much, gentlemen. >> thank you. that is the story on this thursday night. thanks for being with us. tomorrow night at 7:00, talk tucker carlson takes over in d.c., right about now. ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to tucker carlson tonight. the wikileaks founder julian's nest on g was breath, car rested his arrest is a remarkable new development in a long and fascinating story, one that tells you a lot about our leaders and our priorities. but for us tonight, for details on what exactly happened we are joined by catherine herridge. speak out this seven seven-page virginia indictment was filed in 2019 as the wikileaks founder

was arrested. assange spent seven years in sweden to avoid a rate allegation. he engaged in a broad conspiracy with chelsea manning. and wikileaks eventually posted thousands of classified defense. his lawyer issued a statement this morning defending his client as a reporter and publisher. "the u.k. course will need to resolve what appears to be an unprecedented effort by the united states seeking to extradite a foreign journalist to face foreign charges. former u.s. government officials and legal experts predict a protracted legal battle for assange and the justice department for a whole host of issues. >> thanks a lot for that summation. if you watch the coverage of this story today on television, you likely came away with the

understanding that julian assange's i'm kind of russian spy who is in trouble tonight because he stole classified documents from the u.s. government. that is not true, it is factually incorrect. saying so is not a defense of assange, we are not here to promote him or excuse any number of things he said. but just so it is clear, he did not steal documents from the united states government. he did not hack the dnc servers and did not break into the john podesta email account. he's never been charged with any of that and wasn't today, no matter what they tell you. if you are upset about the theft of classified documents from the u.s. government and there is reason to be, we already know who did that. at 22-year-old army private named bradley manning, now named chelsea manning. he got 35 years in prison. shortly after that, barack obama commuted manning's a sentence

which allowed manning to leave jail decades early, and then run for political office. and strangely nobody is. instead they are furious at julian assange for printing the documents that other people stole. he wrote ben sasse who also serves in the u.s. senate. he deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison. wicked? spend the rest of his life in prison? i mean people have never faced this kind of scorn. so what is going on here? a couple of things. first, julian assange published

documents that undermined the documents on the iraq war. he humiliated hillary clinton by showing the democratic primaries were in fact raved. everyone in washington has reason to hate julian assange. but rather than admit that forwardly made us look like buffoons. he said we are denouncing him as, you guessed it, a russian agent. >> justice should come to julian assange for his role in russian meddling in our election, the sooner the better. once again to be totally clear, no one has ever shown that julian assange is a russian agent. that includes many republicans.

robert mueller nearly killed the russian collision hoax and julian assange is allowing them to keep it alive. you would think journalist would say something about this. assange is after all one of them. what do you call a man who publishes news for a living? he's definitely not more anti-american and his broken story is that new york times would have one politicals puli. oh please, brought alexia campbell. we know who he works for, meaning russia. julian assange is not a journalist, without actually explaining. that doesn't so much govern the national security state aside from write memos on his behalf. many believe that if assange was ever a journalist, those days ended a long time ago. it means they believe it.

so why the hostility to julian assange? we will let jim pseudo-explain. he is central to central election experience, and he central also to questions about what the trump administration or trump campaign new prior to the release of those materials. >> it's remarkable to watch, it's bill ordering, actually. that was also when they didn't

applaud the arrest of journalist publishing information. in 1971 "the washington post" and "new york times" published a trove of stolen classified documents about the vietnam war which is called the pentagon papers. liberals loved it. books were written celebrating their bravery. as early as 2011, they said it "a conviction of julian assange would cause collateral damage to american media freedoms. it's difficult to distinguished assange or wikileaks from "the washington post," and that's true. but that was before the trump election and the total war that followed, a war in which the media had definitively chosen aside. the first amendment, that all depends on who you vote for. the guardians of speech are not the enemies of speech. the people charged with policing power hour and we just want to be absolutely clear about who hurts this country more.

and it's not him. mark steyn joins us tonight. mark, thanks for coming on. whatever you think of julian a size or the material that he published, is it a little strange to see journalists who laud "the new york times" and "the washington post" for publishing stolen classified documents during vietnam applaud his imprisonment? >> absolutely. i agree 100% with everything you said. and i'm shocked at the idea because he thinks that somehow, julian assange know something about the trump campaign in 2016. that gives the u.s. government the right to demand that london extradite on the australian to washington to go to jail. even if you take everything that jim pseudo-said as true, there's absolutely no basis for what the government is proposing to do to

assange except that he made everyone in washington look like chumps. >> tucker: is it odd to have a democratic official work to the obama administration to cna and with a microphone telling us that we are immoral if we don't believe the announcements of the permanent bureaucracy here in washington? >> i think this is all an inside game. basically it's a duty of the government to keep it secret. and if the most lavishly funded "intelligence community" on the planet can't keep its secrets, they have the right to go to war against the people who publish those secrets which is something that you said 20, 30, 40 years ago. now to see the american media serving as licks battles of the deep state, it's a deeply bizarre transformation.

the stuff that julian assange published, this indictment is extremely weak. the idea that he somehow goaded and then encouraged manning to steal this stuff, the line he used was, manning tells assange, that's all i got left to give to you, and assange said curious eyes never run dry in my experience. the idea that a corrupt federal criminal justice system could extradite on the basis of those words, actually anyone who believes in liberty. >> tucker: that's right. spend 15 minutes reading about chelsea manning and ask yourself would any competent, and no one was ever held accountable for

the recklessness of allowing. is it weird to see republican officeholders continue with the ludicrous life that it's the greatest threat that america faces on the world stage? >> assange is some goofy australian lefty. if this was a real intelligence community, then chelsea manning wouldn't haven't been able to walk out with all that stuff, just download it and take it out. there were 4 million people with top-secret intelligence glances in this country and that the population the size of new zealand. top-secret clearances to 4 million people, it's not intelligence in the intelligence community on the first place. >> tucker: i don't know why i'm laughing, it's so grim that it's tragic.

so the recklessness with which they manage our country, but i don't feel safe. >> you shouldn't feel safe. i listen to blumenthal, ben sasse saying, this guy should be going to jail forever. americans, flip it around, americans should be up in arms so that london would expedite a u.s. citizen to australia for publishing australian intelligent secrets. you look at it the other way around, americans would rightly see this as a gross infringement on the freedom of american citizens. i hope this english judge who has asked the americans to put up the proofs by june, i hope when he sees what they put up in june, that the english judge tosses this thing out. >> great to see you.

and we will see you in just a minute on "final exam" as a contestant. >> i've been rehearsing, i'm ready to go. they want while the creepy lawyer could soon be the creepy prisoner, hit with yet another indictment. this one is unbelievable, the details. in this hit cnn, too. so it's got everything. we will be right back.

a business owner always goes beyond what people expect. that's why we built the nation's largest gig-speed network along with complete reliability. then went beyond. beyond clumsy dials-in's and pins. to one-touch conference calls. beyond traditional tv. to tv on any device. beyond low-res surveillance video. to crystal clear hd video monitoring from anywhere. gig-fueled apps that exceed expectations. comcast business. beyond fast. >> tucker: it while the hits keep coming to the creepy lawyer, cnn's favorite guest was

just hit with 36 new felony charges. he's been accused of fraud, bribery, embezzlement and one case of rubbing a paralyzed man. trace gallagher has the latest on this. >> tucker, for a guy who bills himself as a winner, he's a loser to beat the band. wait until you hear what the alleged wire fraud entails. here is the california u.s. attorney. >> wire fraud. related to the theft of millions of dollars from five clients including a paraplegic man who agreed to a multimillion dollar settlement, who received only a fraction of the settlement despite the fact that he receive the full amount four years ago. >> the government actually cut off the disability payments because the former attorney what do you wouldn't even file papek

saying the man was awarded the indictment. he also took another clients $2.5 million settlement and bought a private jet. yesterday, plane was seized. so yesterday at the man who had his eyes on the white house may have to settle for the big hous house. they relied on due process and system of justice. along the way, they are entitled to a full presumption of innocence and i'm confident that justice will be done once all the facts are known. they are also facing federal charges in new york of trying to extort nike for $20 million. >> tucker: i think we have fleeced a few david's along the way.

it's horrifying of course in a car crash kind of way that the continuing collapse of the creepy lawyer is really a surprise to no one. actually, someone. creepy lawyer and creepy prisoner was robbing the disabled and this little guy was calling him a serious presidential contender. >> looking ahead to 2,020, look at the serious contender. >> as an attorney i understand how governmental regulations are passed and how laws are passed and how the supreme court works. i have an extreme depth of knowledge. >> i'm taking you seriously, says the president of the contender. each show is called reliable sources. hilarious. every single house democrat except one is backing a bill that would require all high schools nationwide to let biological men compete on women sports teams. to most people that seems

insane, and two female athletes of course it is grossly unfair. but now, it's its orthodoxy. meanwhile, a taxpayer fund and study sponsored by the nih, national nih, national institutes of health is allowing sex change hormones to be given to children as young as eight years old. so what are the effects of that? we know? dr. marc siegel is here tonight. thanks very much for coming on. so whenever you have an advancement in culture that nobody is allowed to question and then it bleeds over into science, it makes me nervous, no matter what it is, whether i like it or not. i haven't heard a single person asked the obvious question, what is the effect of giving per month suppressing drugs voluntarily to children? >> i think it's a long-term effect. first of all, puberty blockers, that followed by hormone therapy as they enter adolescence can

lead to neurological problems, problems with bone growth and stability later on. so that is just the physical issue. there's also the psychological impact and the neurological impact of having transition someone who may decide later on that they want to go back the other way. of course we should support transgender children. of course we should support a child's toys and that is what the american academy of pediatrics says. but when they talk about giving these drugs, these hormones, i get very nervous. and i think to myself, who is superimposing their will, is it doctors or parents? a child of someone i want to watch develop. there's no question to be questioning sexuality and toys and a 9-year-old, we have to wait and see which way it goes. >> tucker: it almost sounds like much house and by proxy. but it doesn't seem responsible at all and it seems incredibly risky. it seems demented to be honest

with you. >> 1100 adults wrote a letter saying we don't agree with the american academy of pediatrics. and your point about lunch housings by proxy is important because parents say, maybe i'm not doing enough. this is our culture now, we have to listen to every word. but our job as parents is to guide and support, not to be mean but support and watch develop meant in progress. i don't think we look for drugs or doctors that do our bidding for us. >> tucker: is so if you were to stand up at a medical conference and say what you just did which was -- it doesn't seem controversial, how would you be received? >> it depends on the conference. i have a feeling that the democratic lawmakers are depending on a certain group, but i think a lot of doctors would agree with me, do no harm. we are not dealing with the

disease, we are dealing with the developing child. and by the way, to your earlier point, when we were talking about athletics, i believe it's a competitive advantage to allow someone that is born a male, and had all these years of testosterone building up muscle and bone, and then we allow them to compete with white men, that's giving them a competitive advantage and and a call that juicing. >> tucker: while it's called biology but it's being denied explicitly by the interest group that is pushing this. doctor, thanks very much. this democrat says his take away from the smollett case is that all the police are racist. we will explain what he means, after this. visionworks can do more than just make you see great.

the right pair of glasses can make you look amazing, too. get two complete pairs of single vision glasses for $59 or two progressives for $99. and choose from over 500 frames. visionworks. we're here to help you.

>> they are a sworn enemy of black people. they want to keep in mind, he did that as part of a fake hate crime. got away with it due to the pretty obvious corruption of prosecutor kim fox. last week police protested fox's corruption and instead of joining them, bobby rush denounced the police. the racist he said, i hate people based on their skin colo color. kevin graham is joining us tonight. thanks so much for coming on. so you have a sitting member of congress dismissing the entire chicago police department as it racist. >> first of all i guess he's unaware that the superintendent of this chicago police department is black and 25% of the chicago police department is also black. and there's about another 25% that is hispanic.

so i don't know where he gets the idea that chicago police are racist but i think it makes for rhetoric. and let's face it. he's a a former black panther, he has never liked the police. he has made incendiary comments in the past and, we stand against hatred. we are there to protect people and not to incite people. so i think he is speaking responsibly and i hope that the members of congress take action. it's the one in chicago is a bit complicated with a lot of disorder and violence and it needs a competent police department. who wants to join the chicago police department when you get called a racist with no evidence by some buffoon in congress? >> this is a very tough job. one of the toughest jobs in the country. this city has gone through a lot of problems and we are trying to

make inroads. i can tell you that the fraternal order of police two months ago brought a plan to the superintendent, and we are trying to mend fences and get out in the community to make sure there is direct community and police involvement. we are the ones that are doing that. we are trying to make sure that we have confidence in the police. it certainly doesn't help when someone makes irresponsible comments like congressman russ did. >> you don't get rich being a cop, and if in addition to those two things you have officeholders attacking or moral character, again on the basis of no evidence, why would competent good people want to become cops at a certain point? >> you are absolutely right. in july, we will be without a

contract for two years. the city doesn't even seem to be interested in trying to settle the contract, so you are right. there will be problems with recruiting and you will end up lowering the standards and they will have more problems. it will be a catch-22. so the city needs to work to be sure the people of the city of chicago are protected. and that seems to have fallen by the wayside, certainly at operation push with congressman bobby rush. >> for example, what is the starting salary for a cop in chicago? >> it's about $40,000. >> and so you are getting lectured by people flying private planes all the time about how you are bad people. how does that make you feel? >> certainly, that they are not in touch with reality.

our police officers do an amazing job every day. they do everything they can. i will tell you this, no situation is perfect. but our officers go out with -- and i had to answer a call from another officer just the other day about the lack of equipment and one of the districts. they are doing their best with what they have and certainly, we are trying to do our best to serve the people and i don't know where they are going to get police officers who want this job. >> tucker: exactly. the only people that wanted are the people that you don't want to be cops. kevin, thank you very much, and godspeed. >> thanks for having me in. >> tucker: last week, the ceo of facebook mark zuckerberg wrote an op-ed calling for governments worldwide to band together to regulate free speec speech. he has written his own op-ed responding to mark zuckerberg.

thank you very much for coming on. so the big tech companies would like free speech regulated by government. what could go wrong? >> it's pretty remarkable actually. if you think about it, facebook has been under mounting scrutiny for a number of practices, protecting your online data ensuring that data and now how it moderates online speech. they asked questions about what they let you say on your platform, and our response for that pushback, facebook has come up with a new idea that has been in the totally wrong direction. they want the government to step in and start policing for online speech for it. outsourcing government censorship, outsourcing censorship to the government isn't just a bad idea but a violation on the first amendment so i may "know on that. i know there are others but not enough.

just taking a very sensible constitutional position. but what about the original deal with the internet, where platforms and congressman said that in their job is to just let people say what they want as long as they are not illegal. right, or guns or peddling. why don't we go back to that? >> whale want an approach that will promote a robust exchange of views. what facebook is targeting here is not targeting illegal content, what it described was harmful content. it has invited regimes, not just the government in the u.s. but abroad, to step in and start shutting down ideas that it doesn't like under the rubric of it being harmful speech. one example that mark is zuckerberg gave was a speech on immigration. mark zuckerberg has a very

large, loud platform, big platform. when they are advocating for those issues online, i think that's a bad idea. >> mark zuckerberg is one of the richest people in the world, and not just speak but influence our lawmakers. i wonder taking three steps back, how did we get here. zuckerberg grew up in the united states. they seem totally unaware of that, why? >> i've been a regular at the fcc for a number of years and i can tell you that when large corporations come in and start calling for greater government control, they are not doing it as an act of charity. facebook right now is a company that is worth a half a trillion dollars and has a leading position in the market. it didn't find religion in and regulation until established.

>> it will wreck an economic mode that only makes it harder for start-ups to compete. and this is the real protectionism right there. thank you so much for that. if you think america is the best country on earth, do you say so out loud? 20 years ago you might get a fist bump but now you will be called a bigot. plus, time for "final exam." mark steyn express, face

♪ >> tucker: it's time now for a

"final exam" where a top-flight battled news professionals see who has been paying attention to what's been happening in the country. this week's first contestant is the fox and friends and cohost, pete hegseth. he's also the host of "battle in the holy city. his opponent is one of our favorite gas on the show, another friend, author and columnist, mark steyn. this is a pairing that i had nothing to do with. i don't know what's going to happen. >> this guy right here? the smartest man of the universe? >> it's war of 1812 around two. the president says, where are the guys who burned down the white house? >> that was their last win. >> tucker: mark steyn is about the smartest person i've ever met but these questions might rattle him. >> i feel like i have a home-field advantage. >> we will see if you can press

them successfully. he has on buzzers, the first want to buzz and gets it. to answer the question, critically you have to wait until i finish asking it to answer. if the correct answer get you one point, best-of-five wins. make sense? question one is multiple-choice. scientists have moved beyond creating useful robots and now make machines that do useless things. a robot in japan is been trained to do something religious ports. is it had a half-court shot, ice skate, or throw a curveball? >> i thought i had it. >> ice skate. >> tucker: has the robot been trained to ice great skate? >> you know, -- that is the old

james in the name smith. >> the traditional japanese sport of basketball. question number two, this one another multiple-choice. this week on the other celebrity quiz showed jeopardy, a contestant set a record for the most money one on a single episode. did he win $90,000, 100,000 or 110 grand? >> tucker: pete hegseth, we will give it to you. >> i'm being too dainty. i'm going to go with 110,000. >> tucker: is that correct? >> congratulations are in order to a jeopardy contestant who won a record amount of money on yesterday show. >> that's our new one-day record of. he wins another $400,000, he

could bright his kids into usc. [laughs] >> good line. all right, you've been watching game game shows to practice, smart. yet another multiple-choice question. this is about a plane in spain that could not take off in the rain. also something like -- passengers were stuck in the tarmac because a bird was strutting down the runway. what type of bird website? pigeon, crane or flamingo? mark steyn. >> i have two go with a crane in spain. >> tucker: was at a crane in spain next to a plane? >> despite honking horns and impatient pilots, it took its sweet time cruising down the tarmac. at one point it flew away but then flew back in a matter of seconds. >> that.

and i was thinking too laterally. >> it was good. it was with worth losing. this was today's daily double. two-point question per our judges. some fans of bernie sanders are angry at him this week because he confessed to something they considered controversial. what did he confess to? >> being a millionaire. >> tucker: is that right? >> senator bernie sandal says he is a millionaire. for years, i wrote -- one of them was a best seller and was translated to five or six languages. i made money on that book. >> capital was great for him. did he put his pinky to his mouth when he said millionaire? >> and what languages did

bernie's book get translated? >> one language, green. final question also multiple-choice. astronomers have captured the first ever image of a black hole. some say it looks like a doughnut and others say it looks like a dragon's eye. how far away as this from? is it, 2 million light wears away, 50 million light light ys away or 100 million light years away? mark steyn. >> i want to go with, 2 million. >> the most famous doughnut hole of all time. >> i never believed that this black hole was as big as people said, until we saw that. >> and 87 is over 50 million light years away.

>> the black hole of my career after this performance. >> you didn't only lose mark steyn, you lost spectacularly and congratulations. >> for the coveted one full mug. >> we are putting a mug in the mail. may you treasure it and fill it with bourbon. biko this man cries at the titanic. >> every time that titanic plays, i cry. >> tucker: that's good. it will be weeks before i can digest this segment. thank both of you. that's it for this week's final exam. played very close attention to weird things that happen all week and come back next week to see if you can be the experts. we will be right back. an egg hunt, and a free picture with the easter bunny.

go online to learn more. your adventure starts here i 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. if you have search results that are wrong or unfair,

call reputation defender at 1-877-866-8555.

>> tucker: at democratic candidate julian castro says that they aren't necessities because americans are having their own kids. >> this is a little bit politically incorrect to some people, but we do need them. if we don't get this right, in 20 or 30 years, the united states would be begging for immigrants to come and make a useful, vibrant workforce. we need them today more than ever before. >> tucker: that's not an original thought, we would be surprised if castro ever had one of those. instead it's a constant refrain that you are from lawmakers, journalists, economists and college professors who tell us we need massive amounts of immigration to replace the children americans are to have it in. for some reason this is always taken as an immutable fact. and why aren't we trying to help american citizens have kids?

it's not that they don't want them, they want them. they want to have more than they are having. according to gallup polling, the average american wants about three kids in a family. that figure is higher than it was 30 years ago. people are more pro-children then they were. the average american woman though is having fewer than two kids, among those who reach their 40s without any children and more than half regret that and wish they had had at least one child. so why doesn't the government try to help americans have the one thing they really want to, is children? it's not impossible. they could inflate the student loan bubble, reaches housing prices so young people could buy a home. give bigger tax cuts to families so middle-class couples could be feel secure about having a third or fourth child. other couples do it, as in not crazy. but none of this occurs to anybody in washington. and, they see only one option.

if you disagree with that, you are the immoral one. and americans want to stand out in america, why else would they be here. but doing so will get you were denounced as a bigot, xenophobe or white nationalists, whatever that is. there's a new view on washington that has a simple ethos recently expressed by eric holder. america was never a great country. >> there is a lot of talk about america being a leader as a democracy in the 1800s when women and african-americans couldn't vote. what kind of democracy is that? >> that's exactly what i mean. when exactly did you think america was a great? >> it takes us back to i think an american past that never in

fact really existed. >> tucker: john miller is here, thanks for coming on. if you don't like america, why are you running it. i don't even know why you are running it, i don't know why you are here. you don't think america is the greatest country in the world, you can get out of here and let me know how it is incorrect because when you flip the switch in the light so come on. it's incredible to me. he said earlier in the show, is that if america was great, you might get a fist bump. i was in college probably -- not even ten years ago and you could say i was at a very liberal school, probably one of the most liberal in the country. you could still chant usa at parties, you could fly your colors, you can't do that anymore. if you do that now they will come after you. >> tucker: i wonder why though? america is flawed, but compared

to what? >> it's the only alternative, and it's florida. and, i was vacillating for a while as to whether they were actually stupid enough to believe this nonsense or whether they were doing it because they don't have any other ideas. their tanks are empty. i came to the conclusion that it was the latter, and they started calling me a white nationalist. there is some logistical problems there. i put up a video on my john miller youtube page which was defending against joe biden's attacks on the white men and, i was defending european thought which led to a great manifestation, which is america. and, stephen miller is not white supremacy activists. >> it's so absurd, it's hard to

believe anyone takes it seriously. and yet we all sort of play along. but why is it that nobody ever says -- i'm pretty open minded. this system doesn't work. here's an alternative. here's another country where it's really working well. but no one ever says that. >> in venezuela? >> tucker: exactly, so what is the impulse, who is made happy by the thought that our country is terrible? >> i think it's meant to get votes and it's very cynical because you have someone who is a trump supporter or maybe where is the "make america great again" hat. hillary clinton says that it is a white nationalist look, and she never lies. but you tell someone that your neighbor is a white nationalist, then you start to say, i don't want to be around that person. and it really divides the country. when you think you are living amongst white supremacist and white nationalist and, it's

dangerous. and it creates a lot of animosity. the one it scares people and bothers me intensely. i don't want to -- first of all, it's so untrue that americans are nice. there are some weirdos out there but not many. >> and you have to wonder if their political agenda is more important than the well-being of the country. >> tucker: nicely put. student loans are of course one of the biggest burdens holding back young people in prior generations, young adults spent money buying homes and raising kids. now a lot of their money goes to paying off tens of hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loan debt. colleges benefit greatly from this but the loans come from the u.s. government. ten years ago the student loan industry was nationalized and now almost all loans come from the feds. if we want to fix this problem government action is necessary. congresswoman maxine waters

chairs the house financial security and she is a top finance regular in the entire u.s. house of representatives. yesterday, waters revealed that she didn't know that government controlled student lending. >> last month of this received testimony that last year 1 million students loans defaulted which is on top of the 1 million borrowers who default of the year before. what are you guys doing to help us with the student loan debt? who would like to answer first? mr. monahan? >> we would stop making 2007. >> we stopped in 2009. >> the government took over a student lending in 2010 or so, we stop doing student lending. >> thank you. >> tucker: it when the government took over student lending. washington obviously doesn't know they are causing problems and obviously they don't care, or they would know. we are out of time, who knew it

would go so fast. but we will be back tomorrow at 8:00 p.m., the show that his sworn enemy of lying, pomposity and smugness and groupthink. but tonight at 9:00, sean hannity >> sean: a special surprise show, tucker. welcome to "hannity." the democratic party, the deep state, the media mobs. ivory tower is about to come crashing down. tonight, the bureaucrats at rigged hillary clinton's investigation tried to rig the 2016 election and tried to destroy your duly-elected president are no longer safe from facing the justice that they deserve. now starting tonight and i'll explain in a minute and the coming weeks and days and months, the deep-state bureaucrats and the friends in the democratic party, the hate-trump media mob, they will face what is an avalanche of