it's tru. keytruda from merck. see the different types of cancer keytruda is approved to treat at keytruda.com, and ask your doctor if keytruda can be part of your story. a good night. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." holy smokes was that intense. so what did we learn last night at the debates? well, america deserves better. that's the first and mostrn n t obvious thing we learn. all kinds of people said that today and they were right. this is a great country, the most decent people in the world live here, wede ought to be prod of the fact that we are american, proud of our culture, proud of her history. p most of us wanted all to continue, we want the nation our grandchildren inherit to be a stable and as happy as the country would grow up in but last night's debate gave us little confidence that would happen. it was a painful, highly depressing 90 minutes, at times things seem out of control.

we could go on about a but we sought so you know what it was like. that's the overview. as a political matter, the main thing we learned last night is that it was a mistake to spend so much time focusing on joe biden's mental decline. this, it's real, yes joe biden is fading, but on stage last night biden did not seem senile. if you tuned in expecting him to forget his own name, and honestly, we did expect that, you may have been surprised by how precise some of his answers were. not all of them, but enough of them. trump isn't going to win this race by calling joe biden senile. nor, by the way is joe biden going to win this race by calling donald trump a racist, as he repeatedly did last night. that slander didn't work four years ago, it will not work now. because personal attacks rarely work. they rarely determine election outcomes. that's obvious if you look atta the results, but it's easy to forget it and many did. what matters, always, to voters anyway, iser what you do, not wt you say. right now many would like to see

someone defend the country. america has never been under fiercer attack than it is right now. virtually all of the attackers come from the domestic left. they are democrats, biden voters. i am the democratic party joe biden reminded us last night. that's true. it should be enough to keep trump in office. the democratic party has become more radical than any major party in the history of the country. its leaders plan to dismantle our system, the system are founders created centuries ago, a system that countless other countries have envied s so much they copied. democrats want to do away with it. they want to abolish the electoral college, they are trying to end traditional election day voting. they intend to invalidate the filibuster and guaranteeid permanent control of the housene and senate by admitting d.c. and puerto rico into the union. we will have 52 states and the democrats will be in charge forever. that is their plan. we are not making it up, they've set it. the scariest of all, they are planning to hijack the supreme court by spending the number of justices.

leading democrats of openly endorsed this idea. it's not a small change. it would end our third branch ot government. the judiciary would cease dispensing justice. it would instead become an instrument of partisan power politics wielded exclusively on behalf of one party. how would you like to live in a country like that? it's horrifying. joe biden was asked about this last night. here's how it went. >> are you willing to tell the american people tonight whether or not you will support either ending the filibuster or packing the court? >> whatever position i take on that that will become the issue. the issue is the american people should speak. t you should go out and vote. you are in voting now, vote and let your senators know how strongly you feel. vote now. make sure you in fact let people know, your senators. i'm not going to answer the question because the question is -- the question is. the question -- will you shut up man? >> tucker: so there are a couple of things to note about

the exchanger just saw. nobody forced biden to answer the question. key question. that was frustrating to watch. but it was also easy to interpret what he meant. of course joe biden plans to pack the supreme court. otherwise he would have denied it. or packing is not popular with the public. nearly 70% of americans oppose it. that includes more than half of all registered democrats.. but the extremist to now run the democratic party are demanding it and joe biden will follow their lead. that's what radicalism looks like. anything that stands between you and the power you seek, you destroy. even if it's the world's or oldestn constitutional court, which our supreme court is. we should be afraid of people who are willing to do things like that but in b joe biden's case we don't seem to be afraidi and that leads to something else that we learned last night at the debate. tone is everything. biden all but admitted on stage that he plans to tear down our system, but he did it in a calm, this is your captain speaking voice. biden seemed almost reassuring,

even as he hinted at revolution. donald trump, by contrast, defended our system, the system that most people in this country support. nothing from set on stage was radical. virtually nothing he ever says was radical, at least if you compare it to public opinion p polling on the issues. it's his tone that rattles people. trump could make a wine list sound menacing. so in the end, amazingly, tragically, many people watching last night may have concluded that joe biden is the stable, study alternative. they concluded this even as e joe biden suggested that he plans to change their lives, their country permanently and forever in ways they won't like. it's quite a trick. the illusion of reasonableness. barack obama was the master of this. biden learned well. and so he continued last night. watch joe biden explained that actually, he's the america first candidate. >> it would create an additional $1 trillion in economic growth because it would be about buying american. that we have to -- we are going to make this -- federal

government spent $600 billion here on every thing from ships to steal, to buildings and the like. and under my proposal, we are going to make sure that every penny of that has to be made by a company in america. >> tucker: with dr. buy american, buy american, says the man who welcomed china into the world trade organization and has beeno sucking up assiduously to its leaders ever sent to fight the billionaire! says the man whose campaign was funded by oligarchs on wall street and silicon valley. joe biden stole donald trump lines. it was remarkable. how was biden able to do that? well, the trump campaign should ruminate on that question. trump's advisors/in-laws are telling him to brag about the number of people he has let out whenison, this at a time our crime rate is exploding and people are dying as a result of it. joe biden's advisors plan to met many more people out ofad priso, but they're not bragging about it on stage. no, they are hiding it. instead, they use the debate to

talk up a buy american program they will never implement. what we learn here is the biden people are very serious about v politics. they know what the public wantse even if they claim to ignore it if they are elected. and of course they're willing to say anything. that helps. that's another thing we learned last night. we learned that "what's up ramsey" is now the single greatest threat to our country.e how can that be, you ask? well it turns out that mobs of white supremacists just burn down minneapolis in kenosha. they trashed portland and seattle. they shot cops in louisville.d the torch 20s, they cleaned out the nike store.dy they destroyed public monuments in atlanta and san francisco. they defaced war memorials in washington. they looted macy's in midtown chicago. also in the city of chicago, white supremacists murdered hundreds of african-americans and everywhere they went these right wing bigots spray-painted racist graffiti on buildings and threatened sleeping citizens in their homes. the whites are from assisted this. if you saw it all on tv.

it was bewildering to listen to all of this. it wasn't just factually untrue, no, it was insane. it was crazier than any conspiracy that google has ever banned. yet they are now demanding that you believe it and if you don't believe it, they are going to punish you. so why are they doing that? that's a good question. it's also an ominous sign. if they can make you accept a lie that ridiculous, what are they plan to doo next? maybe someone will ask that question in the next debate. victor davis hanson is a senior fellow at the hoover institute in one of the rare figures in ia community whose not only deeply knowledgeable, but wise and we are grateful to have them on to make to assess what we saw last night of the debate. professor, thanks so much for coming on, what did you make of it? >> thank you. well, you know, i think there was two debates, there was the optics and the atmospherics watching that experience and then if you read the transcript later on what was actually said, it's quite different. it reminded me of the '60s, kennedy-nixon. everybody thought that kennedy

won who watched it. he was calm and poised, for what he actually said was trivial compared to nixon, who looked sort of angry and tired. so trump was abrasive, he interrupted and biden seems -- although he slurred, you actually look what biden said, he's a captive of the left come as you pointed out, he can't answer court packing and new green deal or the violence in the streets because he's made this devil's bargain with the left and that constraints them, where trump is free to say whatever he wants because he's not trying to delude anybody. what you see is what you get. so fracking, great, forced management, yes, law and order, absolutely. in the past, in the present, it in the future. and i think that hurt him that he tried to interrupt because he had the better message. first 5 minutes was wonderful. he was calm, but i think he got the idea that he was going to rattle biden and he interruptedn biden if he didn't understand d that when biden is free to speak, that's when he goes off the train of thought and think

it's ridiculous, and that's why when he does these canned interviews, all of these o newspaper and visual people in media, pundits, they interrupt him to help them out, because they have these little thought bits and that sort of stitch them together so when he lost his train of thought or something, h everybody thought while trump interrupted him, but if he hadn't interrupted him, we would have been short that he said nonsense. i would say, if i could be a little bit more controversial that i don't like the format. this gotcha question. it's like getting on the horse and spurring them and then saying you're going to have 2 minutes to block and then you're going to stop immediately. if you're going to incite a candidate, then what do you expect? by that i mean, when you ask this question, didn't you what charlottesville say this, when herl didn't say it, and then he gets angry and says oh, 2 minutes, stop.mi and you got to be absolutely symmetrical, so if you're going to mention charlottesville, very controversial topic, i think misrepresent it, then you got to go to biden say what's the most recent controversial racial -- what did you mean by you and

black? we didn't hear that. or if you're going to say you want to accept the election, and what's going to be the counterpart? it was going like you guys -- didn't yard administration try to disrupt the t transition and really cause almost a coup and not accept the 2016 election? and so there wasn't that symmetry and i think that marred the debate and what was the strategic analysis of it? i guess what happened is -- you were right about that, that a a lot of people who got your reassuring message from trump, t that he is the protector of prosperity and law and order were turned off by the interruption and maybe he lost the swing vote. it may be on the other hand he revved up his base, the deplorable scummy irredeemable's that have not come up to vote that might get revved up and he might have weakened some of biden 'a space that said "wait a minute, you are flopping and flipping all over and you made a bargain with us that you'reth supposed to get this radical agenda through." and so it's hard to tell, and also that depends on the polls,

tucker. in 2016, the mainstream polls were wrong. and i mean, "the wall street journal," nbc, you name it. and they had trump losing by quite a lot. now they're saying the same thing and we don't know whether they are wrong again or suddenly they're going to be right him and the outlier polls were right in 2016 and now they are considered wrong because trump is within the margin of error. in places like rasmussen, state level and emerson. so what that means is trump either had it raw and he is ready for debate number two where presidents usually do better in the second debate, or who was behind and he had to make this up and we are going to find out very quickly, but i think there's going to be a sense on the biden campaign that they're going to -- i don't think they can get out of it but they're going to try to float balloons and say, you know what, this was just so much, it was so combative, do we really want to go through this again? of thinking that they have their lead maintained, ihi don't think they increased it and they will

think let's find a different venue because -- i don't know if that suggests they don't want to go through this again and therefore they are afraid of it or they feel that they squeaked by and they don't want to risk edtheir success. >> tucker: i want to ask you with the minute we have left, since you have studied political systems goingu back thousands of years, to the classical era, the idea of changing the supreme court, the electoral college, filibusters a newer innovation, but adding to the size of the union in order to pack the house and senate. i mean, put this into some context for us. these are not moderate proposals. these seem like blows against the system itself. >> they are expected. that's what the french revolution was about. it wasn't about changing government or making a constitutional republic auto monarchy, itmo was changing even the dating system and even the days of the week or months. and destroying the church. the left does not have a message that people will embrace

contrary to human nature, this idea that we are all going to share and everyone is going to be equal by a result, nobody wants it, so the democrats realize that that message is not going to go anywhere. we are not back to 40 hour work week disability, social security that people embrace. what they are saying is we got to change the demographic with open borders, after 150 years, we've just got to get -- we've got to get, rid of the nine person supreme court or after 233 years, we got to get rid of the electoral college or with got to get rid of 190 year filibuster, 62 year tradition of 50 states because we can't win onwe our current agenda so we ae going to change the rule. that's typical throughout history of the left and doesn't require a majority and i think you're right about that, if it's done in a particular fashion and people don't speak out against it, whether it was in france or whether it was in russia or almost during the 60s, passivity fuels it and empowers it. people have to say, you know what, we are not going to chang

the rule. you play within the parameters -- within the field, you're not going to go outside the sidelines and that's very important. that's one reason joe biden would never answer the question. and it was frustrating for trump. i just wish that he had -- focused on not more, but i can see what he was frustrated and i don't think the moderator really helped biden to account to answer those questions. and that's with the fight was about. and we will see what happens in a second debate, but i have aco feeling that it didn't changein for now whatever the polls have recorded before. and you can argue about what they recorded, but i think we are going to go into the second debate with a sense of desperation on both candidates. they've got to change the polls, the opinion on what their attitude about what they really say are. >> tucker: i strongly agree with you that at this moment bravery is the vital virtue, clear thinking people telling the truth. we won't survive without it. professor, thank you. >> yeah. thank you. >> tucker: so you heard mention of critical race theory during the debate last night.

joe biden didn't seem to understand what that is or maybe he doesn't want to admit he knows. we will tell you what it is and what he got wrong after the break. ♪

♪ >> tucker: police say they found the men who ambushed two l.a. county sheriff's deputies

in compton, california, on september 12th of this year. they charged a convicted felon, charged with attempted murder for shooting the cops multiple times as they sat in their squad car near a rail. authorities already had him in custody for an unrelated shooting and a carjacking before they realized he also might be connected to that ambush on the police. the attack on the deputies, by the way, was totally unprovoked, but it was not unforeseen. one police captain said his motive was that he "obviously hits policeman and wants them dead." where do you think he got that idea? it's not just the usual poison from blm, it is in fact the official message of the democratic party platform, that police should be hated. have you read the platform? if you do, you will learn the police make it almost impossible for african-americans to go outside because they could be murdered by the police. that's not true, but that's the democratic party is saying. as of today, joe biden's running mate kamala harris has not

apologized. still, for promoting the minnesota freedom fun. that's the group that bailed out trying to killf a police officer. she has not even been asked about it. last nights debate joe biden was never asked about his own staffers contribute into that bail fund. if the media continue to give joe biden and kamala harris pass, can they really act surprised the next time -- the next murray decides to shoot the police officers after being told that they are oppressors? by the way, there's a lot about kamala harris that we are going to be taking a close look at on the show for the rest of the weekend and the next week. don't miss that. during last night's debate, joe biden when prompted described critical race theory is totally innocuous. not a big deal. it's about "racial sensitivity, he said, and beasley, who was against that? not us, not anyone. here's what he said. >> the fact is that there is racial insensitivity, people have to be made aware of what other people feel like, what insults them, what is demeaning

to them. it's important that people know. many people don't want to hurt other people's feelings, but it makes a big difference. >> tucker: this is the most polite country on the face of the earth. if you traveled internationally, that.ow maybe japan. certainly is the most polite western's country in the world. no american wantswe to hurt anyone's feelings on purpose. so critical race theory is not designed to solve hurt feelings, it's not about racial sensitivity. no, it's the kind of racial supremacy. it teaches that some people are morally tainted because of the color of their skin, the way they were born. that's the definition of racism. it's poison, we should fight against it with everything we have. it's wrong, it's immoral, contrary to the christian message, but it's infiltrated our government. , taxpayer-funded trainers told white male employees to write letters of apology to women and

people of color, which women and people of color? all women and people of color. presumably that he sinned against all of them by who they are. grotesque. some agencies are teaching employees that punctuality and diligence are associated with whiteness and that meritocracy is morallyey wrong. what kind of damage is this doing to our country long term, to our kids? it's grotesque. so the white house executive order this month ended these trainings in the federal government, it was long overdue. probably won't be enough, but it's worth considering what's really going on. peter is a commission on the u.s. civil rights commission, he joins us today. thanks so much for coming on tonight. so what i heard the former vice president say, critical race theory is just a form of racial sensitivity. i thought that maybe the most misleading thing i've heard in a long time. >> it's galactic we divorced from and its fear demott clear that he has absolutely no idea what'so going on in our school,

also in a public agencies, and are corporations, academia, everywhere. critical race theory has been infiltrating these institutions for the last three decades and it reached kind of a crescendo and that's why the president acted and he needed to act. it got to the point where it was out of control. you just described was going on. i've seen critical race theory training, i've seen in many corporations, in many public agencies, the things you just described where whites are harangued for being white and are told that they are inherently racist. they are explicitly told that, it's astonishing. iit's a violation of title vi d title vii in the 19 for 60 -- 1964 civil rights act. also in her academic institutions. it is toxic, as you've described, it's un-american, but what it does is, along with its edge on the 1619 projects, it undermines the foundation of america, attacks the foundation

for american-made institutions, presumes every institution, system, was formulated and constructed to preserve white [indiscernible]. in some of these trainings, it requests of sort commands that employees forswear or abandon all of the traits you'vef mentioned with respect to discipline, punctuality,y, accuracy, linoleum thinking. the obviousness of that is blacks and people of color aren't that. it's one of the most amazingly racist things imaginable. it is so condescending, it's an extraordinary -- it's extraordinary to me that employees sitting there, white, black, whatever, would sit there, they got to because they are employees, right? they don't want to lose their jobs that they take this toxic poison that is inherently racist and absurd on its face. so the executive order that the president signed is frankly fairly anodyne, but it needed to be done and it prohibits public agencies, federal agencies,

federal contractors and federal grantees fromm having these type of toxic trainings. it's pretty clear it is simply a restatement of title vi, title vii, and requires these people to have that in their federal contracts. it's long overdue and what we are seeing in the streets over the last four months is thena natural result of this kind of toxic training that began k-12 in a more probably watered-down sense, but has continued throughout not only upper academia, but in the workplace. it's a natural -- and by the way, there are at least two studies that show that these kinds of trainings actually have the reverse effect of what they are intended to do. in other words, it increases racial division. >> tucker: of course it does! and we are doing that at high volume right now and it's very sad to watch. living antidote to that, i appreciate you coming on tonight. thank you. >> thanks, tucker.

>> tucker: didn't hear much about russia during last night's debate, that's odd because the president arby's that for vladimir putin. whatever happened to the russia collusion story? well actually, we had news yesterday about hillary clinton and how she came up with that story. we will tell you what we've learned today, the next chapter, up next. ♪ i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424.

>> tucker: for three years dummies like bill kristol and many others toldld you that russian agent, that's donald trump. he's working for putin. he is sabotaging ukraine to help russia. but none of that came up at last nights debate, weirdly. joe biden didn't seem to want to talk about impeachment or the mueller report, strange, because those were history changing moments, t remember? in fact, the only person on stage or talked about russia really was donald trump. watch. >> if you look at crooked hillary clinton, if you look at all of the different people, there was no transition because

they came after me trying to do a coup. they came after me spying on my campaign. they started from the day one and even before i won. from the day i came down the escalator, they were a disaster, a disgrace to our country and we caught them, caught them all. we've got it all on tape and by the way, you gave the idea for the logan act against general flynn. you better take a look at that because we caught you, and a sense on president obama was sitting in the office, he knew about it too so don't only got a free transition. >> tucker: i don't know if you could tell from the clip we just played you, but hours before laste night's debate, we learn from declassified documents that russian intelligence determined during last cycle, 2016, but it was hillary clinton that came up with pushing the narrative about trump p and russia to distract from her email scandal. this was so worrisome to american intelligence officials they forwarded investigative

referral about the plan to the fbi, but today, jim comey, who ran the fbi, testified he doesn't even remember that referral. how does that make sense? how does -- a sub source linked to russian a intelligence. your head is throbbing, there's a reason for that. john davis has gone through all the details for years now, cofounder of "the federalist," we are happy to have them on to sorted out. hey, sean. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: what did we learn from comey today? >> it was actually a very big week as far as russiagate news. we learned it was in the trump campaign who colluded with russian spies to interfere in the 2016 election. we learnedn that it was actually hillary clinton's campaign. the russians knew what she was doing, the fbi knew that they knew, james comey was even told through that investigative referral what was going on, had infiltrated christopher steele's

network and seated us document with false information and comey today claimed he didn't know a thing about it, curious that he was running this thing from the beginning for the fbi. >> tucker: further evidence, as if we needed it, that whatever they areac accusing you of doing i is precisely to the letter what they are doing themselves. irony doesn't describe it. >> you're exactly right and it's even bigger than that. if this isn't just a scandal about democrat projection. this is a scandal about what was a coup planned against the incoming administration at the highest levels and i can report here tonight that these declassifications that have come out, those weren't easy to get out. there is in fact far more waiting to get out. unfortunately it seems -- according to multiple choices i've talked are being blocked by cia director who herself was the main link between washington and london. the london station chief for john brennan's cra -- cia, where

christopher steele was doing all this work and i'm told that it is gina haspel personally who was blocking continued declassification of these documents that will show the american people the truth ofct what actually happened. >> tucker: why are we putting up with this? they are still holding documents from the kennedy assassination, the warren commission documents. we still don't know everything there, why is that 55 years later, seven years later? they are blocking the release of so many documents. why doesn't somebody -- anyone in power can do this -- stand up and say no, these are going public now? >> that's a great question. i think one reason is someone of the people blocking these documents are likely advocated by them. youca have these career bureaucrats whose careers may be destroyed by the facts that are within them and i think at this point we need the president, donald trump, to step in and say no more destruction -- obstruction, no more blocking. we need transparency and the americanicee people need to heae truth. that means letting everyone see

everything that happens. so we can decide for ourselves before we vote who we actually want in charge of these agencies. >> tucker: you can literally shoot a cop and get charged with assault but if you're julian assange, and to effectively declassify lots of documents come up with them in the public view, they want to kill you. it just tells you a lot for their priorities. great to see you. >> thank you. >> tucker: after nearly 100,000 voters in thepr city of new york received mismarked absentee ballot packages, the new york city board of elections announced tuesday they plan to print and mail new absentee ballots, but remember, you're a lunatic if you question any ofio this, because, repeat after us, mail in balloting is totally secure. got it? justin haskins may or may not believe that. he is a research fellow at the harvard institute, on the show the other day but for mysterious we didn't tell mike reasons his down. we are happy to have them back. justin, thanks for joining us.

>> thanks for having me. >> tucker: a hundred thousand mismarked ballots but we shouldn't worry at all. shut up, conspiracy monger. >> i mean, this is the tip of the iceberg. 100,000 ballots, we are just supposed to ignore that there were 100,000 faulty ballots in the worst part of this was that there were widespread reports in brooklyn, the borough of brooklyn that people were receiving the ballots with thein return envelope having the wrong name printed onre it. under new york law, if you have the wrong name printed on -- if the name on the absentee ballot, the signature, doesn't line up with the name on the returnp envelope, then they can throw the ballot out, so it is entirely possible that there are people who have already voted incorrectly and that there ballots could potentially be thrown out, and we are being told, no, no, no, don't worry about it, absentee balloting is totally fine. this is just the tip of the iceberg, it is going to get so much worse as we start to expand this out across the country and it's going to undermine

americans' faith in his election and that is literally the last thing weon need at this point in time with all the chaos that we've already had this year. >> tucker: this is not the first epidemic we had in this country, it's not the deadliest either. what are we doing in other play gears? did we just not both? obviously waited dangerous to vote in person, right? so how did we handle that in 1918 forye example? >> look, america has a long tradition of people going in voting in person no matter what, but even if -- no matter what, but even if you are really, really concerned about it, there are ways to do in person balloting and have social distancing and have people wearing masks and why can't we have drive-through voting? why can't we have that were cars in thein their drive-through and they vote and they stay in their car? they be perfectly safe because it really isn't about that, and you know that. this is about one thing and one thing only, as much doubt as possible into the selection but that's what they've been doing all year long, why should it

change now just because there's an election? >> tucker: so just to be onear, they are not fighting voter suppression? >> [laughs] no, i don't think that's what's going on -- >> tucker: try to laugh, it's also>> depressing. no matter what happens in t election, the reflexive faith that most of us grew up with in our system has already been shaken and there's a huge cost of that, it's very sad. justin, thanks so much. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: so we heard a lot last night from joe biden about the administration and donald trump specifically bring responsible for the wuhan coronavirus. d this time by claiming that donald trump personally killed 200 million people. but he still made some pretty big claims. we will say what e they were. next. ♪ .

♪ >> tucker: last night, if you saw the debate, you may have noticed that joe biden blamed the sitting president for the effects of the wuhan coronavirus

on the united states. he didn't explain what he would've done differently as president, he just declared that it's a scientific certainty that mr. donald j. trump caused the damage, watch. >> 200,000 dead, as you said, over 7 million infected in the united states. we in fact have 5% -- 4% of the world's population, 20% of the deaths. 40,000 people a day are contracting covid. in addition to that, between 750 and an thousand people today ae dying. when he was presented with that number, he said it is what it is. it is what it is because you are who you are. >> tucker: it is what it is because you are who you are. in other words, the virus killed people because donald trump is mean. this from the nominee of the party ofis science. so a matter of data, what we deal with here on cable news, is there any scientific proof to the claim that donald trump could have stopped the coronavirus by being a nicer

person? dr. marc siegel is a fox news medical contributor of course. always on the show, always happy to have you, good to see you. av>> tucker, this virus has [indiscernible] all of us and we don't need political posturing, we need to acknowledge we've been learning as it goes along. cdc director redfield told me recently that it's the mostsm transmissible, most dangerous virus he has seen in his lifetime but at the very beginning, cdc was probably underestimating it, saying that it could be contained to the state of washington. the president, as good as the information he gets and i want to point out something, the president as a businessman of the president has geared up big time in terms of the public project partnership, in terms of testing. 150 million new tests of the type that will get us rapid answers on covid-19 and the vaccine. it's a disgrace how politicized that's become when in fact it's the data safety monitoring board that's looking at that and if we get a vaccine before the end of the year, it will be a miracle,

that's never occurred before. if there's never but criticism here. >> tucker: i mean, the former vice president didn't explain what he would have done differently under the circumstances. do you have any idea maybe what he wasid suggesting? >> i think we know what he would've done differently. during the 2009 swine flu pandemic -- on the president brought this up and i wrote a book about this, the former vice president was fearmongering at the very beginning. he got the media a stir with that and then his own chief of staff said this could have been aav big disaster and they were lucky to avoid it. so we know he has a background in fearmongering and he also locked down the entire country potentially and that would cost us dearly in terms of economic, mental, and physical suffering, tucker. >> tucker: talk to any college student right now, someone currently enrolled in college or a parent of a college student and you will see what they're doing to those kids. dr. siegel, great to see you.

>> we need the country open, thank you, tucker buried >> tucker: so the one thing that was missing from last night's debate, sorely missing, was analysis from the great mark steyn. we are going to provide that after the break. ♪

>> tucker: well, if you didn'tf catch last nights debate or don'tht have access to the internet, we have some good newg for you. we hired actors and staged a reenactment of what happened, condensing it to just a few seconds. here's what we came up with. >> you're crazy. >> i know you are what but what am i. speak i know you are but what i my. >> i know you are but what am i. >> i know you are but what am i. >> tucker: we are not going to reenact any of the postdebate analysis because they were horrible. the only analysis you really need is from a mark steyn, who s not on tv last night, but we will promise, it is worth it.

mark steyn, great to see you. >> like many people, i found it terrible, but i'm actually more concerned that the presidential debate commission is so horrified by it that they now want to change the rules to make it more like the traditional, boringly, stultifyingly respectable -- i don't believe in the debate commission, i don't see why a nea in a republa couple of people you vaguely remember from the day before yesterday should have a monopoly on presidential debates. if they do change the rules, i hope the president manages to smash through them the way here did through the format last night. >> tucker: they are not, obviously, interested in ratings, and i'm not quite sure what they're interested in. why do you think the presidential debate commission -- i know why i didn't like last night's debate, but why are they trying to set up a microphone-killing

mechanism, or whatever they are doing? >> well, because they always want to over format it. traditionally, these debates -- last night was very simple, but usually 90 seconds opening statements, after which the other party will have 45 seconds for rebuttal to the opening statement, followed by a 30-second prerebuttal to whatever the next question is, and the whole thing is locked down and boredom. last night, the two guys going at it directly, i don't think it particularly work for either party. i look at it in showbiz terms. whenever you come out and do in act one, you have to do different in act two. trump is brilliant at pit the responses, "you'd be in jail," "only rosie o'donnell." after chris wallaceme started whining trump was talking too

much, trump should give him some of those 15-second answers and then say, like the climate change thing, nobody is voting on climate change. its 37th on people's list of priorities. it wasn't on the list of original topics forna debates, which had to be issued three weeks in advance for some reason, and he should just say, look, there is a pandemic, there is a lockdown, there is looting and burning on the streets of america's cities, nobody cares about climate change, so i yield the balance of my time to joe biden, and he about federal subsidies for environmentally friendly window treatments, which actually happened under obama, and let joe exhaust himself, because joe can't actually fill up the time, so give him more time and let him exhaust himself. >> tucker: god, that's brilliant. your first point is especially smart. angry doesn't work. e it's not effective. i remind myself come or try every night when i write my op

open. funny works better than mad. >> sometimes righteous anger works. for example, i don't believe being told that you've got to condemn white supremacy is a good-faith question, because it implies some have been cozying upup to it. it's like stop beating your wife. that is a fair question, chris, if you also put it to the guy across the stage who actually boasted aboutld how he was ableo work with segregationist democrat senators who actually said he would do well in south carolina because delaware is a state. you have to have some righteous anger, but you have to use it sparingly. >> tucker: very good advice. not surprising. mark steyn, great to see you tonight. >> hey, thanks a lot, tucker. >> tucker: a quick note, kamala harris, of course, is running as joe biden's running mate. she could very well become our next president. she'd certainly be in charge. we don't actually know that i mh

about kamala harris. each day until the vp debate next week, we're going to take a look at her record, get to know her and who she really is, tell you what we found, could be interesting. will beti back tomorrow, they sw that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. sean hannity, right now. >> sean: no private health insurance, executive order to eliminate guns, oh, and she sponsored in the senate medicare for all and the new green new deal. >> tucker: we are booking you for tomorrow! >> sean: but i'm going to watch your investigation tomorrow, look forward to it. good show is always. welcome to "hannity." really busy news like tonight a, a fox news alert, the president set to speak at another massive rally, tonight in minnesota. we will dip in throughout the hour, we have to get other news income as well. in the present talks about last night, you will hear it. first,t, debate one is now officially in history books. we are going to unpack this, but anyway the mob and the media never will. last night,