monday at 7:00. good night. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: goowell, good >> tucker: good evening, welcome to tucker carlson tonight. we're nearing the end of our second full week of total saturation ukraine coverage. that means every channel, every hour of the day. so, at this point, you think it would be obvious what exactly the fuss is about, after this much talking, you would assume every person in america would understand what crimes donald trump is being accused of committing. but, no. even now the story feels obscure and strangely light. there's nothing mysterious or weighty about it. we know all of the facts. there's a transcript. but they don't seem very

shocking. and so maybe for that reason, our news anchors have been doing their best to keep the blood pressure high. the game is boring, the cheerleaders have to work overtime. twice as hard. here was msnbc's best attempt to get you to care. >> i don't say this lightly, be frank. a national nightmare is upon us. the basic rules of our democracy are under attack under the president. we begin with the president that all but ensures his impeachment. the founding fathers would have considered a national emergency if the president lobbied multiple foreign governments to interfere in the next election. it's tough to say lightly. >> cliche bomb this off. how hackneyed and badly that speech is. no one can write a decent paragraph anymore. we'll do a special on that. but for now, the substance of

what you just heard -- the basic rules of our democracy are under attack. so what are the basic rules of our democracy. well, the most basic rule of law is that the people rule. in a democracy, the big decisions are made by voters in elections. they're not made by left wing talk show hosts or "the washington post," or even by high-level cia employees acting anonymously as whistleblowers? no. in a democracy, the main decisions are made by citizens casting ballots. that, for example, is how you remove a president, by beating him in an election. that's the way we did it here in america. not anymore. so, yes, our democracy is under attack. they're right about that. but yet for all his faults, donald trump is not the attacker. wait a second, they materialing you. we understand how grave a decision impeachment is, we're praying over it, people of faith that we are. but in this case, impeachment is

unavoidable, soliciting information from foreign countries is corrupt and evil. that's what they're telling you. okay, fine. it was a brand new standard 20 minutes ago. all american politics revolved around information solicited from foreign countries. it was called the steele dossier. and back then, the press corps strongly approved of it. >> the allegations in this christopher steele dossier, you went through the timeline very well a few moments ago, are stunning. >> there are substantial portions of what was in the steele dossier that has checked out. >> based on our reporting and numerous sources, the dossier is in fact far from bogus. >> we're going have to stop calling it the infamous dossier. it's the accurate dossier. it's the damning dossier.

it's the dossier that's going to hang around the neck of the trump administration and drag them down. >> oh, the dossier. it was totally fine. in case you've forgotten, you may have, because why would you remember, but christopher steele who wrote the dossier was a foreign intelligence operative. he gathered his material abroad in foreign countries, some of it clearly from foreign government officials. at the time, that was absolutely fine with democrats. they weren't embarrassed to say so. we'll give you millions. here's the tweet. i regret i didn't know about christopher steele's hiring in preelection. if i had, i would have volunteered to go to europe and try to help him. oh. okay. and by the way, if foreign interference is such a concern. and by the way, it should be a concern, then why are we worried about foreign companies sending de facto bribes of family members of connected

politicians. there are a lot of those. we're picking on joe biden's son because it's in the news, but it could be a lot of people's son, trust me. in the case of biden, no one thinks he's an expert on ukrainian energy policy. he got the gig because of his dad, influence peddling, obviously. that's okay for some reason. be totally honest, stop lying for a second, i know it's hard in modern america, be honest for one moment, in washington right now, there are no actual rules. partisanship invents standards for the purpose of destroying their enemies. today, hillary clinton tweeted this -- this quote -- the impeachment provision of the constitution of the united states will not reach the offenses charged here, maybe the 18th century constitution should be abandoned to a 20th century paper shredder. barbara jordan, in other words, if the outcome isn't what

hillary clinton wants, she thinks we should scrap the constitution. oh, probably not a question that concept appeals to michigan congresswoman talib. she said the democratic party is considering ways of arresting members of trump's cabinet, jailing them would be an option. >> we're trying to figure out, no joke, we're trying to figure out, is it the dc police that goes to get them? we don't know? where do we hold them. but i will relay your message. i will tell them they can hold off -- we'll take care of them. and then -- if they show up to the committee hearing -- >> just going to arrest them. that's not third world or anything. arrest the cabinet. you have to give talib credit for honesty, she's not pretending to be prayerful, she's saying what she thinks and she speaks for unfortunately quite a few people in her party. what we're watching here as you

watch in that clip is politics itself breaking down. that's not politics. that's not the effort to persuade people, bring them to your side through reason. no, that's something different. modern partisans on the left don't want to win the next election. electoral power is too transient. voters might change their mind in the election after that. it happened in 2016. democrats don't want to take that risk again. so they moved on from the goal of winning votes to utterly destroying their votes, their enemies. they want them imprisoned, they want their supporters demoralized. they want to vanquish rather than win over. that's an effective way to maximize political power. catherine herridge is our chief intelligence officer here. she joins us with the latest on the ukraine investigation. >> the intelligence community watchdog was on capitol hill for seven hours behind closed doors. sources familiar with the questioning tell fox news that

michael atkinson said he did not disclose his contact with the democrat-led house intelligence committee. the whistleblower was a registered democrat who had a prior working relationship with a high-profile democratic politician and atkinson said that he had no knowledge of how an schiff tweet in late aug about ukraine aid and rudy giuliani neared the substance of the whistleblower complaint before it was declassified and shared with congress. the chairman could have been more precise in his earlier media appearances. democrats and republicans today, disagreed on the significance. >> chairman schiff should be disqualified fromming running an investigation where his committee, members or staff, are fact witnesses about contact with the whistleblower and the whistleblower process.

>> this whistleblower did a profoundly important thing by alerting the intelligence community and the committee about what is a criminal act. >> this week also saw the release of these text messages from top diplomats over the president's july 25 phone call with the ukrainian leader. a top diplomat bill taylor texted gordon sunland who contributed to the inaugural fund and ambassador to the european union. as i said, i think it's crazy to withhold security assistance with help for a political campaign. he said, quote, i think you're incorrect with the president trump's intentions. the president is trying to evaluate whether ukraine is going to adopt the transparency reforms that president zelensky promised in the campaign. i suggest we stop the back and

forth by text. they contacted chairman schiff's office and the legal team about the disclosure issue and no immediate response, tucker? >> no immediate response. catherine herridge, thank you for that. things you can believe. the contributing editor of "the nation," a retired professor of russian studies at nyu in princeton. and he's the author of "war with russia, from putin and ukraine to trump and russiagate." thank you for coming on tonight. >> hi, tucker. >> i want to be clear with the steele dossier, i don't want to relitigate the years we spent looking at this, now that the standard in washington is soliciting foreign governments is impeachable, the steele dossier, was that information in whole or in part from foreign governments? >> well, by the way, the first time we met on your program was 2 1/2 years ago when the steele dossier was published. i think it was january, 2017. we talked about it then. and i said to you then, this is

clearly something concocted probably by intelligence agencies around the world. and that's what it's turned out to be. steele's premise, which got him attention was that he got all of this from sources high in the kremlin, right? it was supposed to be kremlin sources. but the story didn't make any sense because the dossier said putin wanted to elect trump. so why then, we ask ourselves, would putin's own agents give steele dirt on trump to destroy his candidacy? the whole steele document made very little sense. by the way, we now know that steele was more of a composer than a writer. a lot of people contributed to it, including the wife of a very high-ranking american fbi agent, louis zoir. she said she researched for steele, i assume that's what it means. >> tucker: surprising, stunning. you've been in and around this world for many decades.

have you seen anything like this? this appears to be part of the intelligence operation aimed a the president? is there a precedence? >> you asked me to go some place we can't go at length. copping down here, i asked myself, have we ever had a presidential scandal like this in america? no. i can't think of one. then because i study the soviet union as a profession, i asked myself, did the russian secret police, the kgb, run its own operations against soviet leaders who pursued policies they didn't like? and the answer is yes. particularly detente related policies. now i connect dots. feel free to tell me that i shouldn't connect the dots. but all of this russiangate stuff seems to originated, that's what steele tells us, intelligence agencies, american and foreign. what we don't know is why.

we need to know this. they set out to destroy trump as a candidate in 2016 and then as a president. after all, other american presidents had pursued cooperation with russia, what is it about trump that determined them to destroy him. >> tucker: that is the question. i have theories, but i don't know if they're right. professor, thank you so much for that perspective. always, great to talk to you. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: the trump white house says nancy pelosi wants to pursue impeachment, she should. the administration is planning a letter to pelosi saying it will not comply with requests for documents or other materials unless she holds a full house vote to begin a formal inquiry. the white house principal press secretary, thank you for coming on tonight. >> thank you. >> is the house or is the house not going to impeach donald trump. >> a great question one that you have to pose to nancy pelosi. their own rules dictate they

have to vote if they want to move to impeachment. they have not done that. they keep issuing subpoenas. are they conducting oversight, which at this point is overreach. or are they going to move to impeach? she hasn't answered that question. the fact is donald trump has done nothing wrong and the democrats know it. he deserves due process like any american citizen would. and the democrats can't void that simply because they hate him so much or because they want to overturn the election of 2016. >> so, you've seen a number of not simply in this conversation with the ukrainian president, but in a couple of other calls to the heads of state, the president's phone calls monitored and leaved. you saw gordon sonlin, the ambassador of the european union, not a minor job, his text exchanges are leaked. what's going on? >> that's a great question. and it has been obvious that people inside the government for quite sometime -- i mean, before

this president was sworn in in the oath of office. i was here in washington, d.c., i watched them rail against him and protest him before he was sworn in. he had not passed a single piece of legislation, they had not pushed things as president. they wanted him out before he was sworn in. this is more of the same. it's very clear that there are people inside of the government hell bent on destroying this president and taking him down. they try it every single day. you see that with the leaked calls from australian prime minister we had the conversation with. the president spoke with the president of mexico, also leaked and now the ukrainian conversation. the democrats are so lost. what you are not hearing them talk about is u.s. mca, for example, to help our farmers and ranchers. they're not talking about guns anymore, which was the most pressing issue on the planet for a hot minute. they were not talking about medicare or fixing the health care system at all. they're not talking abclosing

our borders at all. all they can see is hatred for this president, blood red, trying to attack him. it's disgusting, it's gross. and the american people deserve better. it doesn't hurt donald trump, it hurts the american people. they need safe infrastructure. the democrats won't come to the table to discuss it. >> the other day in his press conference, the president made a remark about china. maybe they should look to what hunter biden should say. and that was, quote, wrong and appalling. do you worry about romney specifically voting to convict an impeachment trial? >> i'm not sure what he's going to do. mitt romney has a long history of trying to go to donald trump and get money. he wanted to be secretary of state as well. he didn't get that job either. goes back to utah, runs for senate. the president has great relationships in the united states senate. the republicans control it. we expect we'll be fine in the united states senate.

>> tucker: does the president regret not hiring senator romney as secretary of state. >> i think he's happy with mike pompeo doing an incredible job and shares the president's vision. >> thank you so much. >> thank you so much. >> tucker: a fox news alert, bernie sanders of vermont has been discharged from the hospital. the campaign now concedes it was a heart attack that put him there. the campaign said sanders suffered chest pape and underwent surgery for blocked arteries. they described the ailment as an mycardialinfarction, that is permanent damage to heart tissue. he will stay in the democratic race for the nomination. he ignored his heart attack admission completely. sanders plans to participate in the next primary debate. we'll keep you posted. impeachment is back in the news, you know what that means, the

creepy porn lawyer has stormed back on to the pages. stormy daniels -- stormy daniels owes him millions of dollars for all of the self-promotion she did at her expense. cpl, back in news, next.

>> with a long list of felony charges against him, you might have imagined the creepy porn lawyer was gone for good. if so, you were wrong. there's television cameras to jump in front of, the porn lawyer will live on, there's

oxygen. he's suing stormy daniels claiming she owes him $2 million in unpaid legal fees. a bold move considering he's facing charges of embezzling $300,000 owed to daniels. a fantastic magazine. he joins us tonight. so cpl is suing stormy daniels, who last time i checked, had no money and was dancing in strip bars in richmond, people throw beer bottles on her. he's trying to take money from her. >> that's right. he's just trying to express -- he's trying to litigate how hard he worked himself to the bone for this client. his relentless dedication to her well being. this guy had a grueling 19 months or however long it was that he was putting himself fully and completely out there for her. just look at what he had to go

through. so hundreds of time his day would be showing up at cnn. i don't know if you ever -- you have been to cnn, used to work there. i've been to cnn. just showing up there is an experiment in human misery you. uh have to dry clean your clothes when you leave to get the stench of decay out of it. he has to sit in makeup. then he has to go in to the studio, hundreds of times we're talking about. and he has to surround himself with these filters and the tappers and the cuomos. and essential ly perform a mr. rogers-like role where he talks to puppets for the entertainment of children. but his day is not over then, he then has to go home and relentlessly google himself. he needs to get on to twitter and search for himself all night long and pick fights with random people. then he has to run for president. and that's the whole press conference where no one shows up and buy really, really expensive

suits. this guy was really putting himself out there. what was stormy doing? well, she was dancing. >> she was dancing. you're missing one task that he had before him. it was about a year ago at this time, he had to pose as america's foremost fem mist hero. he was a defender of women. he was woke. and now he's -- he's basically trying to -- trying to steal money from a stripper. that doesn't sound like a feminist move to me. >> that's exactly right. i wonder if he was america's sweetheart back then? brian setter tells us he had a real shot at the presidency. the femnys loved him. -- the feminists loved him. he's going to take down the president. i'm shocked that he's going to steal money from a hardworking dancing. >> i always felt sorry for her. i feel more sorry for her now than i ever have. he's a predator. great to see you. relentlessly googling himself. i'll think of that before i go to bed. >> likewise.

>> actor robert de niro made it clear about how he feels about politics. >> this guy is should not be president, period. >> when you say that, folks on fox come after you. i remember the tonys he cursed. a lot of [ bleep ] -- well, you know this, is -- [ bleep ] >> sorry, this [ bleep ]. idiot is a president. the guy is a [ bleep ] fool, come on. >> how dare you say the things he does. of course i want to punch him in the face. >> why is he so passionate? he cares about the little people, a progressive, a liberal. that means his instinct is on the side of the underdog. unheralded. that's whose side robert de niro is on. that's why he's fighting the power on their behalf. is that really true? it turns out he may not reserve his rage for political topics. a former assistant has filed a

$1 million sexual harassment case against robert de niro. and her suit includes this voice mail that he left her. >> you [ bleep ]. -- answer my calls? how dare you? you -- you're a [ bleep ] history. how dare you disrespect me. don't [ bleep ] angry with me. because i'm pissed off i didn't get a simple -- out here in california i'm here for less than 24 hours. you've got to be kidding me, you spoiled brat. you -- how could you [ bleep ] -- you don't answer. you don't -- you're living in your -- your -- [ bleep ] brat. >> he cares about the little people. assistant in the valley parker he screams at. he does care about the little people. he joins us tonight. so this seems to be kind of revealing, joe. or am i drawing too grand a

conclusion from this voice mail? >> i don't think so at all, tucker. there's a $12 million harassment suit against robert de niro at this point. by the rules of the #metoo era, he shouldn't go on cnn or any other media outlet going forward. this is not a he said/she said situation. you played the tape, it's brutal. alec baldwin listened to that tape and said, wow, that guy is really out of control. de niro is a great actor. not going to take that away from him. good fella, raging bull, midnight run, he does comedy, forget about it. but he's also the leader of resistance in entertainment circles. and the more he speaks, the more he helps the president. by the way, the president doesn't need any sort of hollywood help. he has john voight, dean cain, and chachi. that doesn't matter despite all of hollywood being against him he still won.

you need hollywood support because they connect with people, that's completely overrated making a very obvious statement. >> it doesn't seem an accident that some of the worst people wind up political activists. instead of straightening out their personal lives and being kinder to the people around them, they get involved in an issue. shouldn't you start as a life lesson, a rule for living with the people around you. if you can't be nice to them, why should i listen to you? >> take care of your own hand, mow your own lawn before you try to tell other people how to take care of their home and mow their lawns. de niro would scratch his back, button his shirt prod him awake, stood idly by while his friends slapped her on the buttocks. this is serious. i don't hear a peep out of anybody remotely substantial in

hollywood denouncing de niro the same way brett kavanaugh or a conservative for that matter would be ostracized at this point. >> they're all this way. unhappy dysfunctional personal lives, that's why they're so angry. great to see you. >> have a great weekend. >> you too. the city of seattle has surrendered the parks to vagrants and may surrender the streets to criminals. they're allowing thousands of criminals to walk away without any charges, that's next.

>> tucker: eli >>be elizabeth warren tells us w tough she's going to be when she's elected president with silicon valley. she's break up the tech monopolies like facebook, amazon, and google. we support that idea, of course. everyone should support that idea. but can we believe that elizabeth warren really means

it? maybe not. a recent story in a business website profiled the tech big wigs that are donating to her campaign, there are quite a few of them. one facebook executive donated $5,000 to warren's presidential campaign. uber and twitter investor chris sock doe fated as well. and they were backing elizabeth warren but kept their names anonymous. the employees at the parent company, google, donated $130,000 to elizabeth warren. that's the second most of any company or organization in the united states. if -- as long as we're ranking them, amazon is number four on the list. apple is fifth. so it turns out big tech loves elizabeth warren almost as much as it loved pete buttigeig who has no chance and joe biden. it's full of smart people who got rich by making good bets.

they beerting she doesn't mean it. they don't believe her for a second. why should we? seattle is one of the country's most progressive cities. leaders there are treating their city as a test tube for radicalology. they're seizing to massive homeless encampments. now mass decriminalization. a report commissioned by the seattle business association found that city prosecutors refused to prosecute almost half of all nontraffic criminal cases referred to them by the city's police. for example, more than 1800 robberies were referred by police over an 18-month period. but less than 1,000 of them resulted in criminal charges. the fellow. this is amazing. first perspective. this is unusual, correct? >> highly unusual. seattle embarked on an

experiment of mass decriminalization, not only decriminalizing homeless encampments, decriminalizing heroin and fentanyl. but low level property crimes, assaults, and even robberies. but the evidence is clear -- seattle has property crime rates that are 86% higher than chicago. 250% higher -- >> than chicago? >> than chicago. 250% higher than los angeles. and 400% higher than new york city. and they're -- they're kind of operating under this mistaken idea that if you decriminalize crime you'll get less of it. but what we've seen especially with property crime is you've gotten much more of it and it's reaching a dangerous point. >> is that the idea or is that we have no moral standing to enforce the law? we hate ourselves so much we can't tell a criminal not to commit a crime. >> that's the heart of it. there's a radical progressive

ideology seeping itself way across saying people who are homeless or committing crimes or addicted to drugs are the victims of an unjust society and we can't hold them accountable because to do so is a vestige of white supremacy or fascism or racism. but you've seen it's devolved into a situation where you've had wide spread addiction, by the latest estimates, we have 6,000 homeless, heroin, and fentanyl addicts in the seattle area. and we know that all of them don't work and we have on average according to federal data, an $1800 a month drug habit. what happens? a huge increase in property crime. i live in seattle, washington. in a few blocks from my house, you had a guy douse another guy with lighter fluid, light him on fire. a number of robberies. i had a neighbor, a during ranged man banging on her door and it took two hours for police

to arrive because they were busy going call to call to call. >> seattle, for the viewers who haven't been there, one of the prettiest places in the world. they're wrecking it. >> it's a beautiful city. it's a city paradoxically of dynamic capitalist interprize, mass prosperity. it's being undermined by an ideological commitment that's multiplying these problems and we see a huge uptick in property crime and random acts of violence downtown. >> the self-hating decadence of the new rich. you see it up and down the coast on your side of the country. god speed out there. >> thank you. >> a federal judge, an obama judge, of course, gave harvard university a green light to discriminate based on skin color. not progress, but we have details. "there's got to be a time where we

come to an end of breast cancer" "i know that there's a lot of innovation that can be done to actually achieve that. and so i'm very hopeful. i really strongly, strongly believe that we are about to turn the corner on this" "but, we are a mighty force when we get out there, but, the foundation of all that what we are doing is through komen" ♪

what wehere, hello! starts is througwith -hi!mple... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.

>> tucker: harvard university is this country's >> harvard university is the oldest and most prestigious college. the lawsuit brought by students for fair admission produced deaf stating hard evidence darks at a, that harvard systematically discriminates on skin color on deciding who to let in. discrimination is the basis of their decision, it is no different, morally, from anything that can happen in the jim crow south. this week, though, a federal judge appointed by barack obama said totally fine. for the sake of fighting, quote, entrenched racism, harvard is allowed to entrench racism. a lawyer and u.s. civil rights commissioner, he joins us tonight. thank you for coming on. so what can we draw? what can we conclude from this

court decision? >> that our elites think discrimination is okay as long as they say it's okay. what happened here as you indicated in the intro is that harvard was engaged in egregious racial discrimination against asian students who brought the law students but also white students to. give you a benchmark, asian students on average have sat scores 218% higher than the similarly situated black comparatives, and the white students have them higher. but it's consistent with the supreme court's 2003 decision that allows elite universities, frankly almost any university, to use race as one component among many to achieve the educational benefits that purportedly derive from having a student body. that's never been litigated, there are such true educational benefits. it's neither here nor there. the fact is that harvard can get away with it even though the

evidence shows that if they did engage in this discrimination, the black student population in harvard would decline by more than 60%. the asian population would increase dramatically, because on average, the asian students that apply to hard harvard have extremely high gpas, by the way, the gpa theish the sat differential is replicated in the gpa differential. so the consideration is significant here. it will be going to the supreme court. >> it's hard to believe once you see the actual numbers unearthed by this lawsuit, it's hard to believe that our meritocracy is real. it's almost insulting that people claim it's a meritocracy. >> yeah, meritocracy for ye, not for thee. one of the troubling aspects. a lot of the elite schools do this. every other school at a certain level does this. one more troubling aspect is

this is supposed to as you indicated in the intro, be a benefit, not just to the school, but to the students who are the intended -- reported intended beneficiaries. but there's something called the mismatch effect. there's copious data that shows the intended beneficiaries suffer egregious harm as a result of this to a large extent. in many schools, for example, 2 1/2 times as many blacks failed than whites, 50% of blacks congregate in the bottom 10% of the gpa level. and so a lot of these folks will transfer from stem courses to softer courses because you can't take someone that's got an sat score, 400 points below their comparatives and expect them to compete. >> it's not done for their benefit. it's done that white liberals can feel like saviors. that's not true. >> so the college catalog has a rainbow on it. >> they can feel good about themselves.

thank you for coming on. i appreciate it. >> thanks a lot. >> america's elite colleges in general are far less impressive than they once were. they're much more expensive and still admit the children of the american elite. chris cuomo went to jail, did you? they don't put a lot of emphasis on learning. students campaign to stamp out free speech. some spent more time protesting lectures than attending lectures. a situation ripe for satire. we finally have such a satire. a yale graduate, he recently wrote a hilarious novel called campus land about experiences on that campus. we spoke with scott johnston. here's how it went. >> there's a novel. a story, i don't want to give it away. we hope our readers will find out for themselves. it's not a preachy book, but if there's a message, what is it? >> i wanted to draw attention to

how crazy things are getting. as crazy as you think it is, it's about three times as bad. >> that is true so, you -- you went to college. you went to yale. them you left. you have not spent a life in academia. to write this book, you had to immerse yourself in what was going on in campuses. what was your reaction? >> i was an adjunct at yale for a little while. i'm a fellow there. i stay involved and i pretty much know what's going on there and elsewhere. but i did not set to write a novel, a couple of things that compelled me to, really. the first is i went to a conference on free speech at yale. 200 protesters showed up to shut the conference down. i have it on good authority they skipped irony class that day to be there. as i was walking out through the screaming undergrads, i started wondering why no one has made

secured hay out of all of this crazynd. it didn't occur to me that i should be the one to do it. i have never written a novel. and then fast forward to my college reunion, and i was holding the door open late one night for an undergraduate who stopped dead in her tracks and looked at me and said patriarchy. she accused me of that when i held a door open. i said if no one else is going to do that, i'm going to do it. >> how did you respond when she said that, nasty little person. >> i said i thought i was just being polite. we had a standoff for a minute before boredom overcame her principles, before they overcame mine and she walked through the door. >> part of what you learn reading this and the news, in fact, is that a lot of these schools, i would probably count yale in the liberal arts, in this category, haven't simply given up on the traditional mission to educate people broadly. but are turning out pretty bad

people. like they're making students worse people. >> if you don't show up at a school like yale outraged about something, they'll turn you into a student that's outraged by something it's become part of a culture, it's almost an addiction. and they have sit-ins and marches and when they get really mad they walk around with signs an every week, it's something different. and they mistake it for action. it's all fairly silly and majors that they have now, so many that i just call oppression studies that are turning out kids who are unemployable. so i had to make fun of it all. >> why are we paying for this? i imagine you go back to yale, some think you're great. some think you're part of the patriarchy, but it's people like you who keep yale afloat. why do people keep sending money to these schools. >> many people are stopping,

actually. they're -- they're catching on. hopefully if they read the book, they'll catch on a little more. >> congrats on the book, campusland. thank you for joining us tonight. >> thank you. >> we have a fox news alert for you, an update. this appeared in "the new york times" moments ago, the newspaper says a second intel official, the intelligence official, is considering failing a whistleblower complaint against the president. the official would also be complaining about the president's behavior toward ukraine, but this one supposedly has more firsthand knowledge on the topic as opposed to the first anonymous whistleblowers whose accusations are entirely second hand. what does this mean? we have no idea. we're going to throw it up there and try to figure it out. we'll stay on this story. u.s. military admits that the ufo footage is genuine. saying it continues to pile up.

groups had physical evidence related to an unidentified aircraft. a member of that group joins us, next.

(ddear humans, i stand here today not for myself, but, for every tail wager,

sloppy kisser and curtain ninja. i stand here for each one of the thousands of dogs and cats killed in shelters each day, asking you to join our cause and help us make sure every best friend has a chance to meet one of their own. with best friends animal society leading the charge and your help, we can save them all. ♪music time and time again, you know when i'm doing street magic..i'll walk up to someone and i can just see they're against me right? they don't want to be amazed. they don't want this experience to happen. but then the magic happens. ♪can we be there? and all of that falls away. ♪oh, just think of the time ♪i know that some will say come on man! ♪it matters a little babe. stunned. i believe in magic.

it's the experience of waking up and seeing things the way you saw them before they became ordinary. ♪i needed to try (amazement & laughter) ♪i needed to fall that's the goal. i'm looking for that experience of wonder. ♪i need never get old

♪ >> tucker: just a few weeks ago, the navy admitted for the first time that several ufo videos were real, meaning they show actual aerial phenomenon that, so far, the pentagon cannot explain. investigation group says they have found material that could be physical evidence of ufos. director of the superstar academy of arts and sciences, also headed the pentagon's office, he joins us tonight. thank you so much for coming on. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: what is this material and why could it shed light on the question of what ufos might be? >> sure, our company over the last year and a half has actually obtained quite a bit of material. let me first preface by

saying some of that material that's providence is frankly hearsay, while other -- the providence of some of this other material has been substantiated. ultimately, we are in the process of analyzing this material at three different levels: physical, chemical or molecular, and atomic properties. it's really at that point will be able to make some sort of definitive conclusion, keeping in mind that we still have to follow the scientific process and methods, and at the same time, have peer review. it's not just as simple as coming out and saying, hey, look what we found. there is a lot of work that still needs to be done. >> tucker: of course. why do you think this material might beconnected to ufos? might be connected to ufos?

>> without getting into a lot of detail right now because frankly it's too speculative for me at this point to say why i think something. at the end of the day, it's going to be what the analysis tells us. and if you have, for example, interesting isotope pick ratios that are not normally found let's say on this planet, then you have to scratch your head and a either engineered that way or b came from somewhere else and ultimately that's what we are trying to find out. >> tucker: these are materials brought to you by people who say this is at the site of a ufo incident or crash? >> in some cases, yes. unfortunately, i can't elaborate too much with some of these individuals. we do have nondisclosure agreements. but it's from various sources both private and governmental. >> tucker: it goes without saying, i hope you will come back, as you get to the bottom of this. we remain skeptical, but open-minded. on this and all things. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: of course. thank you. that's it for us tonight, and the week, amazingly. tune in every night, starting monday 8:00 p.m. on in to the future indefinitely, to the show that is the sworn totally sincere and we hope cheerful enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. dvr it, if you have the advanced science degree or can figure that out.

ha. good luck. good night from washington. have the best weekend with the ones you love. enjoy. you never know. "hannity" is next. ♪ ♪ >> sean: welcome to "hannity." tonight, buckle up. we have big breaking news tonight on multiple fronts. democrats come in media mob, ukrainian impeachment fantasy, it is as we predicted, now blowing up in their faces, just like the trump-russia collusion blew up in their faces. and just moments, we're going to reveal brand-new evidence that will absolutely destroy the democrats, the media's insane impeachment compulsive narrati narrative. including brand-new text messages proving president trump did absolutely nothing wrong during his communications with ukraine. a new report exposing the fake, nonwhistle-blower whistle-blower as a