they drove to safelite for a same-day repair. and with their insurance, it was no cost to them. >> woman: really? >> tech: that's service you can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." hope you had a great and relaxing thanksgiving weekend of weight from the endless drone of news. if you have somehow managed to pull that off a few days of peace of happiness with the loved ones heloved. what happened, what did you miss over the weekend? we are here to tell you.ro for starters, joe biden broke his foot and a couple of places. some serious, don't worry abouty he's just out playing with hishe dog. feeding.l fragile and it could've happened to anyone. seriously, it is totally normal.

cnn in fact wrote a piece congratulating biden for it. so don't ask questions. to worry about in the news landscape. for example, did you hear that joe biden picked women to lead the white house communications office? that was a historic moment. nothing like that has happened in this country since the presidency of donald trump had ntanother triumph. nothing can stop joe biden from smashing the glass ceiling. not even his dog. that's what you missed. i will, and one other thing. the countriesh public health establishment has tortured your children for eight months for no apparent reason. that happened. s that stories not received a lot of coverage, but so has been confirmed tonight. authorities have admitted it. 60 million american children languishing in their rooms since spring sitting in front of screen learning nothing, isolated from human contact in many cases driven to mental

illness. we can now report there was no reason for any of that. the experts were wrong, they had no idea what they were doing. but the most amazing part, and this really is the headline of the story, is that they knew they were wrong when they did it, but they kept lying about it even as american children began to kill themselves. on sunday in new york, city officials all but admitted this. they announced theoo reopening f elementary schools, the same schools they closed fewer than two weeks ago. from a medical standpoint, nothing has changed. there wasn't some groundbreaking new research paper that revolutionized our understanding of the coronavirus. vovonothing like that at all. in fact, parents of we had enough and they forced bill de blasio to admit the obvious. this virus is not a threat to children. as bill de blasio put it, "we have the health realities for the youngest kids are the most

favorable." well, yes, we do know that. we've done it for a long time. we knew it when bill de blasio shut down new york schools. and tony found she knew it as well, though he didn't say anything about it. now he's decided to say something about it. eight months late. here's anthony fauci on sunday. keep in mind that this man on the screen is leading our response to the coronavirus. >> closed the bars and keep the schools open is what we really say. obviously, you don't have a one-size-fits-all. but as i said in the past and as you accurately quoted me, the default position should be to try as best as possible within reason to keep the children attend school and to get them back to school good if you look at the data, the spread among children and from children is not really very big at all. not like one would have suspected. >> tucker: l, i've always said you should keep the schools open says theld man in charge of

america's coronavirus response to a nation whose schools has been closed for months. check the tape. because "if you look at the data" says anthony found cheat, wait a second. why is this just now occurring to tony fauci down m? somehow, he never thought to do that. that is our corona czar. fauci explained he couldn't really say if kids should be allowed back to school. it's "complicated." except it does not complicate, it. in april, many months ago, studied by the journal of the american medical association found that school age children who get the coronavirus "develop only mild symptoms and simply recover within two weeks." months later, same story. "covid-19 is generally a mild

disease in children." other studies on the exact samet thing. no studies found anything but that. there was never a question about it. if you're looking for more evidence, checked the death ra rate. consider the state of fnew jersey. that's one of the states hit hardest by the coronavirus. so far in new jersey, not a single school age child has died from the coronavirus. not one. many children have died from car accidents andde fires and drug overdoses and suicide. none of died from over 19. in california, the biggest state in the united states, 40 million people live there. u a total of two people under the age of 18 have died from the coronavirus. two. the numbers nationwide according to the numbers, 123 americans under the age of 18 have died from the coronavirus. 123 out of 350000000. we shut t the schools the schoos anyway, crushing millions of

kids, affecting their futures in ways we can't even understand at this point. it is clear it is bad. the bad. so the question is "why did we do this"?te in the truth is to save the teachers. the teachers unions pushed us and we obeyed. unionized teachers get to stay home collecting checks for their nine month a year jobs. these classrooms are just too dangerous. it's like the battle of the bulge five days a week. and that is exactly what they have done. but what does the data sayay wht this? well, for teachers under the age of 50, and that's the vast majority of them, the odds of surviving a coronavirus infection are roughly 99.98%. but we should tell you that for teachers under 70, the risk of dying escalates to a terrifying 99.5% chance of surviving. and by the way, if teachers do get sick it likely won't be from teaching. children appear chi not to spred

the coronavirus. certainly not effectively. we've known this for a long ti time. children do not appear to be drivers of transmission. and we argue that reopening schools should be considered safe accompanied by certain measures. again, none of this is news. tony fauci, the data guy, knew it at the time. and so did anyone in the news media who could read. which is still mosta of them. and yet they kept lying about it. in july, here's just one ciexample. a panel of physicians, experts on infectious disease, went on television to explain that going to schoolon is a dangerous for anyone. they would send their own kids. watch the news anchors reaction. would you let your kids go back to school? >> i will. my kids are looking forward to it. >> yes. period. absolutely. >> absolutely. >> as much as i can. >> without h hesitation. >> i have no concerns about

sending my child to school in the fall. >> i would let my kids go back to school. >> they all said yes. >> tucker: can you believe that? doctors have concluded their own children should go to school. they must be crazy. they arere crazy. what was this about? of course, you know the answer. it was about donald trump. donald trump, in this case, agreed with the doctors. therefore they had to be mockedh and ignored. he wasul with the president said about schools>> in july. >> we have two open hours schools. open hours schools. stop this nonsense. we open our schools. >> tucker: stop this nonsense, we reopen our schools. now, in point of fact as a scientific matter, that turned out to be sound policy based on sound data. but the media told us the exact

opposite of that. onen headline at cnn warned "the very clear dangers of donald trump's push to reopen schools." google did not censor that is misinformation. another headline "mind-bending logic on school reopening." mind bending logic. joe biden didn't want to hear it, they didn't want you to hear it either. school was dangerous, period. donald trump claimed the opposite, therefore it was too dangerous to send your kids or for you to decide to send them. watch. >> risking teachers and parents lives. going against the advice of experts. >> very little impact on young people. >> do you trust them to do what's best for our children? because this is not a test. >> tucker: yeah, going against the advice of experts. in thist' country, that is no longer allowed. even, and may be especially when the experts are completely

wrong. what's the message? the message couldn't be clearer. they are not your kids anymore. if they were your kids, you could make the key decisions about their lives. but you are not. thoser kids, your former kids, belong to tony fauci now. tony fauci, america's parent. he will make the decisions about your kids. mrs. nancy pelosi. watch mrs. pelosi fret about the health of our children. >> are you confident that students g and teachers will go back safely to school in the fall questio? >> no, i think what we heard from the secretary was malfeasance. andty dereliction of duty. this is appalling. they are messing. they are messing with the help of our children. going back to school presents the biggest risk for the spread of the coronavirus. >> tucker: okay.

if that's not criminal what she just said -- we may need to redefine what it meansns to comt a crime. 60 million school-age children affected by a decision that was wrong. and many of them hurt for life. but we just blow right past it. and allow political leaders like that to blow right past it with phrases like "the health of our children." what happens when you lock i children in their rooms in front of screens and prevent them from experiencing human contact? has nancy pelosi ever been asked that question? has she ever wondered about the answer? according to the centers for diseasee control, a total of 522 children between the ages of 5-14 died of suicide in 2017. in that same age group, only 42 children have died from the coronavirus so farfa this year. what do those suicide numbers look like if we continue to take nancy pelosi's advice about the health of ouros h children?

we arty have some indications of that. future years will reveal the whole picture and you can be certain it will be horrifying. but for right now, with incomplete data come here is what we know. in st. paul, minnesota, for example, 40% of all grades given this year have been f's. it is still double the amount of failures. in virginia, the number of middle and high school students feeling a grade has increased by h86%. the number of students with disabilities who are failing to or more classes has increased by more than 100%. and a lot of the school districts, huge number of kids never even registered for online classes. do you have kids question what do you know anyone who does? they are learning nothing. those are real consequences. if you want to know the health of a society, look at schools. these are points being ignored and anybody who makes them will be attacked for making them.s

we will look back at this woman. back in june we interviewed dr. scott atlas. he was one of the very few people then or now brave enough to make a simple point. here's what hee said. >> the point about the schools t is really critical because this is the most irrational public policy probably in modern history. children have virtually zero risk of getting a serious complication, virtually zero risk of dying. you don't locked on the children because you are personally afraid. that's totally outrageous. >> tucker:ll he was attacked as a monster for saying that. really attacked. by contrast, dr. fauci was demon five. believed. and dr. fauci was revealed as a powermad incompetent. that is not her opinion, by the way. the data proves it.

dr. alice resigned from his advisory role at the administration today. n he's now with us tonight. dr. atlas, think so much for coming on. this does seem like an indication -- dr. fauci's remarks sound like a vindicatioc of your point that you made many months ago. and i'm going to wonder how you are feeling as you watch that. >> you know, i was just speaking about the data as i always did it and it's true that the data was correct then and the children have extremely low risk of a serious illness. and do notth frequently spread this infection that was known then. we also knew the harms, the serious harms to children from closing in person schools. and nothing has really changed. it's just that some of these things are now beingng acknowledged including all the things like protection beyond what an antibody test would

show, et cetera. but the point isn't that i was right, the point isn't that the advice i gave the president was right, the point isn't that the aspresident was right. although those things are true. the point is we really need to open up in person schools asap because it is so destructive, so harmful to children. there's really nothing more important for our country that i can think of then educating our children. >> tucker: of course. we still claim to believe that. we clearly don't. our leaders clearly don't. but before we move on to the solution stage of the program, and i hope that comes soon, explain if you would why the people who had access to that data, which is everyone with the computer, people like dr. fauci could have ignored what they were seen from the study? how could they not have acknowledged the six months ago? >> well, you know, i find myself asking that question. but you know, we are living in an extremely polarized time.

you know this as much as anybody. it is an election year. we have social media where people go ballistic and feel empowered to do so. i don't know, i think if there's a serious problem honestly in the country -- there is a bigger issue here.ha and that is that america and its universities really need to allow without attack, without rebuke, without intimidation, the free exchange of ideas. because it is from the free exchange of ideas that scientific truths follow. and these scientific truths are critical for us to solve this crisis, every other crisis, and in fact the free exchange of ideas is honestly the foundation of every civilized society. >> tucker: does it make you nervous for our future that the people in charge, people with long lists of credentials who should know better, presumably

aren't stupid. they said things that were provably untrue for many months. what does that bring for a future if we continue to allow that? >> you know, this is very important. i think we see objective journalism is nearly dead. and i think we know saw that science has been politicized. it is very, very dangerous. i think we should all be very concerned about it, let's put it that way. >> tucker: i think so too. dr. scott atlas. after 130 days of serving the administration, congratulations. >> you very much. >> tucker:to they get. schools, as we just told you, are reopening in the country's biggest city,, new york. many businesses are facing new restrictions this week including bans on indoor dining.

in response to this, total economic instruction of a entire sector of the economy. one restaurant in the burroughs has declared itself a autonomous zone. a sign on the door it reads this way. we refuse to abide by any words or regulations put by the mayor of new york city and governor of the state. the co-owner own joins us tonig. thank you so much for coming on. tell me what helped you to decide to become your own country on staten island? >> basically what has taken place is the food industry and bar industry -- we all end up wanting to work with the government when we decided that we could start reopening. and they never came to the professionals, the ones that owned the bars and restaurants and everything. they never came to us to end up

asking how to do that in a safe way. basically, all they did was dictate what we are supposed to do. with doing that, you still aren't able to survive. so it brought us to a point that they are saying they were shutting us down again, they weren't allowing inside dining. i was but against the wall. it's either i took a stance and ended up opening my container so i can pay bills ended up providing for my family. i am behind on bills. i'm so behind i reall felt i hao other choice. with doing this, it was to tell the governor and to tell the mayor that you need to work with us. but you didn't want to work witw us. and we are forced into the situation that i don't know what else i canan do. >> tucker: yeah, i feel for you. it turnyou are coming on the shu

are taking a stand, you are clearly going to enrage the people in charge of new york city and new york state. are you worried they will come after you? >> they are coming after me already. i artie had -- we caught the radar of the mayor righthe away. the sheriff came out as a bully tactic to find us. they were very professional, the sheriff's, but at the same time they were coming on the orders of the mayor because of the fact that i was remaining open and still remaining open past 10:00. it brought the attention of the other agencies out there. they are coming after me. >> tucker: your tax dollars at work. you are a brave man and we wish you godspeed. we hope you come back andl tell us how it goes. thanks so much. >> thank you very much. >> tucker: sell coronavirus

vaccine on the way. many reports of that. when it does arrive, who gets it first? states are in some places portioning it depending on your skin color. for real. and other highly nonscientific criteria. how is this going to work? we will explain that. ♪ it's down to the wire,

the team's been working around the clock. we've had to rethink our whole approach. we're going to give togetherness. logistically, it's been a nightmare. i'm not sure it's going to work. it'll work. i didn't know you were listening.

♪ >> tucker: of the vaccine ismi coming, apparently. will you it?e that's one question. who should get it first? that's another question. an emergency meeting tuesday, tomorrow, to vote on who they think should get the vaccine first. you might assume this would be based on, i don't know, science. so the most important criteria would be your age, your state of immunodeficiency. but in some states, officials have another idea. your skin color should play a role inro this. so if you assume that identity tlitics was a harmless annoyance, think again. watch this clip from the governor of california. >> experts and safety as well as experts looking at equity and looking at the distribution.

again, along the spectrum of making sure black and brown communities disproportionately are benefited because of the impact they have felt because of covid-19. >> tucker: man, that's just one way to look at it. of course, of joe biden's advisors get to decide how to administer this vaccine, we could see a whole different set of criteria at a federal level, a top biden coronavirus advisor, dr. zeke emanuel, wrote a famous 2014 piece in the atlantic at called "why i plan to die at five." so how about the 75 plus population? i am concerned that this vaccine will be yet another way that the country is divided along various

lines and this is the kind of last thing in my view that we need right now. tell us, from your perspective, how this vaccine should be apportioned. who should get priority and why? >> i would start with nursing home residents. you and i have talked about this a lot. you have been a hero for this, frankly, and moving the needle. and it looks like the cdc tomorrow, very important meeting on tuesday, will in fact prioritize nursing home residents, than god.ec there's another disturbing piece of news, frankly, about this, tucker. it's about the package adjusted on california. they are apparently going to -- they are going to put essential workers who are important, don't get me wrong, they are very important, head of the old and head of the sick who were not in nursing homes. now, if there's one thing we know about coronavirus, it's that the old and the sick are the most at risk. the idea that we would portion the very limited vaccine, especially here in december and

january, and ways that would abandon them, as a whole new disturbing thing to think about. >> tucker: especially since the recent come of course, is that essential workers, so-called, and some are essential and are you know lie downld like unionized. >> don't get me wrong, i think we should prioritize and of course essential workers should be ahead of teachers and talk show hosts. it actually comes from a good place, may be an understandable place. essential workers are disproportionately people of color. but the way to focus on those populations is to focus on those populationson in a way that focuses on those who are sick and bulls who are older. those of the people who are most at risk. and that's where our focus needs to be. >> tucker: such as purely on the science -- we know from the data it is very clear who was the most likely to die from a

coronavirus infection. it sounds like you are saying those people should get first dibs. >> it's not complicated. people and working hospitals second. we are going to have to decide in january and february. it seems obvious that we would pick those who are most at risk. but yeah, that's why think your listeners really need to pay close attention to this meeting tomorrow and let their local state and immiscible representatives know if they disagree with the decisions that the cdc comes down with. >> tucker: i think that's fair. thanks much for joining us. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: people would describe themselves as sovereign citizens are no seizing homes, not their homes, other people's homes by force in several states. what is this exactly? is it real? it appears to be.ut we will tell you about it after theoc break.

discounts to distributors when customers died of o.d.es. it's really one of most shocking stories of the year. we have the document, straight ahead. - hello, i'm michael youssef.

you know, history has shown that when a nation turns to god, broken families are healed, people break free from addictions and alcoholism, crime rates plummet. in the welsh revival last century, all across wales, police and judges had nothing to do. why? because there was no crime and it can happen here by god's grace, when you come to him. - [narrator] when nations turn to god, they find their societal problems disappear. there is hope for this broken world, if you just know where to look. won't you consider looking to the one who made you?

visit findingtruepeace.com to learn more about his plan for your life. again, that's findingtruepeace.com. (gentle music) >> tucker: if you sense that property rights are eroding, you are not imagining it. people describe themselves as sovereign citizens trying to

forcibly evict homeowners from their own homes in the suburbs north of seattle. a bizarre story. jason rantz, radio host and not city, has joined us tonight. jason, what is this? i >> it's a group out in edmond, about 20 minutes north of seattle. it's a group of people who were essentially squatters that believe that the laws of the land do not apply to them. and they've decided to go into neighborhoods, waterfront properties, very nice homes saying that they actually own the land and they should take it over. the homeowner is usually like "what are you talking about, please leave." it's very bizarre. it's not just have been in puget sound, it's happening all across the country. a man decided to literally take ownership to decide he's not going to pay rent on property that he doesn't actually own. it's part of, i think, this nationwide trend of laws thatly really don't apply to certain

folks. in this case, they are not activists. they are just kind of nullity. >> this is illegal. once you see that, that means hate, you wanted, it is yours. i want it. it's mine. i'm about to start the process on reclaiming the land. you k can keep paying rent, you can think this is a game, you can think -- real talk, we are taking the land back. >> it doesn't quite work that way, i can assure you. >> tucker: suburban seattle. all right, jason rantz, i hope you stay on top of this for us ♪ t a story that didn't get enough attention, purdue pharma, the

pharma company that made opioids pleaded guilty last week in causing the opioid epidemic that is cost hundreds of thousands of deaths in this country. we now have documents that show how purdue's consultant saw those deaths is nothing more than the cost of doing business. transaction costs. joe, thanks much for coming on. >> yak. >> tucker: this is a stunning story. what we learned? >> you know, there's very few things -- they are spending five years into working into the industry. it's very shocking. i had to read that document was to make sure that i really understood it. and what it really is is that in 2017, mckenzie who had been advising purdue already at that point for eight years on all different aspects, it was tough to sell oxycontin because it had

become the biggest crisis. they had to come up with something different than before and what they came up with isitn idea of "why don't we encourage the d insurance companies,ho unitedhealth, others, that are paying for oxycontin under insurance plans -- give them some incentive." so they gave them bonuses based on the number of people thatet will either get addicted to oxycontin or die from a oxycontin overdose between $6,000.14000 a person. so they came up with the fancy presentation powerpoint that they p gave to the executives wo loved it and said look, it's going to cost you anywhere between $3,000,000.35 million a year for some of the big insurance companies. but it will be some incentive that you continue to get paid out. it's one of the most outrages and calculus pieces of business from the people who brought you

and ron, the best and brightest advising purdue in the heart of the opioid crisis. at the same time, still very disturbing. spew what really is the incubate over ruling class. did anyone at mckinsey sayny hold on a second, this is morally grotesque and i am resigning. >> now come as a matter of fact, not only did they not do that but in 2007 purdue pleaded guilty to misbranding oxycontin and played a $600 million fine. who did they go to next year? they went to mckenzie then. nobody at mckenzie raised a eyebrow. it was mckenzie who was able to get purdue to move forward to the fda and get a new and improved tamper-resistant formula. mckiney presented and help them through it. pewhat happens in 2018 when the attorney general of the massachusetts files a lawsuit

against purdue? for the first time you start to see emails and mckiney saved by the way, maybe we should get rid the documents about the health of purdue. helping them make money to suddenly thinking about maybe we should cover it up it up. >> tucker: unbelievable.sh thank you. >> thank you. >> tucker: if you're wondering what happened to america, mc 10 kiney law school -- they are not responsible for everything, but a lot of it. another story that won't surprise you, the me too movement actually made of lot of people, some people anyway, very rich. not how youno would expect eith. we will explain, next. it ♪ [ whispering ]

what's this? oh, are we kicking karly out? we live with at&t. it was a lapse in judgment. at&t, we called this house meeting because you advertise gig-speed internet, but we can't sign up for that here. yeah, but i'm just like warming up to those speeds. you've lived here two years. the personal attacks aren't helping, karly. don't you have like a hot pilates

class to get to or something? [ muffled scream ] stop living with at&t. xfinity can deliver gig to the most homes.

♪ ♪ >> tucker: we first started the show four years ago and we stopped at the idea of ufos being real. semisolid of classified video footage of objects that seem to defy the laws of physics. we showed it to you. in our minds became a little bit more open. and that hence why on november 18th we took notice when helicopter pilots counting sheep over a remote part of the desert in southeastern utah saw something new and weird. an unidentified stationary object. it was amo monolith of sorts

standing up. apparently made out of stainless steel. they took pictures of it and left. a few other people checked out to the monolith and at the same thing. the on friday night, monolith -- no one knows where it came from -- suddenly disappeared. around the same time, nearly a identical structure apparently surfaced in romania. what does all of this mean? we have no idea. but we will be the first to tell you if we find out because who knows. here's one thing we do now. we know that social justice is a real concept. but in effect, it's very often a scam designed to make someone less powerful people in the country more powerful and richer. the latest example comes from hohollywood and the times of organization. that was part of the me too movement. remember? for a while, it was pretty famous. it hauled in $3.6 million in 2018. what did they do with the money?

they spend 1.4 million on salaries. how much did they spend supporting people who said they had been sexually harassed? 312,000. how is that legalxa exactly? candace owens it joins us tonight to assess what exactly just happen. candace, great to see you. those numbers don't seem like they are serving women, do they do you? >> of course it's not serving women peered ultimately come at points at the intellectual bankruptcy of hollywood. they love this movement. they all wore the black dresses to the oscars because time is really going to be up and it was starting and holly lead and then i was going to benefit all women. but people have to understand, anything that is being perpetuated by hollywood is nothing more than a trend.or you have a bunch of actors and actresses that want you to think that they are more subs to dent. has to take me to come i really care about social issues. hashtag times up.

don't you see that i'm much deeper? at the end of the day, they have no idea what they are talking about. they just want people to think that they are more complex than they are. and what they do is that he lead a bunch of sheep behind them to donate to causes and nobody knows where the money goes. it's always a black hole. black lives matter, no one can answer. billions of dollars. are there black schools built? are there black universities? has anything been done that's beneficial to the black community? no. but you know what? a bunch of instagram models put it on their instrument so it must be good. >> tucker: black lives matter is a perfect example. god knows how much money has been shoveled there. no one ever seems to follow up to find out where the money went. these were televangelists, someone would be looking. >> you bet it would. they don't want you looking. that's the point. i've said it over and over again about black lives matter, i'm going to correct you, it wasn't

millions, it was billions. in the days and weeks following george floyd's murder, black lives matter raised billions of dollars. they have never been made to account to wear those billions of dollars went. they want us to just look the other way and not ask questions. here it is, at the end of the day it is emotional manipulation. of course, all of us -- we care about these issues. no one would ever mock sexual assault victims. but what we are asking is where is this money going? [laughter]e >> tucker: almost no one else is asking him. bless you for asking it because it's an important question. amen. candace owens, great to see you. so joe biden says he's picking someone called nea -- not a smal job. who is she and why is he picking her? glenn greenwald knows the answer.

♪

>> tucker: joe biden says he's naming someone to head up the office management budget, very big job in the white house. there's a lot to know about her and we will be bringing that in a future episode, but the key thing to know about her is that she's she's ultimately a handmade into the billionaire. she runs a think tank called the center for american progress. t the center taking millions of dollars from wall street

financiers, lobbyists, banks defense contracts. she has her own research of criticism while hyperventilating about russian collusion that never existed. >> you see it in detail after detail and i think most importantly, the predicate and we had a long discussion last year of collusion. this sets the predicates of their with criminality behind what russia was doing and to thr next set of questions, bannon, other people putting down is what kind of collusion the trump campaign was part of. >> tucker: in case you don't follow the white house carefully, this job, director of the office of management and budget, is one of the key jobs in washington. buglenn greenwald is probably te most independent of our

independent journalists and he joins us tonight to explain why neera tanden. why? >> well, first of all, the package you did as critical as it was, was generous and she's so much worse than that. in my opinion, she is unqualified for that opinion like she is economist, she worked for hillary clinton and then all she's done in the think tank for last ten years was raise millions of dollars from silicon valley, the gulf states, the real base of the democratic party so they want her to see they regulatory budget and economic policy and the administration on behalf of the real constituencies, which is all the people that they've been raising millions of dollars. that just makes her an ordinary democrat. she is a swamp creature in that regard. she is a deranged and dangerous person. i don't mean politically, behaviorally. she's working with wanted to get hillaryte clinton elected, whatf

her own reporters was arranged to have a interview and asked hillary about the iraq war and neera tanden was so angry she punched him. then she claimed she nearly pushed him. when she was running all staff meeting about three years ago, a woman who worked at the thing r tank filed a confidential complaint about sexual harassment against one of neera tanden's male allies. this is something that would have ruined anybody else'se' careers and she outed the woman at the all staff meeting out of vengeance. she went -- the obama and administration was bombing libya into oblivion and she suggested internally that the way we should reduce the deficit as a nation is to use libya's oil to make them pay us back for the favor of having to destroy their entire o government. here's the worst thing about her, tucker, the video you showed had her talking about russia collusion. she didn't just push the most maximized version of russia collusion, she pushed the conspiracy theory that's completely reckless and wild that russia hacked into their

voting machines and the reason hillary lost in 2016 is because the russians changed hillary's votes to trump's votes. that's the real reason hillary lost. that's the conspiracy theory that two-thirds of democrats believe.avav how can you have somebody in a position like this whose is this deranged? >> tucker: the real question is why did we not do a entire show talking to you tonight. we totally blew that. i want to know more! glenn greenwald, please come back! >> always happy to talk about neera tanden. >> tucker: she punched him in for questioning hillary about the war. that's a committed staffer. we will be back tomorrow night we will promise you, 8 pm, the

enemy that's totally insincere of lying, pomposity, smugness and groupthink. up ahead, we have great news for you, sean hannity takes over from new york, seven secondse early! g >> sean: thank you. i wanted to hear more from glenn. getting lectured by people that pushed the moscow ridge, the whole group ek, i frankly don't need their lectures. tucker, great show. g welcome to "hannity," great to be a back and hope you had a great thanksgiving. we start breaking tonight, new developments out of georgia and arizona, the trump campaign continue to investigate election irregularities, allegations of voter fraud kayleigh mcenany lindsey graham, reince priebus and sidney powell will be here. we get exclusive reaction to the presidential pardon. the work she did on behalf of lieutenant general michael flynn four years of the hell they put him through. i want to start with this.