we should be able to talk about this honestly while still maintaining we can be sensitive and passionate. >> absolutely. we have to leave it there. that will do it for a fox news prime time. i'm mark steyn. i'll see you again tomorrow. tucker is next. >> tucker: good evening in macon the "tucker carlson tonight," second impeachment proceedings started, we didn't d that his head lawyers didn't do a very good job and on the slow day that might be the mildly interesting fact but at this point, who cares? impeachment? the whole thing is ridiculous, they are literally impeaching a president who isn't even the president anymore. they are yelling at someone who's already left the room. it's a farce, insulting, and absurd. anyone who tells you the details of today's impeachment are

important is probably trying to distract you from something that actually is important. there are a lot of those things right now, more than ever. one of them is the ongoing covid pandemic. after months of hearing that life could never return to normal until we get a vaccine, we got a vaccine. the life did not return to normal. life got worse. we were instructed to take the new vaccine as soon as possible and then to put on more masks. one is no longer enough. and anyone who complained about that was punished. most people obey the orders, they had no choice, but the whole thing made them nervous. how could it not? why did the rules change all of a sudden? was there a good reason for that? when we finally going to repeal corona law and what about this vaccine? why are americans being discouraged from acting the simple straightforward questions about it? questions like how effective are these drugs? are they safe? with the miscarriage risk for pregnant women, for example?

is there a study on that? may we see it? how much are the drug companies making office stuff? they are not conspiracy theories, they are the most basic questions. every citizen has a right to know the answer but instead we have fluff and propaganda. not a lot of science it was totally disingenuous and actually, it had the opposite of the intended effect. most americans already supported the vaccines where they didn't need to be browbeaten in order to be convinced. they were grateful their kids don't get tetanus and polio and chicken pox. they were anti-factors and yet from the very first day the way they handled the covid vaccine did not inspire confidence, if the vaccine was so great, why were all these people lying about it? honest question. and they were lying, clearly

lying. you know that for certain because the moment the covid vaccine arrived, they made sure no one could criticize it. >> due to social media companies, have a responsibility to do more right now in terms of getting this misinformation, this disinformation off the platform. if they absolutely have a responsibility. the internet and the rise of social media has happened so quickly that really, the regulations and the good policymaking hasn't stayed out in front and quite frankly, he needs to catch up. >> quite frankly, she says we need to censor people's views on the covid vaccine. remember, melinda gates is not a scientist. she did not develop this vaccine. she has no background in epidemiology or any relative discipline. she worked in the marketing

department at microsoft come up but she is the wife of a billionaire. that's why she's on television. it's why she's allowed to control what you're allowed to say about the drug she is demanding you inject in your body. is this science? not even close, it's oligarchy and they are all participating in it. they announced earlier they would not allow anyone to criticizes vaccine and anyone who did would be kicked off their platforms right away and then corporate media took it upon themselves to enforce this rule. just yesterday, ran a story with this headline. "facebook vowed to crack down on covid-19 vaccine misinformation but misleading posts remain easy to find. that's not a new story, that's an open call for censorship and it works. cnn identified a group on facebook called covid-19 vaccine injury stories in the group was exactly what it sounds like, people talking about their experiences with the vaccine. that group was in the top 20 groups of all of facebook.

we searched for that group, we couldn't find it. even when we search specifically for its name. effectively, injury stories no longer exist. he and then shut them down, erase them. instead, search for the word vaccine on facebook and you will find a lot of material that matches precisely the story line approved by her fellow nonscientists billionaires and the line is clear, you've heard it a million times. the covid vaccine is morally good, don't say anything else. so if your neighbor drops dead after getting the shot, keep it to yourself. facts like that are not allowed on facebook, they've got the same policies. there were multiple reports of adverse reactions for the vaccine and that the vaccines were still not fully filed on pregnant women and kids. twitter banned me until i deleted it for false information. is it false information? that's irrelevant. according to another user, twitter suspended me for saying

vaccines have known side effects which of course, they do. they concede that but at the moment, not allowed to say it. they prohibited users from buying any advertisement that might discourage people from taking the vaccine or might portray the new vaccines as unsafe or ineffective. they had been vaccinated and on the other hand, they are now conceding on the record that the vaccine may trigger a fatal blood disorder and a small number of people. "the new york times" wrote about it the other day. it's one of the stories you should say visit a period piece for when the darkness finally lifts and we can think and speak clearly again. two of the people they interviewed wouldn't even give their names. one said she'd been badly injured by the drug but appear to be punished.

she covered her face like she was a fugitive. science can't live in an environment like this. without relentless skepticism, science dies. that's what sciences and when it leaves, inevitably it's replaced by witchcraft and superstition. are we there yet? you decide. if the liberal web site ran a piece complaining that facebook users were still being allowed to make fun of covid-19 vaccinations. mockery is only -- demanded that facebook remove the offending content immediately. as an example, highlighted this image with a noted with alarm had already been shared more than 100,000 times on facebook and has infuriated them. make them stop laughing and in a way, it is even with total blanket censorship, it is hard to crush the average person sense of humor but you have to

wonder if they can force you to stop laughing about a vaccine, what can't they make you do? glenn greenwald is a truly independent journalist whose work appears on sub sack and we hope he will join us tonight. i don't think you have to have a position on vaccines. i'm for them to think that it's very troubling, news organizations are the government or billionaires or anybody would try to censor open conversation about their effects. >> we've obviously talked a lot about the practice of censoring for political opinion, declaring things hate speech or offensive and the dangers of censoring for that. i actually think this pretense that they are able to concede they are able to decree right and wrong, truth and falsity to the point where they can ban things that they declared to be false is even more pernicious

then opinion based censorship. if this facebook policy had existed back in march less than a year ago that said if you descend from the consensus of the world health organization, you would be banned from their platform, that would've meant that if you are somebody who in march went on to facebook and said you should wear a mask, i believe that masks are effective against respiratory diseases of the kind that sars and covid-19 represent, you would have been banned because the science that that you shouldn't wear masks. they said not only are they unnecessary, they can be dangerous. orthodoxy and piety is about trying to make you think that they have a monopoly on objective truth by finding it science. it is a human study which means it is fallible and extremely

dangerous to say that any kind of human knowledge is so unchallengeable to being discussed and off-limits from even being questioned. >> tucker: i'm worried that paradoxically, their demand that you believe what they say will result in millions of americans not believing what anybody says. this will have an effect on people's unknowable truth, that would make people crazy. that's my concern. >> i think that's valid. i have the same has you do, when the vaccine is available where i live, i'm going to get it. my family will take it as well because the reason i am convinced that, not because it's clearly true, the best course for me but i informed myself and buy a sought out dissenting opinion and i was convinced that the consensus was probably right that taking the vaccine was the

best thing to do. if the internet were on a place where no dissent were allowed, i would have way less confidence in that ability because that would mean this as a profession isn't confident enough to allow dissent and if they are not confident, they earn much less trust and faith in their pronouncements. >> is a wise observation. why are they doing it? of it has the opposite of the intended effect and seems like it makes sense that it would, why are they continuing to do this do you think? >> i think it's so important to recognize that silicon valley companies are not the ones who want to do this. they would rather stay as far away from censoring and arbitrating an intervening and kicking people off their platforms not because they are noble or nice but it's in their best interest not to do it. this is what's so amazing by cnn and nbc "new york times" and

every time you allow information over the platform that we think is wrong, you're going to shame you, disgrace you and they have partners where the democratic party who control the entire government were right or along with them. they are being pressured, led by journalists who are the leading activists to destroy free discourse and free thought for the united states. >> tucker: i think you're exactly right. thank you for that wise assessment. last week, we told you we reported on the show that bank of america which used to be the bank has become instead a kind of intelligence agency combing through its customers private financial records and turning them over to federal investigators without the knowledge of their customer. we caught them. that's next.

want to save hundreds on your wireless bill? with xfinity mobile you can. how about saving hundreds on the new samsung galaxy s21 ultra 5g? you can do that too. all on the most reliable network. sure thing! and with fast nationwide 5g included at no extra cost. we've got you covered. so join the carrier rated #1 in customer satisfaction. and get a new samsung galaxy starting at $17 a month. learn more at xfinitymobile.com

or visit your local xfinity store today. >> tucker: los angeles is the second-largest city but what happens there matters for right now the city of los angeles is teetering on the edge of collapse and many are dying. why? because of bad decisions by its leaders. south los angeles 59 a shooting

victim's last year the same time before the city defunded the police, they were seven murders. it's a massive increase of dead people because of bad decisions. meanwhile, the new district attorney of los angeles has refused to enforce laws including against violent crime. that may shock you. it doesn't shock george soros but tonight, fox l.a. has more on that story for us tonight. >> that's exactly right. our new progressive district attorney suffered a pretty major setback new progressive reforms are not only illegal, also unethical so if we could pull up some video right now, i will explain starting with this policy on the three strikes law voted in overwhelmingly by california voters back in the 1990s and it essentially

allows prosecutors to seek harsher sentences for repeat criminal offenders and on day one, issued a directive to all his prosecutors say we are not going to enforce the three strikes law because it is racist and unconstitutional. forcing them to have a statement in court agreeing with his legal opinion and the prosecutor union had a big problem with that so they officially sued their own boss and yesterday, a judge ruled against him and sided with the union writing in part from the judge the district attorney's disregard of the three strikes law is unlawful. as is requiring them to seek dismissal of pending sentencing enhancements without a lawful basis. if the statement they are reading in court is legally inaccurate and reading it without correction is unethical.

restricting him from not following the three strikes law offenses just because it's your opinion that you don't want to enforce it doesn't mean you can't not enforce it. so must now start enforcing it. talking to the vice president of the union out here, they said they were relieved by this ruling from the judge, they feel vindicated and they say his directives were causing a big problem for them. take a listen. >> it kind of put us in this impossible position, do we follow his directives or do we follow the law and the court clearly said you need to follow the law. >> of course, released a statement yesterday in response to all of the saying he knew he would have a tough job trying to change what he says is an outdated reese's system here in los angeles of mass incarceration and says he plans to appeal this decision to a higher court. >> tucker: thank you for that

report. one of the great reporters. last week, we told you one of the largest and oldest banks in the country bank of america is no longer really a bank, now kind of an intelligence agency spying on its customers without telling them turning information over to the feds. we obtained a proof that bank of america scans the ritz customers private financial records back in january entering the information information over to federal investigators once again without telling its customers. the bank was looking for people who did among other things rented hotel rooms in washington in january. people who make purchases in january in washington, d.c., people who bought plane tickets. what's the point of this? bank of america said they wouldn't comment on communications with law enforcement. that was not reassuring and told us it was it was responsibilities under federal

law to comply with police inquiries. that's not technically true and what they did may be illegal, but here's the interesting part. since our story aired last week, bank of america has not provided any further explanation for the spying they know they did on their own customers. for political reasons and as far as we know despite the fact this is a big story, no politician in either party has bothered to ask bank of america, so it's okay that one of america's largest financial institutions is now spying on people and by the way, bank of america may not be the only one. they're the only one we caught so far. should you be concerned about any of this? a fellow at the hoover institution and thought about this and he joins us tonight. thanks a lot for coming on. should we be worried about this that it spying on its customers? >> it suggests might reflect that there are other people doing it more than we are aware

of and also disturbing because we always thought that the corporation, the financial institution was wary of the left and wanted to be bipartisan and in its consumer base but when it starts to help an investigation of a particular ideological or perceived ideology, that it's kind of scary. remember, tim cook at apple during the 2015 shooting, the deceased shooter who killed 14 americans, the fbi went to court to ask apple to unlock this data on his iphone for the investigations and they refused. they said we can do that because we have to reassure our consumer base that their iphone data -- it's not consistent. that's what's also worrisome. you may pick some groups to spy on or surveilled or turn over their private data? we need to know that when i think it's kind of scary because

a huge octopus we are facing now in silicon valley, traditional media, social media, we always thought the corporation and the financial institution was wary of surveillance or the left because it was afraid of free-market capitalism but when you start to have the financial institution giving the impression that it might have an ideological basis for some of its investigation is pretty scary and it shows you that wokeness is everywhere now. >> tucker: this investigation is transparently political of course if they didn't conduct anything like this when antifa and black lives matter burned a dozen cities this summer. if apple were participating in this kind of surveillance, of course, you would have no privacy at all, that would be truly invasive. a fire none of demanding that

tim cook explain whether or not apple is cooperating with the department of justice to spy on americans? >> i don't know that answer, but i think the politicians of both parties because these five or six companies have about x trillion dollars in market capitalization. we've never seen such money aggregated in a 50-mile radius and they use it quite promiscuously. mark zuckerberg, the hundred 50 million so not just they will give one candidate, they have the means to alter an election by giving money to officials in a particular precinct, people are having an ad campaign for helping to spend $100 million, i think people are frightened of them and to give tim cook the benefit of the doubt, he's on record that apple would never do that because he resisted the demand of his own government

that was investigating a mass murderer and the radical islamist ideology and wouldn't be tough on the fbi that was investigating master murder and not so tough on people who went into the capital looking at this panoptic on and do facebook, twitter, turn on the nba. >> tucker: appreciated. the member of the senate who might be pressing the tech

companies is josh hawley of missouri. no one has been more attacked more aggressively than josh hawley. is it possible they try to take him online because he's the one guy asking those questions? i don't know. this is the moment of no questions to add to the list of no questions. the world health organization is asking that you stop asking questions about china. we will keep doing it, questions like why does joe biden's pick have ties to the communist party of china? that might be worth asking. that's next.

>> tucker: a man called william burns is joe biden's nominee to lead the cia and we are now learning just like the biden family itself that burns has ties to china and its communist government. foxes trace gallagher has details on that story. >> william burns is the former deputy secretary of state and u.s. ambassador to russia and in

2014 he left government to lead the carnegie endowment, think take that has close ties to china and one of the global centers is based in beijing and during his time as president, he brought in chinese businessman to join the board of trustees. if he is a wealthy chinese investor and member of two organizations linked to the chinese communist party. according to "the daily caller" news foundation, between july of 2017 and the end of 2020, donated between 750,000 to $1.5 million to carnegie. it says they do not support research projects in the u.s. but some say it's not the money, it's the influence because while he was at carnegie, also received donations from the china united states exchange foundation which is a hong kong-based think tank but a global research firm led by former intel officials from the

u.s. says that the lobbying activities in the u.s. allows it to play a valuable role in beijing's effort to sway public opinion and build influence in america and all of this is why republicans have repeatedly questioned whether joe biden will confront china or its human rights abuses and unfair trade practices or allow china cheating. >> tucker: unbelievable, thank you so much. again, not talking about the nominee to run the department of the interior, talking about the cia director, but not the only insane thing going on. the world health organization for a long time has been useful mostly for repeating exactly what the government of china would like it to say. when this pandemic began last year for example, you remember china told us the virus could not spread from person-to-person. doctors in wuhan doubted that but not the world health organization, they were praising the government of china on twitter and now wants you to

know the coronavirus had absolutely nothing, not one thing to do with that government virology lab in wuhan. >> the findings suggest that it is extremely unlikely and to explain the introduction of the virus into the population. >> tucker: the w.h.o. like china itself is now saying that the virus may have come from frozen food shipments from other countries. our media seem to find like this. tom friedman, the most famous columnist at "the new york times" suggested that china is a much better country than this and we should learn from them. >> what are they doing in china today? it takes four hours and

18 minutes to take the bullet train from beijing to shanghai and it takes 21 hours to take the train from new york to chicago and they are both about the same distance. i'll tell you something they were thinking about in china this week, they weren't thinking about some knucklehead, they were spending the week thinking about a knucklehead who claim 9/11 didn't happen, they weren't thinking about some guy who is a q a nonshaman. i guarantee you, they weren't wasting their time on this nonsense and how do we do this? week after week, month after month and think we are a serious country. we are so deeply unserious as a country right now. >> tucker: he's right. there are some deeply unserious people in this country particularly on the op-ed page of "the new york times." some bad stuff like, whatever. they have fast trains. miranda devine is a columnist with "the new york times," much

more serious person enjoins us to assess what we are watching. appreciate you coming on tonight. so the w.h.o. says stop asking questions about where the virus came from, it probably came from frozen food from india and no one in our media pauses to say wait a second, is that true? why does no one pause and ask that? >> it's just this kafkaesque situation where we know the world health organization is in bed with china, already made this pandemic much worse than it needed to be because it was lying for china as you said back in january about human to human transmission and is now orchestrated this completely fraudulent investigation in wuhan into the source of the virus that a handpicked team of investigators and the american representatives on that team as a man who is so deeply conflicted, there wouldn't be anyone else in america as

conflicted unless you talked about anthony fauci who funded a lot of his research and he was actually working with the wuhan institute of virology on this very dangerous research into coronavirus' he funded it and also coauthored papers with them. so to have someone like him who has been so vociferously denying the idea that it could possibly have from the lab is just putting the fox in charge of the henhouse and of course, it's so predictable that they come out now, been there a month, spent three hours in the wuhan lab and they have declared that the lab is not the culprit. why are we surprised? of course, the reason for all of this is to whitewash china's role and that's suitable for everybody, just makes us able to become friends with china again, which of course is what tom

friedman and all of joe biden's appointees to national security roles all want that. they just want to normalize what china has been doing and forget about them, some pesky detail if you have a concentration camp for you are organizing of your own citizens, who cares? >> tucker: i think you make a smart point. china is acting in its own interest in whatever diabolical way. it's people in the west who are abetting it that we should be offended by. i think you're absolutely right. miranda devine, i appreciate it. so just the other day, joe biden invalidated federal enforcement of immigration laws in this country. we've got the memos that prove that. the former director of immigration and customs enforcement ice boxes through next.

>> tucker: joe biden tried to end all deportation from the

federal judge, it extended the injunction until the end of this month but despite the judge's order, it still managed to end of virtually all enforcement of federal immigration law, last time showing the detail, internal memos like ice, arresting most criminals. convicted felon is like murder. the white house has made it clear that most other felonies, serious felonies are not a problem. for example, the white house has postponed a planned ice operation to target sex offenders telling us that drunk driving isn't really a problem either. >> there's new reporting that isis going to get some new guidance to no longer focus on deporting illegal immigrants who have been convicted of doi, simple assault, drug-based crimes among other things and

i'm curious how that is in the interest of public safety. >> the priority for the enforcement of immigration laws will be on those who were posing a national security threat of course, public safety threat and on recent arrivals, nobody is saying that duis or assault are acceptable behavior and those arrested for such activities should be tried and sentenced as appropriate by local law enforcement but we are talking about the prioritization of who was going to be deported from the country. >> tucker: and you thought dui was a big deal. you believe mad when they told you that. you're a fool, apparently. has also confirmed that i.c.e. officers are now required to obtain approval from the head of the agency whenever they want to make an arrest in the field. we are told most of those requests have been denied and that's the point of course. the former director of ice joins us tonight to tell us what exactly is going on. thank you so much for coming on. what do you make of this? it must be shocking to you. >> thank you for having me. first of all, it is alarming but

certainly is not shocking or surprising if anyone watched the campaign or watched the democrat sanctuary cities over the last year, it shouldn't be the least bit surprising but is so alarming and putting our public safety at risk because essentially places being told not to deport criminals anymore and we have gone to another level in this immigration debate. it used to be of people were here working hard not committing crimes, the argument was that they should be allowed to stay and now the argument has evolved into even when they're here committing crimes and being aggravated felonies, they should be allowed to stay and enjoy every right, privilege, and benefit that american citizens enjoy. it's truly remarkable. one of the things of the most amazing this is they don't want to report gang members without proof of gang membership but they consider gang tattoos not to be sufficient proof of gang membership. so this idea that somebody would

get an ms-13 tattoo would not be affiliated with a gang is what they are thinking but this is the thinking of these memos and these policies which are going to lead to higher crime rates and it's unquestionably true in an era when crime is skyrocketing thanks to the anti-police policies and other things, just going to add to that, going to return to committing crime to illegal aliens who are in this country because now they know they can commit crimes and it used to be a deterrent factor they would be deported. this will harm public safety, undermine the respect for the law mode lead to further flooding of our borders, so we are going down the road of open borders and amnesty and that's what this is all about. >> tucker: all these people's presence is a crime. none has a right to be here in the first place, so that's the more basic crime, i would say. really quick, why would you suspend an operation designed to

catch sex offenders? >> if you read on the lines of the second memo, the only people under this public safety prong for the who were in custody at the time of the memo was written, so these people who are fugitives and sex offenders don't fall within this public safety perception so they can go and arrest them if the memo is correct so why would they do that? i have no idea. it defies any logic or reason, it puts our communities at risk, but again, it is all about open borders, amnesty, keeping as many people in the country as possible and i think this is just the tip of the iceberg. we are going to see more of this and we are going to have some crime victims that are going to be -- we know it could have been prevented now and they are going to be crime victims and with the explanation going to be to them? >> tucker: i appreciate you

coming on, thank you. so planned parenthood makes a ton of money from abortion. now they have a new plan, they are getting involved in transitioning people's genders. the very center of that debate, here to explain the rules straight ahead.

do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy, even a term policy, for an immediate cash payment. we thought we had planned carefully for our

retirement. but we quickly realized that we needed a way to supplement our income. if you have one hundred thousand dollars or more of life insurance you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit conventrydirect.com to find out if you policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance. when i planned parenthood is america's number one provider of abortions. so now they have another revenue stream, kids who identify as transgender. period of one parenthood employee put it this way. "trans identifying kids are cash cows and kept on the hook. in terms of appointments and meetings and abortions are hopefully a one-and-done situation. she is the author of irreversible damage, the transgender craze for seducing our daughters and is a brave voice and joins us tonight. thank you for coming on.

planned parenthood is involved. outline this for us if you would. >> in the last decade the mother rates of abortion have plummeted when roe v. wade was decided, so planned parenthood which has a r infrastructure to support has found a second revenue stream which is incredibly lucrative, these young girls become lifetime patience wednesday medically transition, the drugs are extremely expensive. >> tucker: so planned parenthood takes a huge amount of federal money. does any of that money wind up as part of this revenue stream? >> i don't know, but i can tell you that this is something that has gone from 26 clinics providing testosterone and planned parenthood clinics, only five years ago and now 210 planned parenthood clinics provide testosterone so it is still a very big business for them and they claim on their

web site to be the second largest provider of hormone treatments for trans identified people. >> tucker: we spent a lot of time talking about the trans question and we are lectured a lot about it. most people have very little idea of what it means medically. you said this is a long-term commitment between the patient had a health care provider. what do you mean by that? >> to maintain the effects of something like testosterone, you need to stay on it otherwise you will end up in this in between looking state. for a woman to maintain the secondary characteristics of a man, she needs to stay on massive doses. that doesn't mean that some of the effects aren't permanent, many of them are but you still has to maintain that appearance and has to keep coming in for checkups to look at her blood level. that said, very often these teenagers who come in at 18 and far below 18 depending to a planned parenthood clinic often never see a doctor. >> tucker: i think we know that there are long term health

effects of flooding your body with hormones that you don't naturally produce. do we know what the long-term effects of this might be? >> some of them include in the fertility, and uterine atrophy, risk of cardiac events and of course, the great unknown which is that we've never done this the biological women for decades and that's what we're doing now so we really don't know all of the long-term effects. >> tucker: this is a conversation the country needs to have and i'm grateful that you are forcing it in some way at great expense to yourself so thank you for coming on tonight. so it's been a pretty heavy show, sorry about that, it's a little relentless, so we are going to end with this, county attorney in texas and today, he had a little difficulty during a virtual hearing before a texas district court judge. here's what happened. >> i believe you have a filter turned on in the video settings.

you might want to. >> can you hear me? >> i think it's a filter. >> i don't know how to remove it. i've got my assistant here, she's trying to. i'm here alive, i'm not a cat. >> tucker: i'm not a cat. probably the best line ever from a lawyer in american history. i'm not a cat. he took it well in the end, the lawyer told reporters "if i can make the country chuckle for a moment in these difficult times they are going through, i'm happy to let them do that at my expense. so the american spirit is not dead, just slightly more feline than normal. thanks for joining us tonight. we'll be back tomorrow and every night at 8:00 p.m. the show that is a sworn enemy of lying, smugness, and

groupthink. buck up, it's going to get better. in the meantime, sean hannity takes over right now. >> sean: thank you. welcome to hannity. here we go again for the second time in as many years, to february's in a row, democrats conducting a trial to impeach and convict donald j. trump who is president in exile according to jim acosta and while the first unsuccessful charade was pretty terrible, the sequel is even worse. coming up tonight, a lot of analysis and we will get reaction, senator ted cruz is here, the president's attorney had a great day today in my opinion, he will join us for an exclusive interview. first, i would like to start and lay out the arguments that i think i would make if i was there. today, the u.s. senate kicked off what could be a lengthy, dram