♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening, and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." a democratic lawmaker in the city of philadelphia berates and threatens teenage girls for praying outside of an abortion clinic. it's a remarkable story you might not believe it actually happened had it not been caught on tape. but it was. we want to begin tonight with trace gallagher who has details on exactly what happened. trace? >> tucker, the entire video of pennsylvania democratic lawmaker brian sims verbally harass ago woman protesting outside of planned parenthood was live streamed on periscope for 8 minutes. we're going to show you the scene of the full 8 minutes which is representative sims maintaining that protesters are, quote, racist,

classless bigots who need and deserve our righteous opposition. when the woman he is taping tells him to stop he threatens to dox her you know public her private information. watch. >> hi, everyone. representative brian sims here and i'm once again out in front of planned parenthood of southeastern pennsylvania. today's protester now, she is an old white lady who is going to try to avoid showing you her face. an old white lady telling you what's right to do with their bodies. shame on you. shame. shame. shame on you. you know. >> get the camera out of my face. >> give me her address we will protest out in front of her home. let's protest out in front of her house. this is a racist act of judgment. have you to business being out here. everyone this is what they deserve. this is what they need. >> and when the pro-life organization live action posted the video and messaged periscope saying the broadcast violates the company's rules of behavior, sims responded saying, quote: bring it on bible

bullies and planned parenthood protesters are scum. later which sims got blasted by state and national republicans, he issued a half-hearted apology quoting again i know that two wrongs don't make a right especially when i'm on the front lines of this civil rights battle. i can do better and i will do better for the women of pennsylvania. but it's not two wrongs not making a right. it's three. sims also verbally abused protesters last month. watch. >> hi, everyone, representative brian sims here and i am outside the planned parenthood, a bunch of pseudo christian protesters who have been out here shaming young girls for being here. here's the deal i have got $100 to anybody who will identify any of these three. >> trying to save babies. >> a bunch of white people standing out in front of a planned parenthood. >> nothing christian about what you are doing. >> some pennsylvania lawmakers are calling for a criminal investigation of sims' behavior.

tucker? >> tucker: amazing trace gallagher thank you very much for that the mother you just saw in that video joins us tonight from philadelphia. ashley, thank you very much for coming on. what -- you were there in the video with three girls, i think two of them are yours. how old are they? >> so, my daughters are 15 and 13. and my daughter's friend who was with us is also 15. >> tucker: 15 and 13. what do they think of this? >> it was -- it was a shocking experience. what is not seen in that video was our first interaction with mr. sims. he approached us about 20 minutes before that, came in -- i would say came in hot and came in yelling at us. and really was yelling very directly at the girls. very specifically at the girls. so, i moved myself in between him and the girls, asked him, you know, please

talk to me. let's have a conversation. the two of us as two adults. but he continued to yell at the girls. and then eventually he left and about 10 minutes later is when he came back videotaping us. so, after our first altercation with him you know, i went and talked to my girls. and told them, you know, i'm really sorry this happened. i'm really proud of you guys for being here. it was holy thursday. this is something we wanted to do as a prayerful act of the service as we prepared for the easter -- going to begin that night with holy thursday mass. and i told them, you know, sometimes it's hard to do the right thing but i was really proud of them. sadly, ironically, the two older girls looked at me and said mom, that was nothing compared to what people were screaming at us at the march for life in january they went to the march for life at their high school. so, i guess i was grateful that they had had some

experience before. they were prepared for it and because they were able to kind of stay calm, that helped my younger daughter stay calm. and, you know, we prayed for him then. i said we will continue to pray for him. and just try to do the right thing. and so then he came back, again, videotaping us. we weren't as shocked because we just had the interaction with him about 10 minutes prior. so, yeah. but it was -- my adrenaline was up as a mom. my adrenaline was running. >> tucker: he seems to threaten you. he offers money for your identities. >> yeah. >> tucker: did you feel threatened? >> i was concerned for my girls. you can see me speaking in that video. i was genuinely trying to enter into just a dialogue with him to try to bring the situation, calm it down a little bit. and say to him on film we are really here just praying

for these women and babies. we are not looking for an altercation. i never come to clinics looking for a fight. it's always just with peaceful, prayerful intent. yes, i was concerned that he said multiple times that he wanted the identities of my daughters. we were at that point already done. we had finished our prayers. we were leaving and so when i realized he was not going to enter into any kind of productive dialogue i thought we will just continue our exit and we will just leave. i never thought -- i didn't ever think more would really come of it. >> tucker: so he attacks you in that video and attacks others in the video we showed before for their skin color. what was that about? was that out of nowhere? what does that mean? >> i have no idea what it means. you would have to ask him. i mean, my daughters and i are caucasian but we were there to pray for all women. we certainly don't look at the color of their skin as they come or go.

my daughter's friend is not caucasian. that's very evident and her video and pictures. she said several times to him over the course of our interactions i'm not white, sir. i know it's in the video at least once. so, fortunately we kind of got a laugh out of that because what he was saying literally just didn't make sense. it didn't make sense. >> tucker: it's a racist attack. it's bizarre. has the democratic party of pennsylvania or philadelphia apologized to you? >> i have not been contacted. >> tucker: by anybody? >> no. i haven't been contacted by anyone in the democratic party about this situation at all. >> tucker: he called you racist. as i understand it you are arguing for fewer abortions among african-american women. is he arguing for more. but you are the racist? >> yes. >> tucker: does that make sense? >> no. it doesn't make sense to me. you would have to ask mr. sims what his logic is behind that.

>> tucker: he won't come on tonight. you were gracious enough to come. we are glad that you did. thanks very much. >> thank you. >> tucker: well, this point we should remind you despite what you just saw and despite all appearances brian sims is not a mentally ill pan handler or i have a grant with a drug problem screaming at strangers. looks like it but is he not. he is an elected lawmaker represents central philadelphia in the house of hof representatives. is he a star. hung out with pete buttigieg. robust social media following. you can check. in 2014 naral the abortion clinic lobby gave him a top award here is a picture of him with the president. the american bar association also gave sims an award for something or other. in 2013, when she became ambassador to japan, caroline kennedy ask asked sims to give the keynote at her swearing in. brian sims is a totally and completely mainstream

figure. he is also as you just saw a frothy extremist who is willing to threaten teenagers and attack them for their skin color simply because they disagree with him. sims calls other people racist because they want fewer black women to abort their children. the whole thing is totally deranged. but it's entirely okay with democrats. the pennsylvania democratic party has not even commented on what brian sims did. nobody at cnn is denouncing him. in fact cnn's website doesn't even have a story about this as of this hour? why would it? he is their kind of politician it's not news. in fact, it never even happened. remember that the next time they call you immoral. it won't be long. dave reuben hosts the reuben report on youtube he joins us now. dave, you almost get sick of these double standard stories where people on the left are allowed to do things that people on the right would be indicted for doing. this is so over the top. you have to kind of wonder is there a limit really?

>> tucker, you truly wish at this point that there was almost anything that could shock me coming out of the progressive movement but the answer is no. i mean, look. there was a bigot and a racist and a bully in those videos but it was the guy that was holding the camera. this is an elected official who is trying to offer money to dox, that means release personal information about people that potentially, i assume, live in his districts. and it's beyond just what this guy is doing. the bullying he is doing in the name of being so self-righteous. it's also the fact that as you noted, he used periscope which is a twitter video app. to broadcast that video. now, you are not allowed to dox people according to the twitter terms of service. so it's not just that the democrats won't say anything, it's not just that cnn is not going to run the story. it's also that the tech companies and this goes to so much of what we have been talking about over the last few months. it's that the tech companies aren't going to ban him. meanwhile they will ban

conservatives just this afternoon david horowitz who is a "new york times" bestselling author who has been on my show and probably your show and good decent guy he was banned just this afternoon. so he was suspended just this afternoon i should say. but the point is the double standards that we are dealing with not only when it comes to how the media deals with these people but also the tech companies. this is really, really becoming the issue of 2019. and i think there is almost no low enough for these guys because they never get called out on it except on some places on youtube like on my show and some places on cable news like yours. >> tucker: screaming at teenage girls? attacking them for their skin color and then calling other people racist? like the whole thing is so commented thademented it's hardo believe it's real. >> tucker, try to imagine. flip the script for a second. pretend he was a conservative or republican or anyone that remotely leaned right or was anything

other than a full-on leftist progressive and he was doing the exact same thing smut media would be having a field day. the 20 democratic candidates would be claiming this is proof that america is an evil right racist parish call country. we have prayed. where are all the people blaming the coflgton kids? where is the outrage which it is right in your face and done by elected official? unfortunately they know they will not be called out in any mainstream outlet and the disconnect here. this is my real fear is that all of us are going to start living in these little siphoned places where we are going to figure out what our reality is and it won't have a bearing on what real reality is this is where, man, where are the good democrats? where are the real liberals who will just step up and say you know what? we will not tolerate this. that was absolutely wrong and just say we're thought going to do this anymore? they won't do it because for whatever reason and i have some theories on, this they are consistently led by

their worst actors because they think it gives them the moral high ground. and that is a really depressing race tout bottom. >> tucker: very deep point that you just made. they are led by their worst actors. they are not all bad but too afraid to stand up to people who are. that cowardice gets to where you are today. david rubin thank you, very smart as always. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: for two years president trump was ridiculed for pointing out that maybe the obama administration spied on him. it turns out the obama administration did spy on him. it's not speculation. it's fact. the people who claimed it was a lie ready to apologize? that's next. and, breaking news, involving trump's tax returns. this story has just broken seconds ago. we have more on what we know and what it means straight ahead. we call it the mother standard of care.

it's how we care for our patients- like job. his team at ctca treated his cancer and side effects. so job can stay strong for his family. cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now.

♪ >> tucker: we have a fox news alert for you. the "new york times" has released new information on 10 years of the president's tax returns 1985 to 1994. they are xeroxed copies of tax information. they say they got it legally. it's not clear where they got it some speculation that it came from the president's personal attorney michael cohen. we don't know that apparently this information shows that the president was reporting millions of dollars of losses some years in the 1980s and 1990s and he may have taken those loss to avoid paying much in taxes. the "times" is not suggested that crimes were committed here, which is interesting because the implication always was that the tax returns would reveal some type of felony. if they do the "times" is not reporting that. by the time there was

clearly some kind of collusion between the "new york times" and cnn which broke this story just moments ago the second the "times" leaked it we have much more on it as we digest the facts as they are. but, first, early in his presidency, donald trump made the surprising claim that the obama administration spied on him during the 2016 race. that produced an immediate backlash the president did not back off instead he repeated that allegation to us in fact to us right here on the show. >> march 4th, 6:35 in the morning you are down in the morning and you tweet the former administration wiretapped me, surveilled me at trump tower during the last election. how did you find out? you said i just found out. how did you learn that? >> i had been reading about things. i read in i think it was januarjanuary 20th a "new york times" article where they were talking about wiretapping. there was an article. i think they used that exact term. if you take a look at some of the things written by wiretapping and eavesdropping and don't forget when i say wiretap

those words are in quote. wiretap means old fashioned stuff. that covers surveillance and many other things stuck tuck surveillance and many other things. well the next day the political director over at cnn david challengian who is more a political activist mocked the president for saying this and called him a liar. watch this. >> he can no longer justify not retracting those tweets, apologizing for accusing barack obama of a crime the white house is such a pretzel on this. the president looked like a 3rd gradener that interview yesterday trying to squirm. it's just not okay for the president of the united states to make this kind of completely unsubstantiated claim. >> tucker: it's just thought okay for them to criticize barack obama david chalian cnn political director. he isn't the only one by the way the senate intel committee released a statement suggesting trump was lying, too. keep in mind the chairman is

a republican from north carolina. and then every bland clueless person in washington consensusville near d.c. lined up to denounce the big orange liar. watch. >> president trump has a new favorite word and every time he uses it he is lying. and that is the word spy. >> these baseless claims of spies. >> this is the president of the united states telling people don't believe what this federal government is doing and that has very, very dangerous consequences. >> the notion that somehow the fbi implanted, planted someone inside the campaign to spy on the campaign is just not true. >> there is absolutely no evidence there was a spy. >> he wants you to believe that his campaign was spied on and it's one of the worst things that we have ever seen from government. >> tucker: one of the worst things we have ever seen. not the spying. people talking about the spying. okay. once again it turns out that trump was absolutely right

and the people reflexively calling him a liar were totally wrong and dumb about it and self-righteous as they always are the fbi did spy on trump's campaign sent undercover operative to illegally seek information. that is called spying. do we expect an apology from any of these people soon? will anyone lose his job for pushing bogus information as fact? no. instead they will redefine what spying means. they want to redefine what sex means. what it means to be a man and woman. not a big deal to redefine something as spying or surveillance or monitoring or whatever. very frustrating to watch. but, what happens next is the question? well, for that we go to kevin brock a former assistant director of intelligence for the fbi. he predicts jim comey could be in trouble for the way he handled the trump investigation. thank you very much. >> my pleasure. thanks for having me on. >> tucker: when you say the former fbi director could face consequences for this. what do you mean? >> i think got hung up on

this term of spying and did the fbi spy. my concern is did the fbi break rules under james comey and andrew mccabe as they were leading a counterintelligence investigation out of the seventh floor of the director's office of the fbi headquarters, unprecedented. these investigations are normally carried out by veteran counterintelligence agency agents out in the field. but here they have created a bobble or cadre of investigators to investigate whether or not there is some collusion between the russians and the trump campaign. and they started running sources, confidential human sources against members of the campaign. and we know now that they approached the fisa court and got a electronic surveillance warrant to surveil carter page. electronic surveillance is much more powerful than using a euphemism like spying. i refer to it as the nuclear of collection operation. highly invasive. more than wiretapping

somebody or listening to their phone conversation. the court orders to you monitor everything about that person to plant microphones, cameras, whatever it takes to capture conversations. >> tucker: why wouldn't -- here is the part i have never understood and no one has ever explained. if they really worried that people connected to the campaign were including with russia, why wouldn't they have told donald trump the candidate about it? >> and that is a key, key question. because veteran counterintelligence agents are puzzled about this as well. there is no doubt that the fbi should and could investigate russian activities in this country targeting our citizens and targeting our government. but, normally, when russia intersects with a u.s. person or u.s. citizen, the fbi goes to that person and asks and warns them about what russia is up to and asks for their cooperation so that we can obtain more intelligence about what the russians are up to.

>> tucker: bingo. >> why they decided from the outset to make members of the trump campaign a target of a counterintelligence investigation is still a puzzle because the predication to do so is literally not there, according to the mueller report. >> tucker: just very quickly having done this your whole life, you think that's very odd just to be totally clear about it. >> it's extremely odd. it's unusual. it's not the normal way a counterintelligence investigation is pursued. and so, that then begs the question that i william barr is getting at and that is let's go back to the beginning and find out how this all got started. >> tucker: nicely put. kevin brock, thank you very much for that. >> my pleasure. >> tucker: very interesting. maybe even more spying we don't know about yet. george papadopoulos said he may have been monitored as early as the end of 2015. papadopoulos has a new book deep state target. george pan papadopoulos joins us

tonight. >> thanks for having me on. >> tucker: you believed you were being monitored even before you connected formally with the trump campaign; is that right? >> absolutely. so i in november of 2015, it was the same month that i was joining the ben carson campaign because people forget i was on carson's campaign before i joined trump's campaign. i was living in london and i had been approached by high level state department officials and even the cia in london and they invited me to the u.s. embassy to meet with me and to basically probe me and to get to know why i'm joining the ben carson campaign and what the ben carson campaign was really all about. and the man who invited me was david cough ver vovich workn london and directing the energy department. clearly by november 2015 i don't think trump's campaign was the only one under surveillance quite frankly. i think many of the republican candidates probably had some sort of

illicit surveillance upon their own campaigns because it wasn't just donald trump who was running for the presidency against clinton and without overthrow. >> tucker: i know this is a long story, knock as succinctly as you can, why in the world would our intelligence agencies have an interest in which campaign you were joining? >> you know what? i think bob mueller might have dropped a really important piece of information that many reporters overlooked. and that was that they stated that there were wiretaps and surveillance warrants issued on me for my ties to the israeli government. now, for everybody watching this program, israel is america's top ally in the world. and bob mueller stated in his report there were wiretaps and likely possibly i have been told a fisa warrant issued on me for my connections, legitimate connections to the israeli government. so i think that what this whole story about myself and

others, of course, has nothing to do with russia. it probably has something to do with my ties to other governments and they basically threw me in the middle of this russia conspiracy to cover that up. there is no other explanation for how i gout involved. >> tucker: by other governments just to be clear you mean israel? >> i mean israel. and i'm just quoting bob mueller himself. it was very strange that he admitted that i even tweeted it just today and the language is all there. so when i was being approached by these assets, u.s. intelligence, british intelligence and australian intelligence from 2015 through 2016, they were always asking me two questions: one, who are your personal contacts and, two, what trump is up to with russia. so there was clearly monitoring and i think that's what william barr is going to get to the bottom of why these assets were targeting me and others. >> tucker: looking glass world and you are right nut middle of it. george papadopoulos, thank you for that. >> it's incredible.

>> tucker: is incredible. >> thank you. >> tucker: facebook is one of the world's most powerful companies now using its power to police what you and i and the rest of us say online. how should we respond to that? that's next. new information about nearly a decade of donald trump's tax transcripts. we are assessing that we have more for you after the break. ♪ ♪

♪ >> tucker: this is a fox news alert. as we just told you, the "new york times" released tonight new information on a decade of the president's taxes. trace gallagher has been taking a close look at what they put out there and joins us with an update on it trace? >> hi, tucker. we're scanning the article. it's important to note off the top the tax records do not include information or tax years at the center of the president's escalating battle with congress. there are no allegations of crimes or financial misdeeds. instead, the records go back to the late '80s, early '90s, years the president has already admitted were at the very least tumultuous.

by the time donald trump's art of the deal book hit shelves in 1987, he was already in deep financial distress, meaning tens of millions in debt and during the decade from 1985 to 1994, the "times" says trump's losses totaled just over $1.1 billion. remember, this is investors and loan money primarily. a few points there. during that time, mr. trump bought eastern airlines shuttle for 365 million. it never turned a profit. and he was spending upwards of $7 million a month to keep it up and flying. and his taj mahal hotel and casino it opened in 1990 with more than 800 million in debt and to keep the taj floating trump's businesses pulled money from other casinos placing them in the red as well. now, the "times" is reporting because of all the losses that trump paid no federal taxes in eight of the ten years. charles j. harter who is a lawyer for the president told the "times" on saturday that the information was

demonstrably false and the statements about the tax returns 30 years ago are highly inaccurate saying, and i'm quoting here, irs transcripts, particularly before the days of electronic filing, are notoriously inaccurate and would not be able to provide a reasonable picture of any taxpayer's returns. we should also point out the "times" did not obtain the actual tax returns. they got the information from someone who is unidentified who had access to the tax information. we're still scanning, tucker. if we come up with more stuff we will bring it to you. >> tucker: wait until they get yours and mine. trace gallagher, good to see you. thanks. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: put an awful lot of trust. we put complete trust really in the tech company there is very little evidence though that they deserve that trust. just today a tech company founder told the senate that silicon valley is deceiving

americans and cannot possibly protect their data. fox news headlines 24/7 anchor brett larson joins us tonight with more on that story. brett? >> it does seem like every day we are getting gems of information about what exactly tech companies know about us. for the most part we continue to be in the dark about what we know about them when it comes to our privacy we're not quite ready to wave the right flag in a senate banking committee hearing today you might be tempted pen board founder started with an analogy to the implication of another big scientific break through. >> i worry that we're in the same position as the nuclear industry was in the early 1950s. we have an amazing new technology with real potential. but we are not being honest about the risks and our incapacity to store a wasteful and harmful byproduct. >> in this case though it's not radioactive waste coming out of the south end of

silicon valley. it's your personal data and a lot of it. >> the pattern that i have seen in my industry is one of deceit. we're not honest about what we collect. >> and worse, ceglowski there aren't any rules of that agreements we click through they do that for a reason they are complicated on purpose as noted by louisiana senator kennedy. >> the problem it seems to me user agreement. why don't we require social media companies to write user agreements in plain english? would that help with the problem? >> i think that that user agreement would just say we're taking all your data, yes or no? >> tucker, this is always the pivot point when we have these discussions about our data. it's in the user agreement what we do. we have explained this in our faq. listen, we get it we are the products when we use these free services. why not do what other companies do when there is a free level of service. tell users what you are

tracking to provide the service. don't like it? upgrade to their next tier and pay the money to be not tracked. >> tucker: i don't think that's an option yet. hopefully it will be. >> you still can't log into facebook and say stop tracking me. >> tucker: that may change. great sty tonight. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: we have wound up in a place where the biggest tech companies in this country have virtually unlimited power to see you lens or amplify what is said online. now led by facebook they are using that to control political conversation. not just banning individual and groups that they say are dangerous prohibiting users from holding certain opinion. facebook says you can share, for example, info war videos but only if you condemn them. if you hold a different opinion they will censor you. the former president of the aclu, one ever the really the champions of civil liberties left on the left so we are glad to have her on tonight. thank you very much for coming on. >> my pleasure, tucker.

>> tucker: so you and i who are old grew up in a world where we really believed the government was the preeminent threat to speech and also wake up in a world where big companies seem to have more power than the federal government. and they really are in control of the public conversation. what's your reaction to this? >> this is a very concerning problem, tucker, because the social media companies as the supreme court itself said in a unanimous decision have more power to control public discussion. not only conversations among our friends in the personal sense, but conversations about public policy issues, conversations with political candidates. and we, the people, who have sovereign power under our constitution can't responsibly exercise it if we are subject to arbitrary and discriminatory censorship by the powerful social media companies.

now, the so-called standard of dangerous speech is so inherently subjective. there is essentially unfettered discretion on the part of these companies to pick and choose which ideas they agree with and think are not dangerous versus the ones they disagree with and think are dangerous. regardless of what your ideological views you should be very alarmed about that much power residing in these private companies. now, tucker, as a civil libertarian i tend to be skeptical about government power. but at least government has some accountability. >> tucker: exactly. >> whereas these private sector companies are interested in and legally they have a responsibility to their shareholders to their business interest, their corporate bottom line. so it's like the worst of both worlds. they have all the power that traditionally belonged only

to government and, yet, they are not subject to the limits that are on governments, including the constitution itself. many people do not understand that the first amendment's free speech guarantee only applies to the government. we literally have no constitutional free speech rights. with respect to facebook or other powerful social media companies. >> tucker: i don't think anybody could have put it as crisply and well as you just did. >> thank you. >> tucker: i hope you are heard by people you agree with by the way on the left as well as people i agree with on the right. >> and we have to point that out. you know, that today's company might consider people on the far right to be dangerous. but, the next company might come along and think planned parenthood or aclu is dangerous. >> tucker: on this show i'm not bragging we will defend their right to say things we don't agree with. >> i have defended your rights. >> tucker: i appreciate that. >> thank you.

>> tucker: for a few moments mayor buttigieg tried to be a moderate democrat as his profile rises he doesn't seem so moderate anymore. what happened to old buttigieg? we will tell you after the break. ♪ ♪ everyone's got to listen to mom.

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

>> tucker: well for weeks the media has been promoting a new religious the cult of the buttigieg. nicer, moderate, more open to compromise even a little tradition. is he religious though not in a way that anyone can explain or that actually means anything. he's perfect. unfortunately being likeable is no longer an asset in the democratic party. certainly not in the primary. two years from now a nice candidate will be remembered as a loser guy topped out at

10%. buttigieg doesn't want that. he wants to win. so now saint pete of south bend is turning to the dark side it all began when he denounced the vice president for saying nice things about him. bubuttigieg said pence needed to reevaluate his relationship with god because he a theologian now. now this morning on "the today show" buttigieg explains that god is definitely against his political enemies. >> it's also important that we stop seeing religion used as a kind of judge jill as if god belonged to a political party if he did i can't imagine it would be the one that sent the current president into the white house. [laughter] >> tucker: religion should not be used as a political cud jill and by the way god hates republicans. he told me that unbelievable. how about america? america is not much better buttigieg says the country that gave him limitless opportunities and made him a

road scholar is not a great place. >> communities like the one i grew up which is industrial midwestern city that is exactly the kind of place that our current president targeted with a message saying that we could find greatness by just stopping the clock and turning it back and making america great again. when that past that he is promising to return us to was never as great as advertised. >> tucker: got the mackenzie consultant tie on. pretty dark really. is the press reconsidering its love affair with buttigieg now that he is no longer a sunny optimist? no they love him more than ever. a guy called donny deutsch somehow got his own show on the weekend saturday he used first episode of his show to suck up to saint pete in a way that's frankly almost pornographic as you watch this, ask yourself how little self-respect you would have to have to grabble like this before a

politician. watch. >> your resume and a resume is not a brand attributes because harvard grad, a vet, traditional in untraditional way, religious, rhodes scholar you bring out hope in the better angels in all of us. when i read but i'm like i'm not doing so good in my life. i can do better. >> tucker: when i look at you i hate myself. [laughter] we could go on but it feels too dirty. instead we are joined by new york journalist chadwick moore who can assess this more cooley than we can can you imagine? i don't care who it is, can you imagine looking at a politician and sucking up like that? wouldn't you hate yourself? [laughter] >> you must hate yourself. you have to. you know, they have to really cover for the fact that if there were no identity politics involved, no one would know who this guy is nor should they know who this guy is. all you have to do -- you know, suppose that during his time in south bend he

had really made an effort to fix the massive poverty problem, the huge crime epidemic, and the plummeting housing costs, especially in the west side of town which is traditionally the black neighborhood, it's a horrible place. if he had fixed those things, that would have been remarkable. , that wouldn't have made him a democrat. that's not how democrats run cities. that would be something to talk about. they have to run with -- they are trying to create all of these things out of nowhere. i seem to recall another aloof intellectual young midwestern democrat politician describing a magic wand and things of that nature. i believe he was president for a while and things didn't go so well. mayor pete for him he is 37 years old. he come of an age after nafta. he came after an age of free trade and nafta carpet bombed the region he is from south bend. pharmaceuticals been in

south bend by 1800s other names just finely closed their final factory there hemorrhaging thousands of jobs since nafta since 1994. this is what people mean when they say make america great again. it's mainly an economic argument but these elites, these out of touch liberals and journalists want to pretend it's some kind of a race cry when it couldn't be further from the truth. >> tucker: so smart. you are absolutely right. it is, in fact, an argument primarily about economics, about trade, and immigration. the effect of immigration on wages and they immediately turn it into the dumbest shallowest kind of like skin color question. why? >> what else do they have? they have nothing else. the people who can't make america great again are the people they -- whose lives they ruined, whose communities they ruined. that's the democrats and republicans. the establishment went all in for nafta. media went all in for nafta. these are pete's

constituents and pete's neighbors. people from the area where pete is from. he has been protected his whole life being a wealthy privileged son of a communist professor that he doesn't understand this. that's very surprising. and they have no other argument. because otherwise they would have to acknowledge the fact of you who they completely ruined some communities in this country. >> tucker: that is so smart. when you say it that clearly, it becomes very obvious. chadwick moore, thank you for that. >> always a pleasure. >> tucker: censorship is not only a problem online it's everywhere. collection following complaints from visitors. that's next. ♪ ♪

when a controversial speaker shows up on campus. students riot when the left turns against historical figures or statues are covered up or

torn down. why should visual art be spared? well, it's not. in the uk, an art gallery was displaying an image with a naked woman with the islamic declaration of faith. now the gallery has covered that work with a sheet. we have the writer of the book "woke." he joins us tonight. thank you very much for coming on tonight. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: when you saw this happening in an art museum, the idea of a museum covering up a work of art, what's your reaction to that? >> i find it very depressing. i think anyone in the creative industry will find that a depressing thing. the art gallery is claiming this is not censorship. they're just covering it up so no one is seeing it. [ laughter ]

>> tucker: are they really saying that. >> they are. the artist himself made the claim it would be a respectful solution to the complaint. there is no problem here. people are going to get offended by all sorts of things. it's really about we shouldn't be capitulating to people when they're offended. it's possible this artist has done this as a publicity stunt. people know if they complain about something, if they take that moral high ground, people will appease them. they'll shut people down. that's the problem. we've got to deal with that. i don't think any belief, political, religious, whatever, should be ring fenced or anything like that. no one likes to be offended. no one likes to gbe mocked. that's the price for you pay for living a free society. >> tucker: why aren't artists

raising their voices against this moment of censorship? >> this is -- this is a real issue, actually, the big problem with artists and not generally is not censorship as such. it's self-censorship. there's something about the climate we created which means that artists are worrying and second-guessing everything they do, everything they produce, will this damage my career, will this cause protest, will there be a twitter mob on my front step. that's the issue now. this is really damaging for art generally. because no great advancements have been made in the artistic world without risk taking. artists have to be free to feel they can take risks, even to get it wrong. otherwise, nothing -- nothing good will come of that. >> tucker: that's what you're seeing now. you're one of the few bright spots, i would say. thank you very much. >> thanks a lot. >> tucker: we'll be back tomorrow 8:00 p.m., the show

that is the sworn enemy of lying, pompocity, smugness and group think. meantime, taking up the baton from new york city, sean hannity. >> sean: i loved your laugh on the donny deutsche tape. so ridiculous. you can't make this up. it's like it writes itself every night. buckile up. subpoenas, threats of contempt. calls for impeachment and obsessive hysteria over decades old tax documents that reveal nothing new and absolutely nothing illegal. and the media's going nuts again. oh, that's right. because mueller didn't come out the way they want, let's move onto the next conspiracy theories. maybe hillary clinton colluded