sean hannity interviews the vice president. and of course, tucker is next. as always, it's the story goes on. i will see you on outnumbered at noon tomorrow and outnumbered over time at 1:00 p.m. have a great evening. ♪ decoded evening and welcome to tucker carlson to my peer barstool sports taking the position that men ought to be allowed to be masculine if they want to end that people ought to be allowed to enjoy sports rather than sitting back and observing a lot of political propaganda as they watch. that's their position. for taking a position, the left would like barstool sports canceled. how does that dave joins us to explain his position but first we hope you had a happy weekend. if you do, hold on to those memories. it may be the last relaxing moments you have for a while.

it turns out all is not well on this blue planet of ours. indeed, it appears that the earth itself is facing what we are going to call tonight an existential threat from climate change. now, which is the third term existential threat actually mean you ask? well, we don't know. but it sounds absolutely terrifying. watch carefully. >> climate change is real, it's an existential threat to our country and the entire planet. >> it's about the common defense. the biggest existential threat is climate. >> this is climate change. it really is the extensional crisis. >> we are going to have to address the most as to potential threat to our nation in the world. climate change. >> on climate change, the greatest existential threat that that we face. >> we are facing a climate crisis. it represents an existential threat to who we are as human beings.

>> tucker: authority who we are as humans. well, there are a number of questions. let's see if we can impact them. the first one, climate change, is it real? that's an easy one, of course it's real. the climate always changes. if you are in the united states, the ground that you are standing on right now was, not so long ago, covered with glacial ice a mile thick. now it's not covered in glacial ice on miles mile thick so what happened? what happened is climate change. that's been happening since the earth cooled. as human act activity accelerating climate change? despite what they tell you, no one really knows. but the real question here has nothing to do with climate science. it has to do with people who pretend they understand climate science. do those people actually believe what they are saying? well, let's see. scare was kamala harris recently talking about how red meat contributes to the absolutely

existential threat of climate change. >> as a nation, we actually have to have a real priority at the highest level of government around what we eat and in terms of healthy eating because we have a problem in america. >> would you support changing the dietary guidelines? the food pyramid? >> yes. yes. i would. >> tucker: got that? kamala harris is a good person. and because she is a good person, much better person than you are, she cares about the existential threat of climate change so much that she is willing to forgo red meat. that's what she told cnn viewers recently. but she is in the state of iowa, it's a very different story. just this past weekend, harris attended the annual polk county democratic state fried. she took her turn working the grill, posing for the cameras created by the way, so did all of the other democratic candidates. miss warren was there, beto o'rourke, even cory booker who says he is a vegan.

organizers grilled more than 10,000 stakes over the weekend. tape of the event shows ozone destroying meat smoke rising heavenward. the candidates standing amidst all of this seem wholly unconcerned. are you surprised? don't be surprised. if this is what climate activism has become. a performative stunt mixed with hypocrisy. these are the people who promised a crackdown on your cheeseburgers while flying across the country private. no one says a word about it. last week, millions of concerned progressives took part of the so-called climate spread. in the wake they left mounds of litter. just today in washington, closet activists and demanded change by blocking roads, causing gridlock, and throwing confetti on the ground. ♪ >> tucker: well, if you're under 40, you might be surprised

to learn that people didn't use to express concern about the environment by littering. that used to seem weird. but then an important environmentalism is to be about nature and preserving and protecting it. the point now is very different. the point now is political power. you find a crisis and do you demand the population submits to your well or else. if you don't need to fight fair org knowledge democracy or even make a rational case for your position. you do what it takes. you even use children if it helps. just today for example, a 16 year old swedish girl addressed the united nations as climate activists. here's what she said. >> this is all wrong. i shouldn't be up here. i should be back in school on the other side of the ocean. yet, you come to us young people for hope. how dare you? you have stolen my dreams, my

childhood, which are empty words that we are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is the money and eternal economic growth. how do you? if he really understood the situation, and still kept on failing to act, then you would be evil and that i refuse to believe. >> tucker: you stole my childhood. do what i want you to do or else you are evil. how do you respond to things like that? the truth is, you can't respond and of course that's the point. when you use children to demand of power, they become a kind of human shield. you can hide safely behind them, no one can criticize you. but who would do something that unscrupulous? anyone who would do that is someone who would literally do anything to seize control. that's exactly what they are doing.

president of the copenhagen consensus center, author of the book the skeptical environmentalist, we are happy to have him tonight. thanks for coming on. so when you hear, as you just did, the testimony before the u.n., these are the words of a child but they could have been the words of many adults in this movement. if you disagree with me, you are evil. is that a scientific debate we are listening to? >> courses now but in reality i think we should answer them on their questions and their claim. they are saying this is an existential crisis and potentially the end of the world but look at the u.n. climate panel actually says if we do nothing about global warming in 50 years, the impact will be equal to reduction in the average income of a person on planet earth by about 0.2-2% of our income. that's a problem. that's not the end of the world

had so let's get our arguments right. this is a problem and what we of course need to do is tackle it smartly but if we end up spending five or ten or 16% of gdp to avoid this tiny problem, then we are really spreading ourselves thin. >> tucker: is there any scientific -- is there a scientific consensus that we know exactly how to arrest climate change? that we know the precise formula that we are actually in control of the climate? >> look, i think there is a tendency for us to tell everything that you see is due to climate change and that's obviously wrong but there are some very clear indicators that we are causing higher temperatures, more heat waves, sea level rise. and to an extent, it makes sense to cut back. some of the easiest omissions to cut, should we actually do, but we should also recognize, and that's what greta, the swedish girl you show before, she doesn't -- she probably hasn't heard that fossil fuels and the

availability of easily accessible energy makes people much better off and has lifted over the last 25 years more than 1 billion people out of poverty. so it's not just evil, it's not just a problem, it's also fantastic good that we are actually able to give a lot of people a lot of access to energy. that's how we can talk together just now but of course it's also what tools give us transformation, communication, food, everything else that is happening in our civilization. >> tucker: so you make an obvious point others of course another side to this, there always is. why do we never hear that? i mean, someone committed science would of course raise up all the known facts about whatever issue it is but they don't get why do you think that? >> i think it's because it has become so politicized and also if you raise the point of saying, look, all of the things, there is both sides. there's a problem with global warming but cutting emissions

also has cost. we need to find a place where we minimize both of these. that is, we maximize the benefit and it benefit and minimize the cost of trying to do that. we don't have a conversation, all the democrats want to and most politicians are on the world just complete they want to say we are going to promise to do everything but of course, remember, they don't actually do that because doing that would be fantastically expensive. new zealand, they've just promised to go car made neutral in 2050. deck she had out a city to ask their official economic institute how much is this going to cost us and the answer was 16% of their gdp. that is more than the entire government spending right now in new zealand and everything they do. of course they're never going to actually do that because they will have a revolt before that. >> tucker: yeah. it's just striking that every political solution that i am aware of what increase the power of the politicians suggesting it which is a tip-off not that it's not about science and it's a

power grab it is terrifying. thank you for your measured assessment. i appreciate it. pretty obvious to the left stopped caring about the environment a long time ago. that's why their cities are filthy. but the evidence that proves it is that everything all of a sudden is an environmental issue. on msnbc this we can come out sharpton explained the climate change has become a civil rights issue. >> i'm even prouder to say these young people of color are connecting the dots between climate change and its effects on their communities when young people when there yesterday, and made me so proud that i was in i heard and devastating some of these people say it's a civil rights issue. >> tucker: it global warming isn't really about the environment, it's really about racism, more specifically, how you're a racist if you don't

agree with our solution to the supposedly environmental problem. you don't want to surrender the entire economy over to people like alexandria ocasio-cortez or other dumb people. get the free green card to every person from the top of the letter to of course you're a racist. environment of racism. chattering more is a new york-based journalist and he's been watching all of this with jaw agape. he joins us tonight. chadwick moore, what is environment of racism? >> it is a way for the democratic party to get a group of people on board who really ultimately do not care about the climate change issues. you don't have been black communities, urban him spending communities, are bothered about either of them but i think you know that when you said these protests are not worried about cleaning up the environment are making the world a better place, they are about state as impurities are basically rallies advocating for advancing state power. these people believe the u.s. government, the same entity that runs your dmv or your

post office, is going to legislate the salvation of mankind. meanwhile, the democratic party can even be bothered to clean up mountains of festering effluvia ends in the cities that they run with the one party in control and for people who actually do care about the environment, they would be advised to think twice before they attack a party so strongly. just look at china. they are the world's biggest polluters by far. >> tucker: so we haven't had time to do this but i'm pledging now we are going to do this. spend a day with the camera at alexandria ocasio cortez's congressional district. is it a green thriving, clean place? no. it's a filthy place. so would you preside over that, how dare you lecture me about te environment? >> exactly and look at the hypocrisy -- we can't even necessarily call it hypocrisy because president obama may have spent

$15 billion on my seaside mansion that up nearly every burger you eat means it's closer to being engulfed by the atlantic ocean all in the biggest names in this group jut around the country in private airplanes. they are now having a meat cookoff in iowa to try to get the message out to those witless, he then clubs in the hinterlands who just don't know what's good for them but they know it's good for you. it's more state control, more state power, more legislation. now look it also would have been this weekend where a supposedly millions people were gathering in these protests. well, no one planted a single tree. they certainly use plenty of dead trees for their protest signs, further sticks, but in downtown los angeles, you had a group of conservative trump supporter's who spent a sunday afternoon dressed in hazmat suits volunteering to claim up a mountain of waste that reportedly took away 50 tons of garbage. where's the media on that? that's actual environmentalism

helping our neighbors and making our community and world a better place. >> tucker: if they were planting trees i would probably send the money. travis, thank you. congressional democrats to help things out a new excuse to push for impeachment. this time over president trump's conversation with the president of ukraine. now that scandal could it turns out whip around like a boomerang and engulf their own presidential front runner to joe biden. catherine herridge is of course our chief intelligence correspondent here at fox news. she joins us to explain this story. catherine? speak inc. you and good evening. of person money or the issue said he did not have firsthand knowledge of the conversation between president trump and that you came president and at the complaint makes clear the whistle-blower did not have direct knowledge of the july phone call. if that matters because typically multiple u.s. officials are on these calls with the president into getting the whistle-blower is not one of them. it's unclear how the individual obtain a transcript, heard about the call, or learned about it

another way. after consulting with the justice department, the top lawyer for the acting director of national intelligence, john mcgraw, so the coming complete was nonstandard, do not make the statutory definition of urgency, and was not required. the information within the president complaint is not deck different in kind involving any past cases. because it involves confidential and potentially privileged indications by persons outside the intelligence committee, the gni lacks unilateral authority to transmit such material. speaking to reporters, president trump went on the offense hit. >> did you tell the ukrainian leader that they would have the aid only if they investigated joe biden and his family? >> no i didn't. it no i didn't. but joe biden said it about himself. he was very dishonest with what he did. >> on on the whistle-blower lag direct knowledge of the call, separate words told fox news that weakens the complaint but does not undercut all allegations. democrats want his testimony on

thursday. >> quite a story. thanks for that. well, the ukraine story appears to be falling apart at least at the edges but of course the same people who jump to wild and unfounded conclusions over russia are doing the same thing here. some of them have gone even further. for example, former massachusetts governor, bill weld, republican turned -- challenging the president, is calling trump a traitor who deserves to be executed. watch. >> talk about pressuring a foreign country to interfere with and control a u.s. election. it couldn't be clearer and that's not just undermining democratic institutions, that is treason. it's treason pure and simple end of the penalty for treason under the u.s. code is death. it that's the only penalty. >> tucker: just! charlie hurt author of the

fantastic book still winning, why america went all in on donald trump and why they want to do it again. joins us tonight. treason. death is the penalty for treason. >> you know, you can't make it up but for the past three years, we have been hearing about this russia collusion and trump did this and trump rigged the election and all this kind of stuff and it turns out of course trump didn't do any of that but actually democrats did and hillary clinton did. there comes a point where, you know, their own voters, they are starting to realize they are being lied to you and i swear, i think democrats are getting together right now and they are saying okay guys, we've got a come up with another lie and it has to be even more fantastic and even more ridiculous than the last one just so that we can stop talking about the fact that we've been lied to our people for the last three years so they come up with this ukrainian thing about trump's strong arming the ukrainian government

for some favors or something and then it turns out no, he didn't do it. joe biden did it. and it sort of funny. i think that when they did that, they were thinking that they had this gossip witness who didn't even -- wasn't even privy to any of the conversation. it's just something somebody hurt her at the lunch table and he went to the ign reported all of it and i think that they were were thinking that the ig would take this information and handle it the way you should handle it and spend the guys i to his cubicle and tell him to shut up and then of course never tell congress about it. then it would leak and then all anybody would know is that the intelligence community is investigating this improper phone call between trump and the ukrainian leader and now it sounds so terrible what happens? trump hears about it and he lays it all out there. he completely calls their bluff and as you said, it turns into a

boomerang that they throw and it hits them in the back of the head. they become the party of production and that moment whena patient begins projecting everything on people around them, that's when they are starting to lose their last marble. >> tucker: well, that is definitely true. and on the most basic level, we often hear trump described as deranged and certainly he's eccentric but strange? i mean it, here you have bill weld calling for the guys execution. i mean there's something about trump that is like a bug light for wackos. it does seem that way. >> it really is. and, no. it's actually astonishing. it's like this stuff it keeps trump from being races all the time and my look around and i'm like i'm sorry, he's obsessed with race. all of these people that are accusing trump of being obsessed with race, they are obsessed with race. >> tucker: quickly, will you

assess just on a scale of 0 to to 10 the potential importance of the biden ukraine story? >> i think there are a lot of very serious questions about all of it. it's very strange. you know, they are his own words. that's the other thing. but then the real hell for me is the way all of these so-called mainstream media outlets are trying to pooh-pooh the story and say we don't know what's going on here. we just don't know. >> tucker: unbelievable. charlie hurt, great to see you tonight. thank you. jay portnoy has built a career and has a great website. now he's under attack for supporting traditional sports. the man who wants traditional sports. dave portnoy joins us after the break. it ♪ from the couldn't be prouders

to the wait did we just win-ners. everyone uses their phone differently. that's why xfinity mobile let's you design your own data. now you can share it between lines. mix with unlimited, and switch it up at anytime so you only pay for what you need. it's a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy a new samsung note. click, call or visit a store today.

>> tucker: one of the most remarkable and troubling moments in the years long russia tsonga occurred when the former deputy fbi director andy mccabe claimed that rod rosenstein offered to e president. now at the time rosenstein denied it but today judicial watch announced a two-page memo from may of 2017 in which mccabe records rosenstein making that offer. it's according to the memo, rosenstein thought he could sneak a y or n because he was not searched when visiting the white house. what do you make this report? >> law, the memo and in and of

itself is extraordinary because it captures a moment in time between the firing of jim comey and the appointment of the special counsel and it really to some extent lays out the entire conversation that andy mccabe as acting deputy fbi director had with deputy attorney general rosenstein and others and i just think it's extraordinary that they were having a discussion, whether or not it was a joke, as i've heard rosenstein allege, of wearing a wire into the white house in the oval office and recording the president. it i can imagine under what circumstance does conversation would've come out and would have been have between those two people. >> tucker: so i mean you were to at this level of government for a long time. assess the likelihood that it was a joke. >> at the time, i was the chief of staff when rosenstein issued that extraordinary statement and then another statement on top of that in the first one wasn't

received well and that the story was covered by many and it was obviously the only explanation that he could have stayed in that role if it had been a serious consideration of wearing a wire into the oval office and obviously the president couldn't have the trust and confidence so he had to explain it as being a joke and saying that as a facetious matter. i don't know -- i think there were others in that same meeting that also took copious notes. i would expect that since they do such a good job we will see those contemporary notes as well because i think we are far from over but the prosecutor in me wants to corroborate the story and any mccabe at the time had a lot of reasons to write down his historically inaccurate accounts because he had just put the president into this investigation is the target. >> tucker: so i guess the obvious question is, do you think, and you know him, rod rosenstein, is capable of that?

>> you know, i worked side-by-side with rod as deputy attorney general when i was acting attorney general and i also worked with him when i was chief of staff. i would be surprised if he had honestly said that he would wear a wire but at the same time if you read the memo, it's very clear that andy mccabe didn't think rod was joking and i would like to see what others in the room thought because i was not in the room at the time and i think it would be a -- it is something i think that is just so extraordinary that it needs to be talked about whether you are joking or not that i think we need a few more witnesses to that conversation actually know whether rod was joking or not. >> tucker: i think so too. thanks so much for that. like just about every thing else in the world, sports is being consumed by a woke ideology. athletes protesting the anthem, espn preaching social justice, biological males ryan o'malley records in in the mail sports. barstool sports meanwhile is it with a sense of humor.

that's the most offensive part to many. they are funny and for that they come under constant attack. most recently, nbc news piece fall to the website for being a bashing of tribute traditional masculinity. dave portnoy founded barstool sports and joins us tonight. nbc has gone after you for being masculine. what is your response? >> not only masculine but the like in sports. they have a problem with sports. literally. direct quote. there are some he had schedules and this article i don't even know where to start but that's it. they say we are overwhelmingly conservative, not really true. we are apolitical. i've told you that. but it literally says they are are -- days of conservative ideology because they watch sports. guess what, we like sports. women like sports too. it's almost like making the nfl leg well, the nfl must be considered good because guys like football. it makes no sense.

it none. zero. >> tucker: it doesn't. it doesn't pay by the way, i've said this before, i would be shocked if there are a lot of white winners on your staff, you are doing what you've always done but all of a sudden the mo. so the piece contains a quote from the following. lisa nakamura who is described as a professor at ann arbor who studies the intersection of digital media, race, gender, and sexuality. >> that hurts. i'm a michigan guy. that's my school. we are getting embarrassed by this lady. it is actually one of the more serious threats. that you look at some of these articles, all the professors and all these schools, it's like what are you teaching these kids and by the way, tucker, we reach out to these people, hey, do you have any interest in defending anything you say? none of them go. they don't call us, they don't talk to us, they just make up stuff. >> tucker: they are cowards. they won't come on the show

either. so have you ever had anybody respond and say yeah, i would like to defend the proposition that it's wrong for a sports site to cover sports or do they just ignore you? >> they say no. a lot of this article says we are going back in time like as a me too movement and women are getting more power in different places we are rejecting the notion. our ceo is a female, by the way, which in its own right is insulting to have to bring up. she's a ceo because she's brilliant. i didn't hire her because she's female. she is awesome and the results speak for themselves but what are you going to do? in our cmo's, our cfo is a female, you look around like wht are you talking about? you're just making stuff up. that's why they don't answer. nbc, hey, i've offered to go on that show pretty know what they do? they can't because they know i have no answer. the only go on fox coming only do tucker. tucker, you're the only one who lets us be great i'll speak to anybody, anytime, anyplace, but if they are afraid to have these questions, what am i supposed to do? you won't let us get our story

out story out. >> tucker: i worked there for four years at nbc so i know how many pigs work there for real. but i wonder, given their deep commitment to feminism, what percentage of the profits from the limbic's do think they are giving to women's organizations? >> all i know is they killed the harvey weinstein story. look in a mirror. just look in the mirror nbc it. i will gladly go on your show even though you don't have -- when i present you the facts you're going to turtle. you're gonna roll over. they just make stuff up and if you can't debate if they what are you supposed to do? by the way, they may have actually -- if they think it's a problem to watch sports, guess what, conservatives have the presidency for the rest of time because people like sports. >> tucker: so andy lacking a red nbc killed the harvey weinstein story and now accuse you of sexism. i wonder, what either one of

those ever do an interview with you? >> you think? do you think any of them one? again, the facts are so heavily weighted on our side, you read that article. there were sentences in that article, i read them a hundred times. i think about fairly smart person, i still don't know if they were trying to get out. the dean of communications at at penn state, you know, if you listen to what she said, i would never let my kid in her class but what world is she in? saying "sportscenter" is going back in time? i tunes entity. i'm happy to debate a bit i go to your class, maria harding, i will let you have the moderator, i will let you put your people in, and i will put you in a mental press whole because you have no facts. >> tucker: notes on your kids to college. that really is the lesson. i may not completely. dead, great to see you tonight. god bless. well, jeff bezos is the richest man in the world with a number

one isn't quite enough. now he is cutting health care for a bunch of us can employees just to get the world's richest men cutting health care benefits for his employees. by the way, he's a screaming liberal. how? how does that work? they will tell you, next. ms. goodman is

>> tucker: jeff bezos remains the richest man on earth. how rich is jeff bezos? well, as a factual matter, he could give $100,000 to every single one of his employees, all 647,000 of them and still have almost 50 billion left over. yet, with all of that wealth and power, you might hope the price might be skeptical of jeff bezos. that's the point of having a free press, right?

to afflict the comfortable? no. this is not to suck up to the power which they do assiduously. they love jeff bezos. over at msnbc, the morning anchor called him -- >> basals told me last night, do not poke this basals bear. >> tucker: he's a bear. basals bear. basals bear has a lot but he ony wants more. he's a greedy little bear. so this week, whole foods, which which bezos owns, announced a change to its employee benefit policy. previously of whole foods workers could receive health benefits if they were to least 0 hours a week. now, the cutoff is 30 hours a week. as a result, this is not an accent, it's the whole point, almost 2,000 whole foods employees will lose health care coverage. who is going to take up the slack?" , you will as a taxpayer. in a statement, whole foods

noted the move would make the company more efficient and better meet the needs of the business. those needs of course are making jeff bezos another few dollars. money doesn't need. meanwhile, earlier this month, chick-fil-a, a mob of progressives there to process because of its social policies or the opinions of its owners. you won't see them at a whole foods anytime soon. they don't care about work is at all. they care about being woke. maybe some workers will still health care if the left cared. even their men is a california radio host. he joins us tonight. ethan, where are the protest? i noticed the left sucks up to jeff bezos as it does to people in power generally but you would think somewhere there would be a least one on his progressive left she said hey jeff bezos, pay for the health care? >> you are speak into one of them who did speak up. that's me. i think it's really wrong for

roughly a million dollars a month he is throwing 2,000 part-time workers out to the window. it's terrible, it's tragic, it's beyond ridiculous and i hate, as much as maybe you do, or maybe more, when people want to tell us what to do and then they don't do it themselves. jeff bezos is not leading by example. he's leading with his words. >> tucker: so it's a pretty clever deal he's figured out that he buys "the washington post" and turns it into a complete barbie garbage publication for pure political operation but it hits every fashionable note in the progressive symphony. there is not one left-wing idea that they are not 100% behind and by doing that, he indemnifies himself against any criticism for his business practices for the last. you're his exception. but you get what's going on her here? >> i do and i -- to be in agreement with you tonight, i'm uncomfortable with

that as well. i'm allowed proponent for speaking to power regardless of whether or not they are my spider not and we must do this. i believe we have an issue that's happening in our country from both sides for that matter and we need to be speaking out. when we see something that somebody supposedly leads on our side and is not doing the right thing, we need to be able to call people out, we need to be able to talk about the issues that are happening, and in this case, in my mind, this is where i will probably disagree with you. i think some of the democratic candidates like joe biden and beto o'rourke have the right idea where we need to make sure that we have coverage for all americans because under president trump we have 2 million more americans who don't have health insurance for the first time in over a decade as "the wall street journal" pointed out. >> tucker: where that obamacare didn't fix that. super quick, this is something that infuriates me. jeff bezos, on his dividends, on the income he makes from his investments, which is a lot, pays half the tax of someone who

works for him for a salary. that's our system. it's grotesque. it's disgusting. it makes the rich richer and the poor poorer but the left never says a word about it. why is that? >> again, i can't speak for others. i've been very loud about this issue for a number of years paired we need to close those loopholes. people need to pay their apportionment. why should i as a secretary pay less in taxes like warren buffett has pointed out that he himself questioned mike we need to fix that and if democrats -- they should address it. absolutely. >> tucker: because we tax capital at half the rate of labor. so we penalize work. so you are an idiot if you work for a living and those of us -- i mean, whatever. i don't know many people -- >> we haven't talked about that loophole. >> tucker: i couldn't agree more. you have to be a liberal to think that. ethan, thank you very good to see you. every year artificial intelligence is getting more sophisticated. that has implications for tens

of millions of american workers. what does it mean for them, what is it mean for us? investigating that, next.

>> tucker: year by year, day by day, artificial intelligence is becoming more powerful and sophisticated. mcdonald's is now working on automating its drive-through windows. one of the czech titans will soon perform cars that can drive themselves. millions of americans from drivers to factory workers to retail corpse, people who work in jobs that could soon be all automated. what does that mean for this country? lauren cast is one of the few people who talked about the subject. senior fellow at an offer the book once a future worker, a

vision for the renewal of working americans. thanks a lot for coming on. so to the extent of people are paying any attention at all to automation, most of our leaders are ignoring it, but to the extent they address it, you hear of some people say this is a problem that will solve itself. we'll think of some new thing for this people to do. you hopeful that will happen? >> i think it should happen. i think the question is why it is it is a net happening question mike we have always automated away old jobs. but economy and business leaders used to spend their time finding new, better ways for people to work and that's what's missing from the equation. we are not creating those new opportunities anymore. we want so you would describe part of the problem as a failure of will? >> i think that's right. i think it -- you look at what you are a business leaders invest in? what are the biggest richest business is doing? it on lot of cases it's trying

to find ways to do things with as few workers as possible or id making money without doing anything in the real economy or when we do need people, you know, you hear those business leaders either wanting to use people in another country or insisting they need to bring new people into this country and whereas back in the day it was all about using american workers well and giving them more opportunities to be productive. >> tucker: why do we not hear politicians push back? mcdonald's idea for example, my gut reaction is, really? it was too much for you to pay some kid to stand at the window? but i can't imagine even a republican senator saying something like that to mcdonald's. why? >> well, i'm not sure if the concern should be about the mcdonald's kid at the window. i think when we talk about what we want our economy to be, it's not that we are saying gosh darn it, why don't we have more jobs at mcdonald's? if mcdonald's could find a

way -- is mcdonald's could find a way to bring more automation into its stores, the people who are working there would actually probably be more productive, they could earn more, we could have more mcdonald's restaurants and more smaller towns and that will create more jobs so i think the question doesn't have to be how do we protect the mcdonald's worker in the drive through, the question has to be, where is the new exciting businesses that are using people in new and excitin, whether that's an entire new types of businesses, that is what i would love to have people talking about. but we don't hear much talk about that either. instead we hear talk about how we will let people get rich whatever kind of business they run and then we will tax them and then send them money over to the people who don't have good jobs anymore. and a lot of our politicians seem to think that's a winning formula and i think that's whatt

back against. >> tucker: right. so a small group of people in finance subsidize the welfare for everybody else. that sounds depressing. >> well, that's -- you have the same thing from silicon valley like universal based income which is this idea that may be a few people have all the money but we are going to be rich enough that we can send everybody a check and that's not what people want. they want a job. >> tucker: that's exactly right. and a free money makes you happy then inherited money people would be happy an end generally they are not. it's great to see you. well, progressives have a brand-new idea for education. ban private schools. this is a suggestion from one of the biggest clinical parties in great britain cup. don't laugh though, it'll be here soon enough. we will investigate after the break. ♪

♪ >> tucker: here's a story that's happening abroad, but we think it's relevant to you, so

we are going to tell you about it. in the u.k., the labour party is making a promise about what they are going to do if they win the country's next election. if they say that they are going to abolish private schools. seize their assets, redistribute them to the more worthy, as defined by them, levy new taxes. their stated goal is to fight grotesque inequality. in other words, private schools do better than public schools. that's true in this country too. instead of fixing the broken schools, the left has decided to destroy the remaining successful ones. rather than allowing some people to have something good, they want to make certain that nobody can have it at all. it's not just about forced mediocrity. oh, it is about power. if people can send their kids to schools that aren't controlled by the state, they might be able to get around the last

relentless indoctrination. to the left, that is intolerable. so again, why are we telling you this? it simple. we are telling you this, because this could very well be our future in this country. in new york now, under bill de blasio, they are moving very close to that. in california, meanwhile, public schools have been banned from disrupting. kamala harris has promised to bring back public busing. they will drive parents back into private schools, add a great cost to themselves. you are going to see much more private school enrollment. but the left will react, as in britain, they would rather destroy a successful school then allow it to operate independently. so, it could be five years, it could be ten years. you will see an effort to ban

private schools and homes going in this country. you heard it here first. we are out of time this evening unfortunately. but the good news is, will be back tomorrow. 8:00 p.m. the sworn enemy of lying, smugness, and groupthink. sean hannity is buckled up in new york new york city. >> sean: thank you. great show as always. we have to start with something you are rarely ever going to see on this program. we need to thank the mainstream media mob in their latest rage filled psychotic effort to smear president trump. they accidentally did his campaign and frankly the country a huge favor. in fact, the media stumbled upon our serious credible claims of corruption surrounding the president's 2020 opponent. that would be sleepy creepy crazy uncle joe. we are going to go chapter and verse. very slowly, you will understand

it.