time of need. we could all do a bit more of that for each other, couldn't we? most watched, most trusted, most grateful you spent the evening with us. good night from washington, i'm shannon bream. ♪ nu >> tucker: good evening, welcome toso "tucker carlson tonight." here's a helpful hint about how your government works -- we are full of helpful hints on this show. if you ever see consensus forming in washington, run. something awful is about to happen. for decades, you remember, it was total consensus that our nstrade deals could not be bett, they helped everyone. meanwhile, they were telling us that, america's manufacturing sector died in huge parts of the middle class died along with it. then there was bipartisan consensus on the iraq war and the stockpile of weapons of mass destruction we would supposedly find there, but didn't. years later, there was consensus on banking regulation that was just before the financial crisis

hit. and still more consensus on the creation of all seeing surveillance state that was supposed to somehow help you, but that is not scanning your face and reading your text. there wasn't much debate in washington about any of those policies. there should have been. so it is with some skepticism that we note a new consensus forming, this one about our southern border. it may look bad down there, they're telling us, but calm down. it's fine. everything is just fine. that's thehe new word from max boot, a columnist for jeff bezos' newspapermen. more than that, he is the living repository of every silly half-truth, every stale scrap of stupid conventional wisdom of buffoons who run this place have thought up recently. so here's the latest, this is from boot's appearance on cnn last night. >> i am ready to declare a national emergency. it's not on the southern border. it's in washington, d.c., but the president who is lawless and out of control. >> tucker: who is this guy?

max boot calls himself a foreign policy expert. that's a title that doesn'thi actually mean anything, but in practice, it allows him to agitate for more counterproductive foreign wars. in the year since 9/11, max boot has demanded military intervention in afghanistan, iraq, syria, libya, iran, north korea, and likely many other places. he has called for the u.s. to topple the saudi monarchy, and of course, like so many neocons, boot fell headlong into the russia conspiracy nuttiness for more than two excruciating years. it's hard to think of anyone in this country more than discredited than max boot. going to him for foreign policy advice is like giving jeffrey dahmer a cooking show. he would be the last person you would ask. so course, max boot has gigs at cnn, "the washington post," and the council on foreign relations, because that is how washington really works. the key is never apologize, never admit faults. no matter what. watch max boot explain the idea

of toppling the libyan government, which was deranged, was in fact brilliant. we just didn't do itt right. >> we did a>> great job of overthrowing gaddafi but nothing to secure the country. there is a similar lack of planning for our pull out in iraq. there was little sense of what would happen when u.s. troops left in 2010. we can't think about these as u being quick, in and out engagements. we send troops, kill some people, and then come back home to a victory parade. sadly, it doesn't work that way. >> tucker: boot doesn't explain how it works. he doesn't need to explain. everyone knows his assumptionai is the same as washington's assumption. military occupation is always the right answer. no matter what the question is. sending somebody else's kids to a foreign country is always the right thing to do.er when donald trump pledged to pull americans out of syria boot went crazy on principle.ed because no troops can ever leave, ever. >> there is nobody who knows anything about the situation in

syria who recommends doing this. this is a christmas gift to america's economy. this will help isis, russia and iran and hurt israel and our kurdish allies. >> tucker: what did max boot not say? what do you notice about that? he never explained how keeping americans in syria would help the united states. why didn't he mention it? because he doesn't care. nobody in washington cares. maybe that's why you never hear anyone ask him questions about our current military commitments. are we overextended, perhaps? here are the numbers. as of tonight, we have nearly 175,000 active-duty personnel serving overseas. american troops are posted in 158 different countries. for perspective, there are only hundred 95 countries, total, on the entire planet. we are almost everywhere. this map might give you a sense of a scale of eight.. keep in mind, there is no world war currently in progress.

this is what we signed up for in peace time. you may notice there is one place american troops are not. they are not on our southern border protectingbo us. they should be, we could use them. tens of millions of illegal immigrants already live here in the united states. we don't know the exact number, we don't even know who they are. they just show up, and 100,000 more are showing up every month. over time, this is how countries collapse. max boot doesn't think that is a crisis, nobody in b washington thinks it's a crisis. as far as they are concerned, illegal immigration is one, just some right wing talking point that trump throws at his rallies in grand rapids. you know what they're really concerned about? medical care in morocco. that is a problem we must solve immediately. luckily, we have exercised african lions. never heard of it? you are paying for it. in the last year, 1100 u.s. military personnel participated in that exercise. all of them working to make morocco healthier. how about the plight of the ethiopian navy?

the ethiopian navy needs a lot of help considering ethiopia is entirely landlocked as a country fair thank heaven for our sixth fleet, they are on it for the navy had a press release last week bragging about new talks with the ethiopian government to "discuss the inciting task of building an ethiopian navy." do you feel safer? the people of mozambique feel safer. u.s. military aircraft reported 60 missions, transported more than 66300 metric tons of relies supplies in the wake of a cyclone. that was nice. in honduras, we currently have 400 american troops stationed. 612 airbase squadron recently helped establish a wildfire in a small city. in malaysia, meanwhile, u.s. navy amphibious construction battalion is rebuilding water tanks at an elementary school. we could go on and on. these are all good works, virtuous things. done at taxpayer expense by the most altruistic country in history of the world, that his

office, the united states. but what about us? what about our country? we are being invaded. no offense to the ethiopian navy, but we could use american troops a lot closer to tijuana than africa. max boot and his friends, troops on our own border? that's disgusting, immoral, it's fascism! only in washington do people believe that. a retired colonel and author of the book "margin of victory: five battles that change the face of modern war," and he joins us tonight. thanks for coming on. this is in no way to denigrate the service of our troops, who are improving the lives of foreigners, a lot of foreigners and a lot of different places. but why do you think it is so repugnant to our leadership class that they would help protect us? >> first of all, let me point out, contrary to what brother boot is saying, there are no russian armies amassing on the borders of europe prepared to strike and conquer europe. there are no chinese armies on the borders off southeast asia,

or on the border with korea, ready to pounce on the korean peninsula, or invade vietnam and thailand care they don't exist. so there is no imminent threat, contrary to popular belief. these troops don't have to be overseas where they are paired so why are they there? very simply because special interest in which the ruling class. the lobbies that exist, foreign and domestic, having norm's money. and it paysy. people on the hil, obviously a great deal of money, to support whatever involves overseas contingencies. so the overseas contingencies, the overseas presence, is a cash machine. >> tucker: just to get back to principles for a second, the purpose of the u.s. military is to defend the united states, correct? >> correct. >> tucker: if there is a threat to the sovereignty of the united states-- >> absolutely, title 10 of the united states code says just what i said. in the army, in addition to

conducting decisive operations on land, has wide security. the u.s. army belongs on the border right now. it's perfectly honest for everyone on the border, you could add more patrolmen, more customs officers. it is not just the function of a wall. if they. possibly quote with hundreds of thousands of people marching over those borders, especially when they are told that if you reach the border, you have to be admitted. we need martial law on the border. i just spoke this afternoon to people on the border with new mexico, arizona, and texas, and also the same thing: police and troops, send the united states army. >> tucker: so we are going to put on the screen a list of places the u.s. military is i committed. i think our viewers might not be aware of the scale of the commitment. again, this is not criticism of those troops who are doing their job and doing it well. but they were sent by policymakers who see what they are doing in denmark, e.g.,

finland, france, we are going to keep scrolling here, as a good deed. but why would it be offensive for them to protect this country? i don't understand. why is one good and the other bad? >> the democrats look south and they see voters moving across the border. the republicans are afraid of losing votes. they lack the courage to stand up and say stop. those are the two problems. no one on the left will advocate for the defense of the border. they see in the future a foundation, a human foundation for a permanent dictatorship of the left. >> tucker: you spend your life in the military. tell me, if you were to ask your average frontline infantrymen, on the u.s. army, would you rather -- would you feel better about protecting your own country's border or protecting our "kurdish allies," whoever they are, in syria? what you think the answer would

be? >> let's face it, the average american sailor, airman, or marine who arrives in the middle east and looks around, he says "my god, there is nothing here worth life." so as a result, i'm not going to take any chances. if i'm going to fight, i'm going to pull the trigger. i'm not going home in a body bag. the average solar no myke sailor, airman, marine, doesn't see anything in africa that justifies the loss of his life. to answer your first question, they would all be delighted to defend the united states, to defend our borders, particularly the mexican border, without question. the generals, of course, are part of the ruling class here in washington. they are not interested it because they look at the same cash machine. how do we justify bloated ground forces and huge marine corps, a large army, massive investment, if we pull back and admit there really is no justification for it overseas? it can't be done.

>> tucker: colonel, it is great to see you. so why should the united states maintain troop forces in 163 foreign countries, hand out billions in aid every year, if it fails even to secure its own borderer? and international lawyer who advised president obama's campaign joins us. thank you very much for coming on. they really simple question, is not an argument against helping the ethiopian navy. they need help, they don't even have water. so there is a lot to do. but it is a question of priorities. why wouldn't you first put those troops on our border to protect this country? >> as you highlighted, our troops do great things all over the world. we are in many different countries, that is how we project power, that is also how we build up militaries in friendly countries, so if we need to work with those militaries in the future, we know we can rely on them and that we have a strong partnership with them. so places like ethiopia, like denmark, other places that you mentioned, our soldiers are

doing great work there. it's important. i think we all agreed, as you mentioned, america is the most generous country in the world. it's also the most powerful country in the world. and it is the country thatw. really needs to be right now. we are being challenged by china, we are being challenged by russia. china is doing some of those things. would you prefer to have american troops doing these things around the world, would you prefer to have china? that's one question. >> tucker: hold on! >> one thing that -- >> tucker: i'm going to stop youruc filibuster right there ad asked for very simple question. we've had your foreign policy for 20 years. and we have funded a number of foreign wars. and i would ask you, at the end of that period, is america stronger than it was a 1999? the answer, of course, no, it is much weaker. so it's not working. so why would we keep doing it? >> well, first of all we didn't have my foreign policy. i didn't set the foreign policy over the last 20 years. i didn't support the decision to invade iraq in 2003.

although i went to iraq during the war to help out. i think a lot of things our troops have done have made the world safer. we also have new challenges that we didn't have before, like the challenge that was posed by al qaeda but we were attacked on 9/11. like the challenge posed by isis in 2014. these are substantial challenge challenges. and killing americans, and america is safer by fighting al qaeda and isis and other terrorist organizations. >> tucker: i for the talking point. but i'm wondering, the justification for continuing to send aid to honduras, guatemala, and el salvador, is that if we don't, and lot of their population will move here. but wait, we have been sending money to those countriesir for 0 years.33 of el salvador already live here, there continued to stream in from the other countries. why would we keep doing that? >> the immigration situation ata

the border is constantlyr changing. so 20 years ago, there are a lot of mexican immigrants going across the border. >> tucker: no, i know the story. >> now, as you highlighted, its people from countries in central america, honduras, el salvador, guatemala. these are economic migrants. they are leaving because they face dire economic situations in their countries because there are not jobs in those countries. so one reason to continue -- >> tucker: wait, wait, wait, hold on. >> help those countries -- let me finish. >> tucker: no, because you are actually wrong. >> >> rather than addressing the problem -- >> tucker: we tried it for 20 years and it hasn't worked, but they're not facing dire economic consequences for the per capita income in many countries around the world is much lower than it is in those three countries. for example, nigeria peered >> we are not talking about nigeria, tucker. >> tucker: hold on.

nigeria has 191 million people. >> the nigerians are not coming to the border with mexico. >> tucker: but why shouldn't they? by your reasoning, poor people have a right to come here because they are poor. then why doesn't the rest of the world have a right to come here? since your question. >> no, i never said that. i never said that the right to hecome here. i do not agree with that. i think we have the right to control our board on the right to turn them away. but what i'm saying is there going to keep coming until we helpin them address their econoc situation. we can ignore their economic situation. and we cannot help them improving our economy, but if they do that, they will keep coming. >> tucker: no one, understands! >> they will come by both spirits we were not one person -- >> let me make one point appeared to be give you one sentence and then we have to go. we are out of time. >> migrants from africa are going to europe in droves. and they don't even have a land border with europe. they go by boat and other ways. just building a border on the land between mexico and the u.s.

is not going to stop migrants from coming. that is one reason why we should try to help these countries address the situation -- >> tucker: we are helping them. it's not working. right, it's our fault. speak with not enough, not well enough and not effectively enough. >> tucker: once you've cure that, you've also cured pancreatic cancer, which is probably easier than figured fg that out there but it is great to see you, thank you. permanent washington was shocked when robert mueller failed to prove russian collusion, which they knew was not true. the attorney general wants to know why the investigation was launched in the first place. plus, a major update to the college admissions scam, including possible prison time for a very famous but deeply remorseful actress. straight ahead. ♪ so... your student loans are holding you back... from buying a house, investing for retirement, and living your best life? it's time to refinance your student loans with sofi.

you could get a lower monthly payment, amazing customer service, and you can see your rate in just 2 minutes. refinance your student loans, and you could save big. ♪

xfinity watchathon week. television is back! now through april 14, enjoy free access to the best shows and movies from hbo, showtime, epix and more. what! so, you can get more into what you're into. whether it's more laughs, oops. epic escapes, or high-flying thrills, get more into what you're into. just say "watchathon" into your x1 voice remote, or download the xfinity stream app.

xfinity watchathon week, free. now through april 14. >> this process is going along very well. i think that, from my standpoint, within a week, i will be in a position to release the report to the public. >> tucker: that's the attorney general of the united states bill barr. talking to congress today, he reiterated his promise to release a version of the mueller report, redacted, color-coded redacted, by the middle of this month. "the federalist" mollie hemingway has been covering this story, thanks a lot for coming. what will we get done when will we get it? >> one of the big takeaways from the hearing is the report is going to come very fairly quickly, next week. there are rules that prohibit the full release of everything because there is grand jury testimony that can't legally be released. i'm a fan of full transparency,

but there are limits, at least at this point. we will have much warm information in a week, but i think the underlying issue remainsss the same, which is the mueller probe ended without a single american being indicted for collusion with russia, and that is a pretty stunning end to giving how much we were led to believe that something much more dramatic would happen. >> tucker: as a postscript, a where are they now addendum to the book, i would like to know how this started and why? >> that is definitely the most interesting thing that came out of the hearing that all of these people asking tough questions, and attorney general barr have these very reasonablett respons. he said one of the things he is interested in doing is understanding, how did this investigation getd going? what were people thinking? we knoww that it's not true, tht there was this grand, treasonous collusion issue that we were led to believe happened. why did people fall for this or how do they get started? what are the norms and processes that should have been followed, followed? i hope it's a legitimate investigation. it's kind of crazy we haven't had a legitimate h investigation

is many years into it, but finding out how did it start? finding out a little bit of all of the criminal leaks that were partri of this. people leaking classified information that should not have been leaked, and i'm not even sure if anyone has looked into it, much less been held accountable. >> tucker: i wonder why that are not even particularly punitive on thiss question, i'm happy to just stop, stop subpoenaing people, but we had a case of mass hysteria. and we should know how it started and why, and why don't we have a blue ribbon commission, i don't know, some widely -- oprah can do it, i don't care, but just to find ou out? >> i don't care that means we hold people accountable, but i think you should care, it can be something we just move past on. >> tucker: i agree. >> this is not something that happened in general in our system of government, and in order to make sure it doesn't happen again, we have to know how this was able to be allowed and the people who were engaging in these behaviors, they need to be held accountable. if there are actual laws that need to be rewritten, then they need to be rewritten, so that we don't have people using all the

tools that are helpful for going after our actual enemies against opposing people. >> tucker: i've a question, i don't even know if you know the answer, there is a committee in the senate, chaired by a representative from south carolina, it is like a ghost ship. it's like a run away robot. there continue to investigate claims of russian collusion and issue subpoenas. why are they doing that? >> congress should do its own investigation. at the issue with the intelligence committee on the senate side as they have not done particularly good work in the last couple of years, in general. and in general, they tend to view their role with intelligent agencies as being protective as opposed to doing oversight get oured constitutional system says that congress should pride over his of these agencies to make sure we don't have unaccountable bureaucrats running wild, and when you think your job is to protect them and enabled him to continue doing whatever they are doing, they're not going to be doing a good job with oversight, not being responsible taxpayer money, and not being responsible

with our constitution, which says that congress is in this oversight role, which it strongly suggests that. >> tucker: adam schiff is on msnbc right now, i'm not encouraging our viewers to turn over there and burn their retinas, but he apparently is saying he will not be satisfied until the totally unredacted version of this comes out. which i would be happy with, by the way, as well. will we get the unredacted version of the fisa warrants? >> he is welcome to continue pursuing this, their legal courses of action he can take. i think the fact is he spent the last several years claiming that he had definite evidence of treasonous collusion with russia. it is long past time that he needs to put up or shut up with that evidence. >> tucker: how about resigned? >> was actually obstructing investigations and how this t conspiracy theory was running wild. he was communicated with some of the people involved in the conspiracy theory. i think people should find out more about his it elation ship with the people who were creating the conspiracy theory, but i also think media shouldn't

just treat him as if he is someone you have on without asking tough questions, given how strongly he has misled thee american public. >> tucker: he has disgraced himself, we should at least say that out loud. mollie, the great to see you. there are new and serious charges tonight against actress lori loughlin, in a college library scandal. we learn information about the jail time she and many others might face. we will have details for you after the break. ♪ t an awful skin condition. with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe eczema, or atopic dermatitis... ...you feel like you're itching all the time. and you never know how your skin will look. because deep within your skin... ...an overly sensitive immune system... ...could be the cause. so help heal your skin from within. with dupixent. dupixent is not a steroid,... ...and it continuously treats your eczema... ...even when you can't see it. at 16 weeks, nearly four times more patients taking dupixent saw clear or almost clear skin compared to those not taking it.

...and patients saw a significant reduction in itch. do not use if you are allergic to dupixent. serious allergic reactions can occur, including anaphylaxis, a severe reaction. tell your doctor if you have new or worsening eye problems, including eye pain or changes in vision. if you are taking asthma medicines, do not change or stop your asthma medicine without talking to your doctor. help heal your skin from within. ask your eczema specialist about dupixent.

>> tucker: prosecutors are seeking jail time for a dozen parents who attempted to bribe their children's way into supposedly colleges and universities. federal prosecutors are hitting 16 more parents, that would include actress lori loughlin, with additional charges. trace gallagher has gone astray from the beginning. trace? >> for lori loughlin, and her fashion designer husband and 14 other parents, the newew>>lo indictment adds a money laundering charge which could up the jail time.

the reason it's money laundering is because when the parents of allegedly paid the bribe money to the ringleader of the scandal, rick singer, they funneled it through his purported charity. in other words, they tried to hide the payment and then clean it. the parents were also charged with wire fraud because the feds say they brought the money frome outside of the united states with the purpose of committing a crime in the u.s. i'm of the parents have already said they planned to fight the case in court, and prosecutors say a few parents who fessed up early and cooperated may avoid jail time. for lori loughlin, her husband, and others, prosecutors say they won't listen to any plea deal that doesn't include at least two years of prison. "people" magazine reports lori loughlin refused a plea deal because she won't accept jail. in the meantime, their youngest daughter, olivia jade, finally got her trademark application accepted for her new light of makeup. the application had been denied because of numerous punctuation

mistakes. and finally, felicity huffman, who pleaded guilty to mail fraud yesterday, will likely avoid jail time, who is taking a career hit today. her new movie "other-hood" will not be released on netflix later this month, and there is no new date. her movie "when they sees crs," for now still launched a schedule on may 31st. tucker? >> tucker: numerous punctuation mistakes. i know you're not making that up. [laughs] trace gallagher, thank you. tammy bruce is president of independent women's voice and a frequent and honored guest on hothe show, she joins us tonigh. it seems like the take away is what we already knew, that a system that tells us it's meritocratic is nothing like a meritocracy at all. it's not. it's a live. >> it is a little bit. some kids get into school, they worked hard, maybe they used scholarships, working jobs while going to school. they studied for the s.a.t. test

and did well enough to get in. but what we are finding here is that there is i a part of the system where some young people weree pushed out in order to allow these individuals to get in. that's one of the biggest problems here. you are especially taking a slot for an athlete who worked hard all their life together that scholarship. ofha those are illuminated comes about as the real harm. some people are saying, what's the harm? well, some young people were shut out of this process. in addition to the fact that it's cheating, right? this on self-aware, kind of vulgarity, in the actions that have been taken in this regard by individuals who really could have whatever they want. they've got a lot of money, maybe not as rich as jeff bezos, but they have a half million dollars allegedly to get there two kids on a couple of crew positions at usc. so it is a remarkable things for americans to watch unfold. and now, and this is the good

news, we are focused on these actresses and they are behaving very differently from each other in this regard. of the department of education is investigating the eight colleges involved. but i think this tells us, tucker, that this entire system has to be looked at.ed it's not just the eight colleges that were caught being involved. i think it it's an infrastructure and entitlement because of the liberalism that guides that institution as a whole. >> tucker: since we fond of thesein institutions through tax dollars and tuition, why shouldn't we have some transparency in the admissions process? why shouldn't we know how people get into college? it's the gateway to success in our society. >> right, we've got eight universities, six of them are private. and a two of them were public. however, even with private institutions like harvard, conservatives complain, understandably a lot, that we give t research grants to these private institutions. and there are a lot of other things, a lot of other ways that

federal money flows into these institutions. so there has to be -- i think it is the height of naivete to suggest that it is just a few of these individuals are one conspiracy. as a matter of fact, earlier this month we learned that harvard is investigating their fencing coach, who sold, allegedly, his home to the father of a student who was trying to get in for almost, it appears, half a million dollars more than what the home was worth. there's a lot of different thingss going on at the highest levels here of academia. clearly, we see that the washington structure is dissolving. the problem with the fbi. and it is scary to think, even academia, the higher education structure, is corrupt. but we've got to face it. it's like if you have cancer, you've got to admit it, and then you've got to work on it to get the thing fixed. that's what we have to do. >> tucker: tammy bruce, great to see you tonight. thank you.

as just mentioned, ivy league and universities are some of the richest in the world that harvard has a $36 billion endowment. that is more than the entire gdp of paraguay, more than three times what goldman sachs made last year, which is a lot of money. but for some reason, the federal government hands out billions of dollars to the universities and set of financing, i don't know, border security or clean water in flint, michigan, some thing else that might help normal people get organization open the books to reveal just how much of these schools profit from tax players, and also exposed billions being sent to cosmetology school and community colleges with graduation rates of barely 10%. adam and jansky is the founder of "open the books," joining us to talk about the spirit >> great to be on the program, tucker. thank you for this platform to launch our new oversight reform on the department of education, specific to higher education, where we found outdated policies, misaligned priorities, and a lack of in-house financial

accounting control. >> tucker: so give me some specific examples. i'm interested in this phenomenon, which if you talk to people who don't live in big cities, they will tell you is pretty common, where low income people are lured into these schools for the promise that they will get a great job at the end and they wind up only with student debt. those schools are getting a lot of tax dollars too? >> there are schools across the entire continuum that the no idea thatic has they are funding. you mentioned the schools on herod's beauty and a massage. the american taxpayerde last yer funded those schools to the tune of three quarters of a billion dollars. and you come out with a license to cut hair, do massage, or do nails. what'sll interesting is, the tuition at those schools, sometimes rivals that and exceeds that of big ten universities. your empire schools, your high-end beauty schools, now the two tuition is over $20,000 per year. >> tucker: so if you are this

in terms of outlay versus return, is it worth it? is it worth it for taxpayers to subsidize this and students to pay this tuition in order to get a license to cut hair? >> i think, with student debt, arguably, you can make the argument that the cost of student tuition, fees, and room and board at these colleges is the biggest financial scandal facing america.m student debt now exceeding $1.7 trillion and exceeding consumer credit card debt. look, market forces need to come into play. i think some of these policies are outdated. for example, in our report we show that you have the 50 worst performing jr. and community colleges in the country, last year they soaked up nearly a billion dollars with the federal student financial aid funded by the american taxpayer. their average graduation rate is 12%. we need to take a look at accreditation reform, amongst

other reforms within higher ed. >> tucker: there is a massive lobby in washington which gets virtually no attention at all that makes this wealth transfer possible. higher education swarms the congress with lobbyists. is there more effective lobby in washington? >> well, may be the fortune 100 companies, right? look, we took a look at the salaries at how higher ed is literally using the taxpayers for personal gain. at openthebooks.com, we captured every employee that works for a college and university across the entire country, and tucker, there is a new minimum wage for a higher ed employee, and that is $200,000 a year. we found 43,000 employees in higher ed across the country make $200,000 or more, just in the state of california, there are 10,000 public employees working in colleges and universities that make more than $200,000.

>> tucker: lastly, and quick, what percentage of those administrators versus teachers? >> i don't have the breakdown of the professors, the administrators, the executives. however, in each schools of the ivy league, it's a perfect example of how they game the system. there is 147 of these administrators and professors that make more than $400,000 a year. there's 47 of them that make more than $1 million a year, and five of them over the course of the last five years cleaned off, collectively, each, $20 million. >> tucker: [laughs] i went into the wrong business! i should have been an professor. thank you very much for that, i appreciate it. >> great to be on the program, tucker. >> tucker: 2016 presidential election did not go at all as the media and democratic party had hoped, but they have a plan to makec sure that something lie that never happens again. we will tell you the details

after the break. ♪ we just got married.

we're all under one roof now. congratulations. thank you. how many kids? my two. his three. along with two dogs and jake, our new parrot. that is quite the family. quite a lot of colleges to pay for though. a lot of colleges. you get any financial advice? yeah, but i'm pretty sure it's the same plan they sold me before. well your situation's totally changed now.

right, right. how 'bout a plan that works for 5 kids, 2 dogs and jake over here? that would be great. that would be great. that okay with you, jake? get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change from td ameritrade investment management. >> ♪ >> ♪ ♪ >> tucker: let's say we are determined to never lose an election again, no matter what. what would you do? the left has thought about it, they have a new strategy to permanently solidify their democratic majority. it does not involve persuading new people to for them. democrats would rather enact policies that would make it impossible for anyone but a democratic elected. senate of the leadership fund and detailed their claims in a column for "the wall street journal" recently. thank you so much for coming on. what is the plan to make structural changes to ensure permanent majority? >> you look at washington, it's easy to get mesmerized by the green new deal and medicare for all come abolishing i.c.e., but behind all of that shock and all, it's a very methodical plan

to lock in a majority. it starts with hr 1, the first bill that you introduce is symbolic period for speaker ryan, it was a tax bill, but for speaker pelosi, it was able to federalize statean election systems to make it very, very hard to impose registration deadlines, to have to register anyone as young as 16 years old, felons can vote after they get out of prison, and beyond that, for the first time ever, the house went on record in favor of d.c. statehood, which then could create a larger senate with two additional democratic senators and a larger majority for them to start a new congress with. >> tucker: they live in d.c., though, so they know it's the most dysfunctional functioning city in the world, but they still wanted to become a state. they are totally cynical as what you saying. >> precisely. i think if they can create more state that will produce democratic senators, they've not only talked about the district of columbia, which

senator chuck schumer endorsed, but they are already talking was statehood for puerto rico. potentially, what they call fulo voting rights from guam and other territories, which ultimately means statehood. so you can start with the small democratic majority in the senate and instantly expanded y the addition of more stars on the u.s. flag, more states, all of whom would be moremo democratic. >> tucker: are they making an argument about how this would make the country better? how america would be improved by this? was it just power grabbing? >> it is all encased in this argument about franchise meant, helping people get the right to vote, self representation, just like it shows on the d.c. bumper stickers and all that. but really what they're trying to do is to create impediments to republicans ever getting back in power, should we lose control in 2020. and as i said, the start of it is byta changing state, not just federal, state election laws,we weaponizing the federal election

commission to go after people who criticize federal officials, even on policy. then you create more states, and then i think the thing that is really the ultimate centerpiece, and the sounds like it could never happen, but it's being talked about very seriously, and that is to pack the supreme court appeared to actually expand the size of the supreme court so that the narrow balance of power that is currently there would suddenly be tilted radically in one direction and stay that way, potentially for a very long time.ir >> tucker: i hope republican's are awake and concerned to. they should be. thank you, appreciate it. so will this plan worked? doesn't make any sense? we talk to an actual democratic about it. former advisor to both bill and hillary clinton, joins us tonight. richard, thanks for coming on to i want to run four ideas by you that are now endorsed democratic presidential candidates. the first is allowing inmates to vote while still behind bars. are you for that? >> it really depends on what the state law would be. the fact is that most states, that's not an option.

>> tucker: but bernie is for it. >> the fact of the matter is, we talk about hr 1? they like the status quo, do like having somebody, someone who can basically only ask for $5600 as a donation, and then step out of the room and ask -- have their lackey ask for $56 million? if you like that, then you would hate hr 1. because what hr 1 will do is restore some sanity to our politics against voter suppression and against big money. that's all. >> tucker: who tooker more big money in the last election? >> we don't know. >> tucker: which can paint it twice asas much money? twice as much, hillary clinton! >> i don't think we actually know because it is unregulated. super pacs don't actually have to identify -- >> tucker: every rich person in america supported hillary clinton, so i think we know the answer. >> some of those rich people are ambassadors now, i've heard.

>> tucker: rich people typically becomes investors, that's how the system works, if you are against that you should change it. lowering theor voting age was 1, are you for that? >> again, what we'reha trying to do with hr 1 to safeguard against voter -- >> tucker: [laughs] >> you think it's a joke. >> tucker: it's a joke that children should vote. >> people are taking measures, closing polling places, reducing the number of days -- >> tucker: it's an attempt to whip up racial disparity. i'm sure that there is crummy voting behavior, but overall, that is the opposite of the truth. >> no, voting in bigger numbers -- >> tucker: they have a higher turnout than white voters. let's be real for a second gear that's not -- that may be a lot of things, it's not suppression. top saying that, it scares people.n.e >> no, it's a demonstrable fact. take george as an example, we

know what happened. all of these people strip from the voter rolls that were disproportionately black. call that what you want, it feels like voter suppression paired >> tucker: racial lysing everything only makes people hate each other. there is bias in the country, let's expose it, but saying there suppression with african-american voters voting at a higherr percentage than white voters, it's a terror tactic. speak with your stripping people out and it happens that they are disproportionately black, you call that what you want, i'm just looking at a fact that i'm not putting a label on it, i'm just calling it back. for those people, it's not funny. >> tucker: no, it's not, that's why it's not. richard, thank you very much. 900-foot, one-bedroom apartment in san francisco rent for just $4,500 a month.or if you can afford the rent, you can see for yourself just how repulsive san francisco's trash covered, syringe-laden streets have become. all investigation into the crumbling state of california straight ahead. ♪

>> tucker: health officials

warn about measles exposure. newspapers say the poor are digging through neighbor's trash cans to make a living. we are describing one of the richest cities in the world, san francisco. look at what our reporter found. >> san francisco manages through eight city departments, issuing some 400 contracts with at least 75 privatete organizations, a tangled network of services with no unifying oversight by the city that actually hand out most of the money. >> it's just all the good old boys club. the people that run homelessness out of our city halls and county seeds are formally owners of nonprofits. we still got 14,000 -- okay, great. we will try better next year.

where's my check? inex the checks keep coming. >> basically, industrial complex, so to speak? >> big time. we have a pharmaceutical industry, and we got our homeless industry. these people that run nonprofits making $250,000, that is b.s. you say you care about homelessness, you taking home $250,000 a year, that is ridiculous. that's ludicrous. >> tucker: that entire video isr: going up on our facebook pitch, check it out. you made an interesting point that i never hear made, that this is a moneymaking operation for a bunch of different supposedly nonprofit organizations. how does that work? mean, it was very interesting. i hadn't really spent much time in san francisco when i went down theren to work for my shower, and when i was speaking to different people and talking them about their organizations

and how the money circulates between these institutions, and then put back in such a way that almost enables some of the gbehavior that goes on in san francisco, especially from a drug's perspective. it's almost like it's sustaining itself, it is like there is the money, and then you kind of move it around a little bit, and then don't really put them in a position to improve their life. just keep them constant. as he said in the video, they are pulling home $200,000 plus a year. it baffled me. >> tucker: is a metaphor for how a lot of things work in society, when you keep people dependent, you increase your own power. tithe democratic party does thi. it'sf not like san francisco spending a lot of money on this problem. >> they're spending a ton of money. in ways that doesn't really deal with or attack the issue in a way that solves it. it's weird, just this massive sweeping under the rug, and

they've been doing this over time. i think that what they're dealing with, what they are as there is no where to put the mass. as an eye you just have a bunch of rich people arguing with richer people about where to put the homeless people. and it's just, it was really naughty, to be honest with you. >> tucker: it is, it's a wonderful city. you said you hadn't really been there before, give me your 30 seconds take on it, what were you struck by? > initially? within i want to say the first2 or 3 hours i was in san francisco, i saw more deliberate drug use, open drug use in san francisco that i had seen in my entire 35 years of life. >> tucker: that's a sad and crisp summary. thank you, it's a great piece you did. it's on our facebook pitch. thanks. we are out of time, sadly. we will be back tomorrow night, 8:00 p.m., the show that is the sincere, sworn enemy of lien, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. dvr it.

if you have a masters in electrical engineering, good luck with that. and good night from washington could be of good news, though. the fun doesn't end here. live in new york city, the world-renowned, host of the 9:00 p.m. show, sean hannity. >> sean: i love when you give me the biggest buildup ever. >> tucker: i mean it, man. >> sean: tucker, great show, thank you. welcome to "hannity." buckle up. an avalanche is coming. i have been telling you about this. i it will destroy, there is any remaining credibility of the tinfoil hat conspiracy theory and arranged media mob in this country, along with their allies in the democratic hate-trump left, and those that have abused powerus inside and outside of government, you are about to face the justice that many of you deserve. we have made a promise on this program that we will hold all of them accountable, which has been a central focus of this show.