skin in this game whatsoever and everything is fine. is that true? >> your previous guess was interesting. he said something time and time again students who go to college are more successful in their careers. it is this insidious view that students who succeed in life are dependent on the college education they got. there is another view out there, tucker. that's look, students who can succeed in life go to college but college doesn't have anything to do with their preparation and we look at colleges and we see what is going on. people look at the way money is spent. they look at the class a student takes and say wait a second, is college really the key to students making it if life or is college simply a way station on the way for them? without it they would have been

just fine. your previous guest didn't answer that question. he operates on the assumption unless you go to college you don't have a shot and that's not true. >> tucker: this has been going on for a long time and i'm on your side on this question. what i never looked at until recently were the numbers where the money is going. here you have a taxpayer-backed program created by lobbyists exempt from bankruptcy law that funnels billions of dollars into the colleges and they don't have any liability for them. free money for them. no down side at all. isn't that the definition of a scam? >> it is. look, schools ought to have skin in the game, no question about it. you're right when it comes to the big institutions that have been around for a very long time. they don't have a lot of skin in the game because they're living on their reputation. i think what's interesting if you look at younger schools, upstart schools that are trying to disrupt this space, it is a different story for them.

they don't have that reputation. every student they send out in the marketplace they have skin ?t game. if that student doesn't perform. people won't hire them and your reputation takes a hit. it is a scam and a taxpayer funded. this is -- we talk about socialized costs, this is socialized cost. >> tucker: it is hurting a whole generation of kids. >> they are getting awful preparation for the real world. they are skimming through college, not being challenged. when they are challenged there is always somebody swooping in saying no, don't punish them. you aren't going to make it in the real world like that. >> tucker: i've noticed. thank you very much for that. congresswoman ocasio-cortez says that her approval ratings are low and the reason, you're racist. we'll tell you the real reason after the break.

on >> so many of these republican

senators have turned their back on blazy ford and her testimony but turned their back on america's women. they have turned their back on survivors. >> tucker: you heard it. kristin gillibrand is drawing a pretty clear battle line. republican senators are sexist bigots. they don't care about women. gillibrand is their champion. was she friends with bill clinton and harvey weinstein but whatever. she cares about women. yet now gillibrand faces accusations that she mishandled a sexual harassment situation inside her own office. trace gallagher is on that story tonight. >> most damaging to kristin gillibrand a former senator knows exactly what happens in her office and is fully aware of all complaints. in other words, gillibrand, who is an outspoken supporters of the #metoo movement and called out senator al franken and bill

clinton is being accused of turning a blind eye to sexual misconduct in her own office. last july a female staffer accused a 34-year-old, gillibrand's military advisor of unwanted advances and sexist remarks. three weeks after the staffer filed the complaint she resaid the man retaliated against her and the office failed to question staff members who would have could rob rated her story. >> her allegations did not rise to sexual harassment. but we did find evidence of derogatory comments. >> but no action was taken until "politico" broke the story and then malik was fired and ann bradley, the long time deputy chief of staff who headed up the investigation resigned. and because that matter went public, we also learned that in 2017 another gillibrand advisor, 32-year-old mark

brumer, resigned because of alleged sexist remarks to young female staffers but despite his alleged misconduct brumer reportedly continued to be paid for three months. one aide told "the washington examiner" off color remarks were common but discipline only happened when gillibrand was being contacted by a journalist or running for president. >> tucker: trace gagger, thanks for that. an interesting new poll from sienna college shows that alexandria ocasio-cortez has wasted no time in becoming unpopular among her hometown voters. a whopping 44% did not like her. how did someone who has been in congress only a few months turn off so many people so quickly? the congresswoman has a ready answer for that as she does most things. she said republicans working in concert with fox news, quote,

demonize anyone who isn't a white male. it's bigotry pure and simple. they may look like bad poll numbers. what they really are is racism. it's possible you'll stop at this explanation. it is predictable and self-serving and unsupported by evidence. skepticism is a fair response. let's go deeper for a second. what we have here is not simply a cynical excuse for personal failings one we've heard a thousand times, racism. what ocasio-cortez has given us instead is a litmus test for our souls. it is simple. when you agree with alexandria ocasio-cortez you are a good person. when you disagree you are not. a racist, bigot, hater and loath some human being. prepare for the exam. we aren't proctoring this test. we're on tv. we'll have to use the honor system. we will play you a series of clips. be honest how you feel about

them. everything hangs in the balance. first we'll consider aoc's views on children. she doesn't have any and there is a reason for that. she cares too much. her heart is too big. watch her explain. >> our planet is going to face disaster if we don't turn this ship around and so it's basically like this scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult and it does lead, i think, young people to have a legitimate question, you know, should -- is it okay to still have children? >> tucker: is it okay to still have children? that's aoc's question to you. if you answered are you kidding, of course it's okay to have children. back off you authoritarian creep. how many kids i have is none of your business. if you looked at it that way you failed the test and you're a white supremacist. if you paused for a moment and thought deeply about climate

changed and actually some 29-year-old member of congress should be in child of your childbearing decisions, congratulations, you passed. you are not a racist at all. on to number two. this one is about food. >> my twitter mentions i get a lot of references about cow farts. can you explain that? >> yes. you have to address factory farming. maybe we shouldn't be eating a hamburger for breakfast, lunch and dinner. >> tucker: the question is how many hamburgers should you be allowed to eat in the course of a day. two possible answers. the first is huh? what kind of question is that? isn't this america? hey, stop eating off my plate. that unfortunately is the racist answer. the one that bill connor would have given if he were alive. the correct answer is i will eat exactly as many hamburgers as ocasio-cortez allows me to eat and be grateful for them. if that was your response. congratulations to you, you are

a good person. now to number three. this one is about immigration. >> women and children trying to come here with nothing but the shirts on their back to create an opportunity to provide for this nation are acting more in american tradition than this president is right now. >> tucker: the question is who is more american, actual americans or foreigners who spit on our customs and mock our laws by sneaking into our country illegally and calling us racist if we try to make them leave? this is a tough one. keep thing. time's up. the answer is illegal aliens are the real americans, did you. if you doubted that for a second, please hate yourself. you deserve it. now for the final question on our test. this one is the daily double. see how you do. >> criticisms of you is your math is fuzzy. the "washington post" awarded you four pin oak yosemite. >> a lot of people are more

concerned about being precisely factually and semantically correct than being morally right. >> tucker: are you one of those people who still cares about facts? about numbers and evidence and physical reality? it's 2019, man, physics is just a preference. if you persist in being factually correct and continue to read books and speak in complete sentences, please know that you are committing racism. you, sir, are a bigot and congresswoman ocasio-cortez -- on this test that's all that matters. lisa boothe is a senior fellow at women's independence voice. reflects the generosity of the spirit of the show. we said ocasio-cortez was admired by 33% of new yorkers,

it's 31%. how did you do on the test? >> i failed her test. >> tucker: you are a bad person. >> i hope my parents aren't watching. i'm a terrible person. what's funny is the college poll you referenced president trump is more popular with new yorkers than ocasio-cortez. i found that little tidbit. gallup had a poll march 15 that found her unfavorable ratings have increased by 15 points since the last poll in september of 2018. the reason being is that the more americans find out about her, the less they like her. the more they get to know her, the more they form an opinion on her, the less likely they are to like her. back in september of 201850% of americans didn't know who she was or they hadn't formed opinion. now it's 29%. people don't like her the more they hear from her or the more they get to know her. >> tucker: you already told me you failed our test. so why shouldn't i suspect you

are being defensive and trying to pass the buck? >> i could say that you could go to the gallup poll and look for yourself. that's what the gallup poll found. look at this this way. a lot of americans don't like the fact she was an event last month and told people her critics i'm the boss. this is a 29-year-old member of congress. she is a freshman mind you telling people if you don't agree with her she is the boss. someone who holds kind of dumb ideas when you look at her support for the green new deal, the document she put out. most americans don't want to give economic security to people who are unwilling to work. i think most americans don't look at cow farts as an imminent problem that's coming up here. i think most americans. >> tucker: correction. most americans are racist if they don't like aoc. she has said that. she would be an interesting person if she wasn't just so self-involved and dumb. lisa boothe. thank you very much for coming on tonight. months ago the press speculated

the white house conspired with tabloids or shadowy foreign secret service agents to attack their beloved jeff bezos. that turned out to be a lie. we remembered it, though and we'll tell you who actually did it after the break.

>> tucker: liberals used to be suspicious of plutocrats appeared huge corporations. they love them for the power they wield on their behalf. when jeff bezos' leaked personal test x, instead of being amused onlookers the press rallied behind the world's richest man. >> the wealthiest man in the world. founder of amazon going from being the punch line of this sordid affair to all of a sudden become praised as a hero of journalism. >> he is playing this brilliantly. >> tucker: there is a certain amount of bad assness. they messed with the wrong guy and they have found that out. >> the source close to bezos told me last night do not poke this bezos bear.

>> tucker: bezos bear. the press didn't just defend bezos bear, stroke him lovingly, they also speculated wildly that his texts were leaked by president trump in collusion with saudi arabia. when he wasn't busy helping russia. >> we know how he despises jeff bezos. what is going on here? >> two leading theories see that ami is doing the saudi's dirty work, president trump's dirty work for a combination of the two. >> trump has had a hard-on for bezos. >> it's no surprise that he turned to his good buddy david becker at the inquirer to, you know, to do a hatchet job on him. >> he told us he does not believe that jeff bezos's phone was hacked.

he thinks it's possible that a government entity might have gotten hold of his text messages. >> tucker: government entity. it was a lewd krause teary -- his texts were sold by the brother of his girlfriend. what are the consequences for this reporting? does anybody say i'm sorry, i lied to you? no. richard epstein is an attorney who helped advise bill and hillary clinton. i guess the first macro question is why is everyone sucking up and defending jeff bezos? >> he stood up to extortion. not because he leaked things. he leaked what he did. didn't put him in a good light because ami tried to extort him. tapes and emails and raises the

question who do they extort. they stipulated in court they made contributions to help trump win and they engaged in felonious deal. good for him for not caving. >> i don't think you should cave to extortion ever. here you have a guy who is the richest person in the world who runs this giant company that's crushed american retail and put countless millions out of work that runs distribution centers where people call in suicide threats to 911 because they're so unhappy and the left acts like he doesn't exploit anyone, he is a great guy. >> tucker: the fact is any big organization regrettably has people who are a little unstable. look, the left didn't like him because amazon is driving out all these brick and mortar stores. >> tucker: exactly. >> everybody who benefits from a lower price and the ease of

ordering something. when he stood up -- what turned it was his standing up to extortion. it wasn't because -- anything else. but then they thought hey, maybe this guy actually kind of has some common sense after all. >> tucker: are you bothered by the fact the world's richest manner owns the biggest newspaper in his capital city, personally owns it. we're upset with william randolph hearst. >> the lobbying arm for his business and nobody says that. >> there is zero evidence. zero influence that bezos has over editorial decisions or reporting decisions. if anything, they report all the time any story >> tucker: this is reassuring. one of jeff -- >> it would be the story of the year or century if bezos had

any influence and all these reporters aspiring to win a pulitzer didn't disclose that. >> tucker: he owns the newspaper and has a propaganda arm in d.c. it is lobbying for him and that's totally cool because marti barron is happy to get a salary? >> it's not lobbying for him. they've done ex -- >> tucker: we sucking up to billionaires now. >> if he exhibits influence, you'll call it out. >> tucker: that paper is disgusting. richard, thank you very much. former night line host ted copel said something that was true. he said the press has abandoned objectivity and pursuing a political vendetta. >> i'm terribly concerned when you talk about "the new york times" these days or the "washington post" these days.

we aren't talking about "the new york times" of 50 years ago. we are not talking about the "washington post" of 50 years ago. we're talking about organizations that i believe have, in fact, decided as an organization that donald trump is bad for the united states. >> tucker: political analyst brit hume worked with ted for many years and joins us tonight. i don't think of him as a conservative figure at all. but he just said something that i think many on the left will hate. is it true and why did he say it do you think? >> it's unmistakably true, i did work with him for many years. he is old school much as i am. we come out of the same tradition, which is neutrality in news coverage, opinions reserved for columnists and editorial writer and broadcast journalism you have certain commentators and correspondents

who cover the news. those lines of separation have become increasingly blurred and in the age of trump, as he suggested, they've gone completely out the window because of the sense among journalists that the election of donald trump constituted a national emergency and their duty as patriots to resist it and to do all they could to undo this presidency, which they have tried to do and we see it reflected constantly. >> tucker: i suppose what i find so upsetting about it is how indirect and dishonest it is. opinion people are straight forward. rachel maddow. she says exactly who she is. no misleading anybody being an opinion person. why shouldn't news people who decide to become activists say so out loud? >> well, i agree with that but i think what happened here is

watergate really is a factor here because at that moment, which was the most exciting, the most extraordinary moment in modern journalistic history in the united states. these two young reporters seen as bringing down a president of the united states. we had all been told the fourth estate -- none of us had ever seen anything like this. it was remarkable and glamorous and celebrated in movies, the subject of endless books and so on and it was an extraordinary moment. it created an atmosphere that journalists want to relive this. here comes a target more unpopular that richard nixon in the person of donald trump and they've gone about their business. back in those days the "washington post" reporting on watergate was solid. but when donald trump gave his state of the union address this year the headline -- the headline in the next day's "washington post", banner

headline said a discordant appeal for unity. that is an opinion. you didn't used to see that in headlines in the news pages of any newspapers let alone the "washington post". as ted said, things have changed and they have and not for the better in my judgment. >> tucker: they're undermining their own currency. great to see you. thank you. a new investigation. amazing investigation reveals how the policies of the left have destroyed not an overstatement the city of seattle. local leaders ready to change at all? wait until you see the pictures after the break.

♪ >> tucker: ask anyone who has been to a lot of cities around the world, they will tell you seattle, washington, is one of the most beautiful places on this planet. it is also politically one of the most liberal.

and as a direct result of that, seattle is now a haven for homelessness and drug use. now the documentary about a local news station warns of the consequences. the middle-class people cannot live in seattle anymore because the city is dying. >> the city mayor does not give the cops authority. that is the problem. >> this is one of the most beautiful regions in the entire world, and right now for lack of a better word it looks like the leap. >> it is inferior doing, every camp i walked into there was a weapon. i found modified weapons. i was constantly on the side of the road talking to people swinging machetes. >> i've not talked to anyone else who has been in some phase of addiction. of use, of serious use. i think that that is the starting point. you just have to address that. you have to figure that out. >> you said call 911. do you understand that the police have told us to vote you all out so that they can do

their jobs? >> tucker: putting the whole video on their facebook page, because it is remarkable. doing a great job, jason moran says that seattle host joining us tonight. that video is really stirring. do you think that it actually accurately depicts what seattle is like right now? >> if anything it under plays what is happening. within the last ten days there was an instance in which a mentally ill homeless man, 6'3", 270 pounds try to throw a woman over a highway overpass. that same exact free way, i-5, a major freeway had a bunch of homeless people burning garbage dangerously close to a gas pipe. this seattle fire department had to put out a memo saying that we are worried about the structural integrity. and just today literally hours ago in the community of ballard, there was a homeless man attacking people with a crate. he went win hit one individual

in the head. and not only is seattle dying, but we have a bunch of leaders who are letting it die. you have a council and a mayor's office that is playing politics, going after anyone like me who has to say that maybe we should be helping these people putting them into treatment, putting them into housing, but they say we would just be inconveniencing them. that it is not compassionate to move them from site to site. i'm sorry, it is not compassionate to let them live like this. >> and they are drug addicts, it sounds like your mayor does not care about seattle at all. >> the mayor on this issue loves to talk about how much he cares. and that is the theme across the country. with some progressives. they like to tell us how much they care, but they don't actually follow it up with any action. we have a governor right now who is desperately trying to become president was talking about how amazing washington is while completely ignoring that a major city in washington, a hub for business in the economy is dying because of a lack of leadership. it is a shame. >> tucker: it is absolutely

shocking that this could happen, is there anybody, i wish that we had more time for this. is there anybody in elected office in seattle who is going to fix this? >> there are some republicans and democrats who are in olympia, in the capital who are looking at this from a bigger picture. they are going to help in small quantities. but unless we get a change in leadership in the council in seattle and the mayor's office, i just don't think that they will move anything through. there are some democrats and republicans who are taking this very seriously because they live in the neighborhoods that are impacted. the problem was seattle politics as it spreads to other parts of the state. >> tucker: i hope that they do, because what is happening is cruel and awful. how wild on that one hour news documentary was. it is como, posted on the "tucker carlson tonight" site. we hope that you will look at it. a lot of times tomorrow night, we will be back with the show

that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness and groupthink. there is a lot of all of those things going on right now. but someday it will be better. good night from washington, guess who is next? okay, take three guesses, sean hannity from new york. >> sean: all all right, thank . welcome to "hannity," we have a number of breaking news stories. we will cover them all including another insane anti-trump conspiracy theory by the cowardly shift himself. a huge development today in the mueller witch hunt and an update on the massive college admission scandal. and we will continue the "hannity watch" on the radical 2020 democrats i would like to be president with an investigation into beto bozo robert francis o'rourke in his home state of texas. by first we get started with the round up of the worst moments from the democratic hopefuls for president, something that the mainstream media, we know that they will never do.