♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." happy friday. it's been one of those weeks that really nobody could have predicted. on monday, we checked the records. we opened this show, the segment about climate change hysteria. at the time, it seemed like the most pressing issue in the country, if you can believe it. and then, just 24 hours after that, we were assessing the impeachment of the president of the united states. that's the kind of week it's been, and that's where we remain tonight. as of right now, it looks like impeachment is likely to happen. the fascinating thing is that nobody can seem to explain exactly why it's going to happen. can you explain? quick, in a paragraph or less, describe the specific crime that donald trump has

been accused of committing. stumped? that's okay. don't feel bad. so is nancy pelosi, and she is running the whole thing. the best she could do today was to suggest that russia somehow has a role in all of this. watch. >> it is wrong for any foreign government to interfere in our elections. and here you have the president of the united states asking for that. and they know how wrong it is. so, it's wrong for a -- as we saw with the russian interference. and, by the way, i think russia has a hand in this, by the way. >> tucker: huh. now, as she put it, to be clear, nancy pelosi can point to no evidence that, quote, "russia has a hand in this." she is just throwing that out there just as she is simply saying that donald trump cut a secret deal with the president of ukraine. she can't cite a single fact to show that's true. she is making it up. but nobody in washington cares.

facts are not the point of this exercise. power is the point of this exercise. seizing it, wielding it. well, it turns out that when power is your only in, you will say anything. including, maybe especially, things that are the precise 180-degree opposite of what is actually true. case in point, the latest claim they are making definitely fits in that category. they are telling you that the push for impeachment has nothing to do with politics. nothing at all. political considerations couldn't be more irrelevant here. watch them lie. >> politics be damned, it's time to do what is right. and in this moment, we must continue these impeachment proceedings. >> this is not a political statement, it's a harsh reality. which is why the speaker has acted. >> and i don't think the action of the inquiry is a political move. it's not about politics. it's not about partisanship. it's about patriotism.

it's about protecting -- [cheers and applause] >> tucker: yeah. it's about patriotism, kids. aunt nancy says it is. if you love this country you will shut up and obey her. ugh. what's the point of even repeating a talking point that stupid? is there a single person in this country who really think it's about patriotism? in fact, is there anyone who thinks it's about protecting the country? how many more self-righteous lectures are we going to hear about national security, delivered by the very people who gave us open borders and an endless string of pointless wars? in fact, if there is one thing that group doesn't care about at all, emphatically doesn't care about, it's the security of our nation. national security. there is no moral component to any of this. they saw an opening to grab power, and they are taking it. the question, the interesting question is: why now? why impeach now?

there's a presidential election a year from now. the president actually is beatable, theoretically, anyway. look at the numbers. you could beat him. you could try anyway. elizabeth warren is not a weak candidate. so why not try? why not just let democracy do its thing, as it has every four years for 240 years? because, and this is the deepest truth, they can't. they can't win that way. the democratic party has become too radical to win a conventional election. and if you are wondering if that's true, ask yourself this: when was the last time a democratic candidate seemed to care about improving your life? by the way, improving your life is the most basic of all political promises. vote for me, and i will make your life a little better. when was the last time someone on the left said that to you? unless you are a convicted felon or an illegal alien, you probably can't remember the last time. in just the last three years, the democratic party's

agenda has become openly hostile to middle america. by the way, including to many of its own voters. they are not even pretending anymore. if they get power, they are taking away your rights. starting with the most basic right of all: your right to defend yourself and your family. >> so, to gun owners out there who say, well, a biden administration means i'm going to come for my guns. >> bingo, you are right if you have an assault weapon. the fact of the matter they should be illegal, period. >> do you believe in the mandatory buy back of "assaulted weapons." >> i do believe we need to do buy backs, and i will tell you why. they are weapons of war. with no place on the streets of a civil society. >> hell, yes, we are going to take your ar-14, your ak-47. we are not going to allow it to be used against fellow americans anymore. >> tucker: yeah. meanwhile, the assault on our core and most basic institutions continues a pace. ever more aggressive with

every passing week. law enforcement itself, they are now telling us, has no moral standing to enforce the law. >> i have challenged our police department to recognize all of the ways in which the uniform has been burdened by racists. >> training for police officers on implicit racial bias and procedural justice because to deny it exists is to deny folks liberty and, in many cases, life. >> how can we continue to lose the lives of unarmed black men in the united states of america at the hands of white police officers? that is not justice. >> if you are young and black, you are treat you had differently because of the color of your skin. i don't believe that it's just a case of a few bad apples. i believe that the system is broken. >> tucker: it's crazy talk. none of it is accompanied by numbers because they can't prove it because it's not true. and outside of faculty lounges, everybody in america recognizes that.

and it's not just their position on law enforcement, it's all of their new position. free healthcare for illegal aliens, reparations for slavery. forcing everybody in the country to pretend that they are somehow more than two genders. that's the new democratic agenda, it's so bonkers that there is no precedent for it. if barack obama came back to run on his 2008 platform, the one that made him, antifa would show up outside his house to protest. so the bottom line is you can't win an election with this stuff. normal people don't support these ideas. this is an agenda fit not for an election, but for a revolution. that means that ordinary democracy must be suspended. that's why the left wants votes for violent felons and children and illegal aliens. it's why they want the electoral college to be dismantled and discarded and ultimately it's the reason behind this fake ukraine crisis. if the vote next year is simply about trump's priorities vs. those of the

new democratic party, it's not close. they will lose. people don't support these ideas. they may not like trump. a lot of people don't like trump. they think he is weird or offputting and brags about himself or whatever. but if the election is about what you are going to do when you are elected, if it's about ideas a platform or agenda, the democratic party will lose. they can't win because people don't support this crap, period. so, what do they do? they have to delegitimize trump completely. they have to cancel the 2016 election and prevent a fair race from being run in 2020. so, in a way, actually, democrats aren't wrong. they are telling you that democracy is in the balance. they are right. it is. but the president isn't the one trying to get rid of democracy. they are. a new report, meanwhile, indicates that ukraine couldn't have had a quid pro quo with trump because they didn't even know that military aid was being delayed. chief breaking news correspondent trace

gallagher has more on this developing story. hey, trace. >> hi, tucker. the whistleblower's account and democratic lawmakers both argue that during his call with ukraine president zelensky president trump laid out a quid pro quo, you know, this for that. meaning the president was dangling $391 million in foreign aid to ukraine in exchange for an investigation into joe and hunter biden. democrats also argue that even if the president didn't explicitly make the demand the innuendo was certainly there. that's where the so-called mob boss secret code comes in. but if a quid pro quo is in place, it stands to reason that both parties would know about it. except "the new york times" is now reporting that a ukrainian official says kiev was not made aware that the u.s. had suspended security funds until a month after the trump-zelensky phone call. even the whistleblower acknowledges not knowing, quote, "how or when they learned of it." they, being the zelensky administration. separately, the

whistleblower complaint says the u.s. diplomat kurt volcker who, by the way, resigned today, was upset about rudy giuliani's role in pushing kiev to open investigation into the bidens, and that volcker sought to, quote, "contain the damage from giuliani's outreach to ukraine." but fox news now has text messages between volcker and giuliani from july 19th showing that volcker actually encouraged rudy giuliani to reach out to ukraine, and even connected giuliani to a source very close to president zelensky. tucker. >> tucker: thank you, trace. for two years, democrats told us that proof of russian collusion was eminent, any day now, they said. we're still waiting. now, democrats like ted lieu want the public to trust them that the evidence on ukraine is just around the corner. president trump, they tell us, was definitely making a corrupt deal with ukraine's president. joe biden's son and his

$50,000 a month no so job nothing to see here. move along. >> hunter biden receiving $50,000 a month from a ukrainian energy company, do you think that that is evidence of corrupt behavior? >> no. people sit on boards and they get monetary payments and what the evidence actually shows is that the ukrainians looked into this, terminated the investigation. found nothing there. >> tucker: uh-huh, yeah. that's not corrupt at all. but asking about it is an impeachable offense. is that really the story they can sell the public for the next year? john daniel davidson is political editor at "the federalist," which, if you don't read, you ought to, and he joins us tonight. john, simple question. is that, distilled down to its essence, a message that they can ride to victory in impeachment or in the election? >> absolutely not. this is a half-baked story that the american people are not going to buy, especially

not from this congress. look, the democrats decided that trump needed to be impeached the day after the election in 2016. and ever since then, they have been grasping at straws. first it was, oh, he fired comey, and then it was this russia collusion hoax. and now, we get this story about the ukrainian phone call. the american people aren't going to buy it. they have every reason to be suspicious of this democratic congress. >> tucker: yeah. i mean, it seems like in real life, you can't do impeachment except as a bipartisan matter. obamacare, maybe, is their model, can you squeak it through on one vote. but impeachment is bigger than any piece of legislation. it's undoing an election. do they really think they can do this party line in the house? >> yeah. absolutely. the last two impeachments we had, bill clinton and richard nixon, were both bipartisan affairs. in fact, the vote to just authorize impeachment inquiries got support from the opposing party. nancy pelosi won't even call for that vote because she

knows that it will be an entirely partisan vote. and it will undermine the credibility of an impeachment investigation that's already tainted. -- you know, you were talking about in congress by the way that has something like 14% approval rating. >> tucker: right. >> the american people don't have confidence in this congress, and you need to have the american public to have confidence in congress in order to do something like this. >> tucker: so, what's the message? by the way, this is not a defense of this president or any president. but it's a defense maybe of democracy itself. so what's the message to voters who voted in 2016 hoping they were going to drain the swamp or shake up the system or, you know, put something new, a new kind of person in there? what's the message to them like no, you are not allowed to have what you want. >> that's exactly the message. the message is you were wrong, and you don't -- you can't be trusted with this. and so, we are going to have

a do-over. in fact, today, senator kamala harris called for the formal impeachment inquiry against supreme court justice brett kavanaugh. they want to undo 2016 and everything that happened since and have a whole do-over, except this time they will be in charge because they know what's best for the american people. that's essentially the message. >> tucker: she is an appalling light weight. i mean, do you see any parallels between the way that permanent washington treats the 2016 election and the way the european bureaucracy treats the brexit vote of 2016? >> absolutely. the european union has a long track record of calling for new referendums and new elections every time one of their initiatives fails they have done it multiple times over the past 15 years. and now, you see, you know, politicians in the united kingdom calling for the same same thing for brexit. you were just wrong, voters, the first time. and so this time we're going to get it right.

it's a -- appalling and talk about trampling or democratic norms and institutions. this is much worse than anything that trump has done. >> tucker: or that russia did. they don't believe in democracy. they are not hiding it anymore. that's fine. let's get rid of this then. this weird, half baked democracy is not fine and causes volatility. thanks for coming on tonight. >> yep. >> tucker: ian samuel is a former supreme court clerk. ian, thanks for coming on. i'm not a security nut, but does occur to me the debates we are watching over impeachment because of ukraine, or a lot of our racial debates, all seem like side shows designed to prevent us from ever debating economic issues. like, what is the role of -- is private equity good for america, exactly? why are they paying half the taxes i'm paying? things like real questions that actually matter? have you noticed this, or have i gone crazy? >> well, i don't know if you are crazy. although, i think that

actually this impeachment investigation couldn't really be better timed if you want to have that debate. because that debate would never happen if joe biden were the democratic nominee for president. and i think the most-likely effect of this impeachment investigation, in addition, obviously, to whatever it turns up about what trump did, is to remind everybody that joe biden, whether or not this is what his son was doing was formally illegal or not, is like the preeminent swamp creature in the democratic party, and it's an -- it's coming at a time where there is still an opportunity to nominate somebody else who actually did want to have that debate. and so, i have sort of mixed feelings about this impeachment process. i don't really want to spend the next year talking about hunter biden and what he was up to and joe biden's views on ukrainian gas. on the other hand, this might be only opportunity to talk about something else by getting joe biden out of the picture. i have mixed feelings. >> tucker: i agree with you completely. i wonder how joe biden got to be the front-runner in the first place. i don't really understand

that. how could a party that claims to believe all the things democrats claim to believe have put him in the top spot? >> well, i mean, remember, this is really early in the process. why is joe biden a front0runner? front-runner? i will tell you why, because he is obama's friend. he is the guy from obama. he is the guy from the onion. if people are getting reintroduced to the actual joe biden they are remembering why the first two presidential campaigns of his crashed and burned. he doesn't fit the modern economic populism that is emerging in the democratic party -- or at least is trying to emerge. this sort of impeachment investigation in addition to what it will say about the administration, which is great, whatever is true is true, will also be revealing about what sort of democrat joe biden really is, and that's good because they there is still time to do something about it. >> tucker: the guy who carried water for the credit card companies for decades. >> absolutely, the senator from mbna. >> tucker: unbelievable. >> mr. bankruptcy reform. he has no place in any party that is going to put the interest of working people first. implausible in the extreme. and he is not a person who can credibly say to people

if you are a working person that voted for trump because you thought he was going to make your life better, he lied to you, but you weren't stupid for doing that, i want to do something about it. joe biden can't sell that message because it ain't true with joe biden. >> tucker: no, it's not. just defending the interest that they charge should be ashamed. ian, thank you. well, ilhan omar, alexandria ocasio-cortez, and the rest of the squad are now firmly in charge of the democratic party. they are leading the charge for impeachment and raising money off of it. what does that mean for the democratic party and for america? we will tell you next. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪[upbeat music]

♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun transitions™ light under control™ new transitions™ gen 8™ lenses

are now faster than ever. and learn more at transitions.com

♪ >> tucker: alexandria ocasio-cortez is not a genius. she doesn't know a lot, but what she lacks in impressive qualities, she makes up for with pure aggression and moxie. and as a result, she and her friends now dominate and, to some extent, control the democratic party. they are the ones pushing impeachment. >> corrupt president who violates his oath in office must and will be impeached. [cheers and applause] >> it is absolutely time to start formal impeachment proceedings. >> what he has admitted to is already impeachable, regardless of future developments. >> i know it's time. it's been time. we must impeach this lawless president. >> tucker: congresswoman rashida tlaib, she is a charmer, the

last one you saw there is selling impeach the mother fer t-shirts online that was made before the ukraine controversy even existed. ned ryun is the founder of american majority joins us tonight. ned, for the first, i would say, couple months that the squad became prominent and it republican talking point to say, for obvious reasons that they are really in charge of the democratic party. it's starting to seem kind of true. >> oh, absolutely. i think with every passing day, nancy pelosi is really speaker in name only. the inmates have taken over the asylum, which isn't really that surprising, tucker. the parasitic far left has been eating the democratic party for years and now it's coming to the surface. you are right, they are an amazing blend of ignorance and petulance and stupidity and hatred. the fact that they are selling shirts for $19.99 -- to which i say, knock yourself out, since nancy pelosi

announced impeachment, trump has eraised 13 million for reelect. adam schiff is now a platform for pair buy. it's pretty amazing to watch. the thing that's crazy to me is dems are willing to destroy all of these norms because orange man bad. if you think about what's taken place over the last two and a half years, russia gate, collusion, ukraine gate, all of this stuff, it's about one thing, tucker. it's about policy differences. they cannot stand the fact that they are not in power and trump has a different approach to governing not only domestically but on foreign policy as well. so now, their new approach on all of this, we shall impeach all things. impeach kavanaugh and trump based on what? nothing. policy differences. >> tucker: you have got to kind of wonder, once these people take full control, formal control of the party and that's only a cycle or two away. >> that's right. >> tucker: do people like adam schiff really believe they are going to continue to run committees? i mean, there is not going to be a place for adam schiff. >> the amazing part if you study history these revolutions have a way of eating themselves. look at the french revolution and robespierre.

i think they will start to realize they will start eating each other. but as did you go down this path, i think they -- it shows how deranged they are. look at the impeachment poll this week, in the midst of all of this hysteria about ukrainegate, only 36% of the american people supporting impeachment of trump, and if you get into the heartland, where i grew up, tucker, impeachment drops to the low 20s, and you start to think about how stupid they are when you get to the swing districts of oklahoma 5 and illinois 14, which are real pickup opportunities for the g.o.p. in 2020, they are going to make those members watch -- walk the impeachment plank and lose the majority, i really do think so in 2020 if they continue to push. because i think impeaching trump is a fool's errand. >> tucker: ned ryun, great to see you tonight. thanks so much for that. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: well, this white house the past three years has been defined by leaking. now cia bureaucrats feel empowered to use anonymous hearsay to shut down the political process.

that's not just a worry for the current president. it's a deep concern for all future presidents who might try to defy the consensus here in washington. danny coulson has been around the a long time. he's former deputy assistant director of the fbi, and he joins us tonight. danny, thanks so much for coming on. >> thank you, sir. >> tucker: this -- and i'm not saying this in a phony way. this is sincere. if you care about our system, and you believe in the peaceful transfer of power, and you believe that the people should rule in democracy, in other words, you don't want faceless unelected bureaucrats wielding the real power, do you? >> oh, absolutely not. i think we are talking about leaks here. and that's where we get in big time trouble. they are very harmful. i have done several leaks at the white house investigations and somewhat successful. they need to close the faucet here, so that there has to be some things done in confidence. the american people don't need to know about everything that goes on in the white house. especially every conversation with another leader. so they need to close down

the circle of access and get control of this thing. if not, this president and presidents in the future are going to be plagued with this kind of stuff, and they are going to be having -- running around chasing their tails, trying to stop it. >> tucker: you will notice that the leaks are particularly common and virulent around foreign policy questions because the president's views on foreign policy contradict those of the foreign policy establishment here in washington. particularly on russia. they hated the fact that he said on the campaign trail that we should be closer to russia. they hated that and found it unacceptable. so really what you are seeing is permanent washington deciding what you are allowed to say as a politician. that's scary. >> it's very, very scary. and a lot of this has to do with ego at the white house. not just this white house, but every white house. everybody wants to know what's going on. and the bigger the circle of knowledge is, the bigger the likelihood of leaks because you can hide among the crowd. if 30 people know about a conversation, and you leak

it, the chances of finding you are very, very difficult. if there is four people that know about the conversation, then people are less likely to go out and leak information because they know they will get caught doing it. it's a matter of securing your own people, securing your own -- the secrecy of what you do, which is good. secrecy is important when you are dealing with foreign affairs because there is a lot of issues dealing with other leaders and whatever, so, we don't, as a people, need to know every aspect of what's going on and you need to take steps to secure it. that's why we have compartmented information systems within the intelligence service, to keep the number of people's knowledge close. >> tucker: these used to be obvious points, no longer. thank you for reminding us of them. danny coulson, good to see you. >> thank you. >> tucker: well, for the crime of doing a good deed, a young man in iowa found his life basically derailed by

"the des moines register." used to be a newspaper, now an activist group. cancel culture. that's what they are calling it. by the way, one of their own reporters fell to it. the question is why is the editor in charge of the newspaper facing no consequences? we'll investigate that question, next. ♪

♪ >> tucker: california has already become tragically famous as a ruined paradise. its once-beautiful cities now covered in waste, needles, and tent cities. now it has a new self-inflicted problem. organized shoplifting rings. instead of siding with law-abiding citizen, though, california state's priority appears to be protecting criminals. chief breaking news correspondent trace gallagher has more on this story. trace? >> tucker, these are called grab and dash crimes, where groups of people rush a store, grab arms full of merchandise, and flee. while crimes are on the rise

arrests are on the decline. police about halfway between sacramento and san francisco say over the past year, there have been 746 retail thefts and despite video all over social media and local news, more than half the suspects got away. and both law enforcement and the retail industry blame california's proposition 47, passed back in 2014. the law more than doubles the amount a suspect can steal before facing felony charges. before prop 47, stealing $450 or more was a felony. now it's $950. police say criminals have done the math and realize the benefits heavily outweigh the consequences. first off, the odds are you won't get caught. and even if you do, the fine won't be as much as what you stole. so it's win-win. and to increase the odds even further, groups of people are harder to track down than individuals. hence, the major uptick in these organized retail thefts. experts say criminals are also taking advantage of other police department

policies by targeting malls and shopping centers close to freeways because they know police won't risk a high-speed chase for a misdemeanor. finally, for safety reasons, many large retail stores are now telling their employees not to engage these grab and dash groups. so a lot of these crimes are not even being reported. tucker? >> tucker: falling apart. trace, great to see you tonight. thank you for that. well, we recently told you that pretty remarkable story of a young man called carson king from iowa. king raised a million dollars for charity, for children's hospital, and "the des moines register," the local newspaper, rewarded him by digging into his personal history all the way back to high school denouncing him for tweets he made seven years ago. for this, he was pilloried. anheuser-busch, which had agreed to a partnership with him, dropped him.

now, in a fascinating coda to this story. calvin, the reporter who broke the story, has been fired himself after he was found to have offensive tweets on his twitter timeline as well. amazing. do you know who still though at "the des moines register"? carol hunter. she is the editor who made the call to publish the piece and to crush carson king. she appears to be completely fine. and to be clear, we are not calling for her firing. we just think it's a little bit weird that the kid gets fired, and the person who makes the decision gets to stay. is that fair? joe concha writes media for "the hill." he joins us tonight. joe, is that fair? >> no, it's not fair. this isn't some rogue reporter, tucker, that just writes a story and there it goes, out, published. there is a vetting system. and the vetting system starts with the senior editor you just mentioned. she has a job tonight. and by the way, she only put out a statement, an op-ed, basically, explaining what happened. and we hear about news

organizations, publications, demanding transparency from people in power that they cover. i agree with that completely. but, in this case, she should be answering questions right now in terms of why is she okayed it and why this reporter was thrown under the bus, because he very easily, tucker, could have been on order saying why don't you look into his social media history? look, as a writer and reporter myself, if an editor tells you to do something, you do it. when you estimate a story, the editor can either pull that out or put it in. either way, it shouldn't be completely your responsibility while the editors get away with zero responsibility. >> tucker: well, that does seem right. her justification was -- and by the way, she is basically illiterate. for a newspaper reporter, she can barely write in english maybe it's not her first language. we wanted to perform a background check on this subject. just some kid giving money to a charity, no. need for a background check. they didn't do a background check on their own hire?

how does that work? >> exactly. what do you need a background check, by the way? it's completely irrelevant to the story. he raised more than $1.7 million. and, yeah, i think we have to start doing that now. as a matter of fact, tucker, i think the educational system starting at the high school level, and even junior high should start -- and i'm completely 100% serious about this in their curriculum, a course that says, you know what? social media behavior and consequences, because, guess what employers are doing now? they used to hire companies to do background checks. they don't that anymore. they check your social media feeds, your twitter, you are instagram and facebook. one inappropriate tweet or facebook post or picture and that can alter your career path. and i don't think enough kids, 16 years old, in the place of carson king when he put up those tweets, or even this writer, aaron calvin, i don't think anybody understands at that age that anything you put up in to the public record is going to have consequences. no question about it. by the way, the reporter is

speaking out tonight from "the des moines register," who was fired. you are not going to believe what he said. you are not going to feel quite as sorry for him. he tells buzzfeed, tucker, and i quote, "this whole campaign was taken up by right wing idealogues and largely driven by that force." adding, "it was just a taste of what i assume that women and journalists of color suffer all the time." i mean, are you kidding me? he is making himself a victim. he is a victim that the editor threw him under the bus, but to say that? i mean, it's hard to feel sorry for him at this point, tucker. >> tucker: sad. who goes into the newspaper business now? we're not sending our best into the newspaper business as trump would say. unfortunately -- i used to work in a newspaper, but it's true, unfortunately. joe, great to see you tonight, thank you. >> it's a dying breed, unfortunately. >> tucker: it is. >> thank you, tucker. have a good weekend. >> tucker: in the democratic presidential race, moderates are no longer welcome. what does that leave an

where does that leave an old-fashioned democrat like john delaney? he joins us to talk about his campaign next. ♪ ♪now i'm gonna te ll my momma ♪that i'm a traveller ♪i'm gonna follow the sun♪ ♪now i'm gonna tell my momma ♪that i'm a traveller transitions™ light under control™

they give us excellent customer otservice, every time.e. our 18 year old was in an accident. usaa took care of her car rental, and getting her car towed. all i had to take care of was making sure that my daughter was ok. if i met another veteran, and they were with another insurance company, i would tell them, you need to join usaa because they have better rates, and better service. we're the gomez family... we're the rivera family... we're the kirby family, and we are usaa members for life. get your auto insurance quote today. (♪light musical cords)

♪ >> tucker: america currently receives more than 1 million legal immigrants every year. also, we get hundreds of thousands, unknown number, but certainly hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants moving here. there's a lot of polling on this. and it shows pretty consistently that americans like immigrants. they work hard, and mostly nice people. they are not begging for much more immigration, and they are definitely against uncontrolled migration. they want their country to have a secure border. why wouldn't they? every population of every country in the world wants that, and they know that mass immigration puts a lot of stress on services -- public schools, for example. definitely expresses wages especially for vulnerable workers and drives up inequality. dallas federal reserve

president has a message for americans, the majority who think that way. the message is: tough. he told us recently that america, in fact, must have more immigration, period. we are quoting now. "if you think you are actually going to cut the number of immigrants," caplin say, "and grow g.d.p. those two things do not go together. you need to grow the workforce," end quote. hear that? he is telling you don't live in a country where happiness is influenced by things like social harmony or equality, definitely by equality, or other factors, you live, instead, and this is how our ruling class feels, in an economy live, in a place where the only thing that matters is g.d.p. and it must go up, always and forever, or else. growth is what matters. the only way to drive up g.d.p. forever is typically to import more workers who will work for less. investing in americans who have fallen out of the

workforce or helping american parents have more children is way too hard and expensive. that's their position. actual voters have a very different view. in fact, nobody in history has ever voted to turn their country into a g.d.p. calculation. at least, they are not for elections anyway. whatever. well, imagine being former maryland congressman john delaney, who has been running for president longer than any other democrat in the field. delaney is a traditional democrat. he wants his party to be a big tent. he wants it focused on bipartisan and the core economic issues that face americans. but over the past year, he has watched as a revolution has consumed the democratic party, a revolution obsessed with far out policies like seizing guns and decriminalizing illegal immigration. >> i mentioned before that we might not own our own cars. our current car ownership and usage model is really inefficient and bad for the environment. >> hell yes, we are going to take your ar-14, your ak-47. >> when somebody comes

across the border, not to criminalize desperation. to treat that as a civil violation. >> if somebody commits a serious crime, sexual assault, murder, they are going to be punish. they may be in jail for 10 years, 20 years, 50 years, their whole lives. that's what happens when you commit a serious crime. but i think the right to vote is inherent to our democracy. yes, even for terrible people. >> tucker: uh-huh. so that's not going to happen in the real world, but more to the point, normal people are not going to vote for you when you talk that way. and john delaney knows that. he urged his fellow candidates making promises that maybe they could actually keep. and, when he said that, he got a scolding from elizabeth warren. watch this. >> so, i think democrats win when we run on real solutions, not impossible promises. when we run on things that are workable, not fairytale economics. >> you know, i don't understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the united states just to talk about what we really can't

do and shouldn't fight for. [cheers and applause] >> tucker: that party is getting more radical by the day. so where that does leave someone like john delaney? well, we recently talked to him about that, and here's what he said. so, the question is, has the democratic party changed irreversibly? are we going through a moment, you know, a frenzy that will subside and the party will get back to making economic arguments? i mean, put some perspective on this, if you would. >> i think we are going through a moment, and i do think the party will get back to the party of my dad's kind of democratic party. my dad was a union construction worker. and he used to say if you care about workers, you vote for the democrats. and that's the democratic party that i grew up in, and i think we'll get back there. that's where i get the sense most democrats are, but the loudest voices in the room are getting a lot of coverage right now, and the activists have had a very strong kind of voice in the

party, and in many ways, the dnc has been enabling it, this democratic primary. >> tucker: so i -- the last point you are making, and i'm not a democrat, so i'm from the outside looking in. but it seems to be right, just everything i'm reading and hearing. why would they do that? because clearly most voters are closer to where you are than to where some of these other candidates are, so what would be the point? >> you know, you never know who is really making the decisions behind the scenes. i mean, they are requiring a certain number of small dollar donations to qualify for the debates. yet, we all know that the people who tend to make small dollar donations online tend to live in new york and california, and tend to represent the more extreme parts of the party. i mean, half the american people can't afford their basic necessities. i'm running to help those people. they are not making a lot of donations to democratic candidates online. >> tucker: exactly. >> i think we have our priorities all wrong in terms of how we are choosing who gets to debate issues on the debate stage

in front of the american people. >> tucker: so, in 1972, democrats really hated richard nixon, and they thought, you know, attacking him personally would work. and they nominated the most radical person they could find. and they lost. and that lesson enabled bill clinton to win two terms because he looked at that and said that doesn't work. why have democrats forgotten that legislative? that lesson? >> you know, i have made that point. i mean, if you look at mondale and dukakis, they ran very far to the left. they turned off independent voters. they didn't run on core economic issues. kitchen table issues. pocketbook issues. building infrastructure, creating jobs, improving people's wages. but bill clinton and, actually, barack obama, people forget about barack obama. he was the more moderate candidate in the 2008 primary, compared to john edwards and hillary clinton. so, that's the lesson we have got to remind ourselves. i mean, obviously there is a lot of rage for the current president. but if we want to beat him, we have to capture independence.

and the way to capture independents is by running on things that a majority of the american people support. it's actually pretty simple. what most people care about is, you know, their kid's education, their job, their healthcare, their pay, opportunities for their kids. those basic issues that effect every american. we have to get back to that as a party. >> tucker: yeah. i mean, what you are saying -- and you could substitute republican for democrat. that's the substance -- that's the core of politics right there. think about. >> your average american care about their job and pay and care about their kid's public education, and care about their healthcare, and want to know their next generation, their kids and grand kids, will have opportunities, and they want to be safe. that's what most americans care about. >> tucker: i know. it's not hard. it's so weird that you are one of the only guys saying that. anyway, i'm glad you are. thanks for joining us tonight. john delaney. >> thanks for having me, tucker. >> tucker: well, it's friday. you know what that means, it's time for dan bongino news explosion. bam. our favorite former secret

service agent with the most remarkable stories of the week, next. ♪ service agent with the most remarkable stories of the week next. ♪ ♪

♪ >> tucker: if there was ever a week for a dan bongino friday news explosion, it's this week. our favorite new york city cop here to break down everything that happened. he's also got a brand new book, "exonerated: the failed takedown of president donald trump by the swamp," outstanding. great blueprint. congrats on the book. >> we lay out the blueprint. they tried this scam before. i deeply appreciate you mentioning the book. but let's get to the news explosion, my favorite segment of the week. two stories this week, but really three. there is a tie for number one.

stay tuned, we'll be giving out a special award at the end. who's story number two? hillary clinton, corruption fighter, tucker. warrior against corruption. >> tucker: pretty unbelievable. >> hillary clinton -- get your berries here. here's the penalty flag, hillary clinton, illegal procedure, 15 yards. um, corruption fighter? now what is the genesis of this? she claims trump is a corrupt human tornado. so i don't like writing notes for the segment. but when it comes to hillary clinton's corruption, you need some notes. uranium 1, pay to play in the clinton foundation. the ukraine scandals, the rose law firm, spygate, hillary, just a note, you may just want to sit this one out. i'm just saying. pro tip on that. >> tucker: i think that's probably pretty good advice. >> you think so? hillary clinton, corruption fighter, who knew, right?

okay, story number one. we have a little competition. we've got a special award today. and the winner for the best dramatic retelling of a democrats fake news hoax. we have two contended. we have adam schiff, who reinvented the entire transcript in the ukraine called him and told a totally different story, hyperbolic story, of what trump said to the ukrainian president. i want to compliment on his skills in the retelling. and then "the new york times" decided they were going to get creative. their opinion section. they put out a tweet with the "star wars" scroll telling what they believed to be the trump story of corruption. of course, fake news story. tucker, have the envelope. we have a winner here. the winners adam schiff! actually, an invite to my 7-year-old daughters a dinner party. we have a trophy. here it is. this is actually my daughter's

lacrosse trophy, but you get it. adam schiff, complain your trophy, it's here in florida. >> tucker: you don't want him there. dan bongino, great to see you. best weekend. we will be back monday, 8:00 p.m. have the best we can with the ones you love. ♪ >> sean: all right, welcome to "hannity." the democratic party come away out of control. they have declared war on a president of the united states. of course, driven by a blind, unyielding, psychotic rage for president trump. and democrats and their collaborators in the mob, they will do anything to smear, slander, besmirch president trump and anybody that likes the president. that means they are really attacking you, me, the american people, so make no mistake, all of these holier-than-thou, well, dirtbags, to be very obvious here, they wanted president trump impeached pretty much