shove the vaccines down everyone's throats. >> mark: excellent answer, lisa. tragic, but a nice all-american hip-hop song about fabulous bootie is reduced to a public service announcement. don't miss lisa foster best podcast, fox news prime time will be back tomorrow. here's tucker. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." lastly, last monday, we told you the bite in the administration buster's largest intelligence gathering agency, the nsa, had been reading my private emails. even saying that out loud is weird, one of the segments we never thought we would do ever but the country has changed that much that fast and honestly the whole thing was kind of shocking. the government was spying on us? come on. that seems crazy, but it's true and no one in washington appeared to be shocked in the

slightest. in fact, the usual shills, right after our segment had an explanation for. it never happened at all, they said, just a cable news show lying for ratings or there must've been a good reason it happened and they began furiously making excuses for why the nsa did it. a powerful, heavily-politicized spy agency surveilling journalists that are critical of the regime? no problem, it's perfectly normal. just don't call it spying. if it's not normal at all. it is third world and as we told you repeatedly, it did happen. now that has been confirmed. yesterday we learned that sources in these so-called intelligence communities told at least one reporter in washington that was in those emails, my emails. there was nothing scandalous in there, thank god, we are happy to report that. late this spring i contacted a couple of people i help -- thought could help get an interview with the russian president black reboot. i told nobody i was doing this other than my executive producer justin. i wasn't embarrassed about trying to interview putin.

it's always newsworthy, i'm an american citizen, i can interview anyone i want, and i plan to but still in this case i decided to keep it quiet. i figure that in a kind of publicity would rattle the russians and make the interview less likely to happen, but the biden demonstration found out anyway by reading my emails. i learned from a whistle-blower that the nsa planned to leak the contents of those emails to media outlets. why would they do that? well, the point, of course, was to paint me as a disloyal american, a russian operative. i've been called that before. a stooge of the kremlin, a trader doing the bidding of a foreign adversary. i'm the only person -- i'm hardly the only person who's been accused of this, we've seen this movie several times now. at the same moment the chinese commonest government increases its already stunning level of control over this country, our leaders prattle on about the threat of vladimir putin. he's an evildoer, they tell us, a totalitarian dictator. vladimir putin does things that no american leader would even consider.

he runs domestic disinformation campaigns. he lies to the public. he punishes people for opposing him or for believing the wrong thing. he even uses intelligence agencies to spy on his own citizens. beyond the pale stuff, so no decent american would interview vladimir putin, at least no reporter from fox news. that was the point they wanted to make, that's why they planned to leak the contents of my emails to news organizations. and yesterday, as noted, we learned they actually did it. even now, some in the media are claiming that we deserve this. emailing with people who know putin, are you? of course the nsa is watching you. that's what you get. but that's hardly the point. by law, the nsa is required to keep secret the identities of american citizens who have been caught up in its vast domestic spying operation. so by law, i should have been identified internally merely as a u.s. journalist or american journalist, that's the law. but that's not how i was

identified, i was identified by name, i was unmasked. people in the building learned to i was and then my name and the contents of my emails left that building at the nsa and wound up with a news organization in washington. that is illegal. in fact it is precisely what this law was designed to prevent in the first place. we cannot have intelligence agencies used as instruments of political control. both parties use to agree on that, democrats were especially adamant on the point, but not anymore. so that's exactly what is happening here. we need to find out how this happen. who did it, who allowed it? paul would know the answer. paul is the highly political director of the nsa. paul would have been required personally to approve my unmasking. paul should axley who asked for that i'm asking and he should do it immediately. april haynes would also likely know the answer, and even more political director of national intelligence.

she oversees all of it. she may have approved the unmasking as well, should certainly know who asked for it and who approved it. that's her job to know. she should release that information immediately tonight and as april haynes does not release the information, she should be forced to release that information. we don't have a lot of power as a tv show but we are going to keep pushing for that because it matters not just us, but to the entire country. you can't have a democracy in a place where unaccountable spy agencies keep people in line by licking the contents of their emails, discrediting them with their own emails which they thought were private. it doesn't work if you allow that. and we suspect congressional republicans will also demand an answer. many have finally awakened to the fact that the intelligence agencies they have blindly supported for so long are not in fact their friends. they are not the friends of anyone in this country, they are dangerous. that's obvious. in the meantime, we're happy to have one of the very few people in american journalism who understood exactly what was going on long before most of us did and wrote about it

extensively. glenn greenwald, a frequent guest of the show, thanks so much for coming on. i think there are a couple of levels here, i have learned in the last week that in washington the fact that the federal government is reading our emails is no big deal and you're like a nutcase for even noting it or being bothered by it, you should have no expect tatian of privacy whatsoever but i think, and you would no, the federal law is pretty clear on this. if nsa captures information sent privately by the american citizen they have to keep that citizen's identity secret unless they go through a process to "unmask" it. it seems very clear they did exactly what they are not allowed to do. >> yeah. i think there's two important components. one is the first one that you just referenced, which is that if they were doing this perfectly legally, meaning they intercepted your email communications with legal authority because you are talking either to the russian government which they all beasley are allowed to spy on, or to a target in the united states -- they learned

that way that you are communicating with the russians about the possibility of an interview with putin, they have the legal obligation to conceal your identity and make sure that nobody knows that you were the one that was speaking to the russians, the intelligence that they care about is that the russians were doing something, not with whom they were speaking, so clearly there was either a failure to hide your identity as required by law, which is illegal, or an attempt to unmask it after it was minimized, which also would be a crime given that there is no national security justification for doing it. there's something much more serious, tucker, which is when the nsa spies on american citizens speaking to foreign nationals and foreign officials, even when it's legal, that's a very grave power, so there's limits on what they can do with that. it is one of the greatest crimes in the u.s. code for the nsa to leak the contents of communications that it intercepts between a foreign official and an american

citizen. and i think one of the things that got overlooked is that in 2017, when general flynn, who was in the crosshairs of the entire deep state under obama, was speaking with ambassador kislyak, they leaked the contents of that communication, intercepted key medications between a russian official and incoming national security advisor to "the washington post." not only don't we know who did the leaking, no one cares because they hate general flynn, he's not their ideology and therefore they think it's justified. that's the reaction here. oh, it's tucker carlson, he's a conservative, we don't like him and so we don't even care if the nsa was doing this, but it is illegal to do either of those two things. >> tucker: and it's not an attack on flynn or anything but like so many people he was under attack and he went on the defensive and then he remained silent and didn't articulate his own case and maybe his lawyers told him not to or something,

but if you were persistent independent, look, you may not like my politics, but you're not allowed to violate my rights and break the law. i mean, i wonder if you could force them to admit what happened and then you could force some account ability. i mean, no one in his agencies, brennan, clapper, they lied under oath before congress. nobody cares, nobody does anything. could you actually force the system to hold these unaccountable leaders accountable for once? >> the problem is there are so many doctrines that the dash the security state has existed since the end of world war ii. they've been operating in secret and with no democratic accountability for eight or nine decades now. dwight eisenhower when he left office warned the country about the dangers that they pose, so, so many times when people have gone to sue the nsa for illegally spying on them they have doctrines that they use that will say it's too secret, we can't have courts looking into what we did, because that will jeopardize national security and then courts dismissed the lawsuit, or they

will say tucker carlson can't prove that we actually spied on him, therefore he has no standing to sue and courts will dismiss that as well. the remedy here is for congress -- it's congress' responsibility to exercise oversight how the executive branch spies on people and for so long congress has been either afraid of the nsa and the cia or worse, subservient to them, and you're right, it has been the republican party along with democrats that has long venerated these agencies and only under trumpeted they start to realize actually these agencies interfere in our politics and threaten our democracy and really pernicious ways and that they need to take that knowledge that they learned over the last five years and use it to get to the bottom of what happened here. >> tucker: so i spoke to -- this is not speculation, this is a conversation i had personally face-to-face with someone i thought was a very powerful member of the committee that oversees the intelligence agencies in congress. i can't be more specific.

if two years ago told me to my face that his communications were being monitored by the intel agencies, the ones that he was supposed to be overseeing and that he didn't dare text me because he knew they were reading his text and i thought to myself the system is complete we dysfunctional. if the person is supposed to be holding them accountable as of right of them, then who's in charge or? it sounds like they are. >> we learned -- this was one of the big scandals of the obama administration's, when they were investigating the cia and their role in the interrogation program at guantanamo and elsewhere, john brennan, cia, spied on the leader of that senate investigation, which was dianne feinstein. the cia was spying on the senate as the senate was investigating the cia. the most significant exchange -- i think i talked about this on your show before, was three days before trump was inaugurated, chuck schumer went on the rachel maddow show and she was very upset that trump was insulting the cia because she loves the cia and chuck schumer said the

thing you're not supposed to say aloud, which is trump is being stupid because everyone knows that if you challenge the intelligence community, they have six different ways to sunday to get back at you and that's exactly what they proceeded to do over the next four years, undermine his administration. people in washington are petrified of the security state and that's why they exist with no democratic account ability. >> tucker: well, we have to push back. if they find a meth lab in my basement, it's not real, just so you know. just kidding! sort of! glenn greenwald, great to see you tonight, thank you. so there's been something missing from this show, you probably noticed it, we've noticed it every week. that element is mark steyn. no idea where he's been buried he's missed a lot of big stories, he's been brooding on them and he will tell us what he thinks when we see him in about 3 minutes. we will be right back. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ >> tucker: everywhere we've gone in the past several months, grocery stores, airports, soulcycle studio -- just kidding -- but basically everywhere in public people come up and they say one thing. "where is mark steyn? your show is great but mark steyn, we long for mark steyn." and honestly we had the same question, where is mark steyn? not really clear but the good news is he's back.

dare we ask him where he's been? mark steyn, it is so nice to see you again and i'm not -- because i really believe in propriety and prep so mike privacy , or have to ask, are you following the news? >> yes, i have been, tucker. don't worry if you don't know where i've been the last couple of months, the nsa is going to be leaking it -- >> tucker: politico. >> one of the things i've missed, which i would like to comment on is the story, i would like thousands of miles away when it came out and i wasn't really paying too much attention to it and i didn't pay attention to it until the nsa released that statement, which all the court unix of the american -- you are member the statement to it was only a week ago, it's been superseded by events, they

say, but what struck me is that all of them of the american media actually reported it of what it wasn't, which was a denial. i will read a headline here. this is from adweek, the guy who is paid to follow you and all the cable news big shots. nsa denies tucker carlson's claims that agency read his private emails without permission. that's exactly what they didn't do. as you know, it was clear from reading that that you were being subject to what glenn calls incidental collection, that in other words they were monitoring someone else and then sucked you in and read your emails and foreign intelligence guy actually said to me this is brazen. they are actually telling you that yes, they are reading your email and what you going to do about it? >> tucker: and then telling other people what's in them. >> yeah, yeah. and that's what's so shocking about it. as they said in that statement,

they are supposed to be a foreign -- dealing with foreign national security matters and somehow they are pivoting. they're useless for foreign affairs to all intents and purposes and are pivoting to a domestic agency, so that was one of the stories -- >> tucker: can i just say, what about -- i have -- to be honest, a pretty conventional personally, wife of 30 years, four dogs in the bed with us, nothing crazy but what if i had some kind of hidden legal but hidden weird personal life that i was really embarrassed about? they would have liked full control over me. i'm serious. they don't because i don't, but what if i did? >> even if you don't, what's to stop them actually leaking emails of you hanging upside down in a bondage dungeon somewhere? >> tucker: no one would believe that! you're right though. >> that's the point. i'm willing to admit that there were a lot of people with exotic tastes. you don't need exotic tastes now

because we have such a powerful surveillance state, they'll create it. you can outsource your exotic tapes to these creeps. >> tucker: you're totally right. if that's a really good point. >> yeah, yeah. exactly. exactly. that's what they did too -- that's what they did -- that's what they did to a famous president who was renowned as a germaphobe and yet they outsourced to mi6 a fetish holy concocted for him by foreign intelligence agencies. and they'll do it to you and they'll do it to me and all do it to shannon bream. they'll do it to whoever is necessary. spill and i will not believe that no matter what they -- but i interrupted you, sorry, what was the second story mag >> the other thing is this woke military. that statement from general milley where he was talking about how he is trying to understand white rage. even as the taliban can't even wait for the americans to leave

to take over the country. all the taliban had to agree to, look, okay, if you leave on wednesday, we will wait until friday to take over the country. they haven't even waited -- they haven't even waited for that. the whole american way of war, if we are going to keep funding the pentagon, needs top to toe overhaul, and the final story was the way the so-called conspiracy theory on the origins of covid now turns out to be all but certifiable fact and the whole what marketing. i do like this picture of the woman with a bat on the head by the way, which i think comes from our chumps at sky news down under. that looks like -- that's your state-of-the-art safety protocols right there, tucker. so i think the gap between conspiracy theory and conventional wisdom now is

about -- what is it, six months? something like that. >> tucker: i just got to ask super quick, you were ready for newspapers -- you've been in the news business a long time. if has there ever been a time to be in the news business like this? >> no, because that's why the performance of the american media is so dispiriting, because this would be a fantastic time to make your name at nbc or "the washington post" or "the new york times," and instead this lame tedious propaganda cheerleading -- i called him court unix, but that's actually an insult to rem the ottoman empire. take them over "the new york times" any day. >> tucker: there were some honorable unix, very powerful and wise, not a joke, no one likes that. >> i feel a tucker carlson original is coming on. i'll be on your ottoman eunuchs

special. >> tucker: is only one left and you've got the media gig at cnn and i don't think you'll do an interview with us. maybe. [laughs] [cackles] we really missed you. thank you. >> thanks a lot, tucker. >> tucker: we suggested last night that cameras ought to be in every classroom. the police required to wear them, they have them in congress and your local city council meetings. what, it doesn't matter what they're teaching our children? you have no right to know? you're paying for it, they have all this power, why don't you want -- why don't they want you to see what they are teaching? they really don't want you to. the reaction to that segment was pretty darn revealing, we have it next. ♪ ♪

>> tucker: when things fall apart, and sometimes they do come in every society, fall apart, there's chaos, some kind of emergency, you're on your own, that's the truth. no matter what they tell you there is no one to call, if there's a threat you have to protect yourself and your family from that threat but what if

they won't allow you to? what if it just the moment you needed to defend yourself the government prevented you from defending your own life and the lives of your family? what would you do then? well, for the latest episode of our documentary series, we sought to answer the question. we talked to people who have been through moments of civic disorder. in los angeles, in new orleans and last summer during the riots. when we asked what it was like to be forcibly disarmed by the government when you needed to defend yourself. here's a clip from our documentary. >> in other parts of the city, they aggressively disarmed law-abiding citizens. it may have been the most aggressive gun confiscation scheme in modern american history. >> when the people were most vulnerable they took the guns away from them. when they needed them the most. >> rather than stop looters from ransacking new orleans, police decided to confiscate firearms from people who had broken no laws and presented no threat

with no due process. it was illegal, but they did it anyway. >> we are going to take all weapons. >> they went door-to-door. >> they went into people's homes, they took guns. don't think it won't happen. it can happen. >> for the police and the national guardsmen dispatched in new orleans, it was easier to disarm citizens then it was to confront criminals, so that's exactly what they did. >> tucker: and that was 16 years ago. they have become much more aggressive and law enforcement of course has been all but neutered and up parts of the country, the fascinating documentary is on foxnation.com right now. we made a pretty obvious suggestion on the show last night, why don't we have civilian review boards for our schools? it's not like schools aren't important, there may be the most important thing we pay for. in a lot of places they are the main thing we pay for, the biggest budget item in most towns, schools. we are educating our children to become adults and run the country that they are inheriting. so why don't we know what's

happening in the classes? why don't we have cameras in every classroom? again, it's obvious, we have cameras monitoring congress, city council meetings, our police officers are required to wear cameras. what's the argument against that? so why should we have cameras in the classroom? and now more than ever, used to be that which is trusted with their teaching our kids. now we know a lot of them are demented and they are teaching poison. the biggest teachers unit in the country has come out in support of racist struggle sessions in kindergarten. meanwhile, the video we do have is not reassuring at all. over the past year you've seen all kinds of cell phone footage with teachers saying shocking things, berating vaccinated students, for example, for not wearing their obedience masks. watch. >> i don't care if you're vaccinated, you little [indiscernible]. i don't want to get sick and die. >> okay. >> there are other people you can infect just because you're vaccinated. you're not a special person around here. you should hear about how everybody talks about -- you're a jerk! you're a jerk!

>> tucker: yeah, that's totally normal. so why don't we know what's going on in classrooms? what's the answer, why shouldn't we? and not surprising, a lot of people were very offended by this. you don't have a right to know, shut up and send your kids. don't ask questions about what they are learning, about what kind of people they are becoming. [awkward laugh] matt walsh hosts the mat while show. thanks so much for coming on tonight. this is one of these things that someone suggested to me in conversation the other morning. the second eye third at i thought that's the most obvious thing i ever heard, why don't we do that? why don't we do that, i guess, let me ask you that question. >> well, i mean first of all i have to admit the reform i would prefer for the publics will system is to just destroy it, reform it with a wrecking ball. i don't think it should exist at all but if it's going to exist, then it makes total sense that obviously we should want to know

what our kids are being taught when they're in these government buildings. maybe there are a lot of parents who don't want to confront or acknowledge what exactly they're doing when they send their kids to public school. you're sending them to a government building for seven hours a day, five days a week, nine months a year for 12 years. that's what's happening. you should want to know what's going on, what's going on inside the building when they are there all that time. i think there's a reason -- there's the real reason why the left doesn't want this and then there's the reason that they give us, which of course often times are two different things. the reason they give us is it's a privacy concern or it's a free -- it's even a free-speech concern. first of all, teachers as government employees in their capacity as government employees working with kids, they shouldn't get privacy or free speech any more than i want a bank teller -- if i'm making a deposit of a lot of cash, i don't want them to turn the cameras off and go into a back room and say i need some privacy while i do this. we don't want privacy in their capacity handling money.

you send your dog to a dog border, they got webcams now so you can check in anytime. so why wouldn't we want that kind of oversight with kids? and i think the real reason, aside from the reasons they give us come out the real reason is that they just -- they don't want us to know what's going on inside the building. as you said, we have a right to know. >> tucker: let's be totally blunt here. most teachers are great, i am married to a former teacher. but some teachers are creepy. and we know that because they want to talk to other people's prepubescent kids about sex in pretty detailed ways. your creep if you do that, let's become totally clear about it. anyone would want to talk to a third-grader about "fox news primetime"'s, don't you think we need to have a camera on the person? >> that's another thing where that shouldn't be happening at all even with a camera. so we should have that kind of oversight. i think if there's anything -- just think of it like this, is there anything that could happen inside a public school classroom

that you absolutely would not want on film, and if you can think of something that could happen like that, it shouldn't be happening in the classroom to begin with. whatever's happening there should be open for anyone to see or at least as you know, you can have the cameras in their and parents who have custody of children could have -- they could be password-protected. there are many ways of doing this that make a lot of sense i think. >> tucker: but your point is the best point and i wish i'd said it. if there is something happening a public school that shouldn't be on film, it shouldn't be happening in the first place and it's kind of an unassailable point of reasoning and i appreciate it. matt walsh, thank you. >> thanks a lot. >> tucker: a lot of college -- we believe most colleges are forcing young people to take the coronavirus vaccine. they are young, by definition they don't need it. a lot of them have already recovered from covid so by definition they shouldn't get it because they are greater risk from being hurt by the vaccine than they are from the covid they've already recovered from.

that's obvious. but no one's been pushing back really. now there's a major effort to fight back against mandatory vaccines in the schools. charlie kirk is behind it and we are proud to have him announce that initiative on the show next. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ >> tucker: joe biden announced the other day he would like the government to go door-to-door to make sure you're vaccinated because i guess you really haven't had the opportunity to get a free vaccine. oh wait... anyone who hasn't gotten the vaccine at this point doesn't want the vaccine and that used to be it was your choice. if you didn't think you wanted or needed it, you didn't have to take it because it was your body, your choice. turns out that was a complete lie and we know for certain because it feels like most colleges in the united states are now forcing their students to prove they've been vaccinated. very few exemptions, if any, before they can get an education in the fall. they've already paid for college but they can't come back on campus until they get the shot and many of them have already recovered from covid -- a lot of them have already recovered, they shouldn't get the shot, it's not good for them, there's a risk involved much higher than covid but colleges are forcing them anyway. it's not your body, it's not your choice. very few have fought back

against us, very few but tonight there's a new effort to stop mandatory vaccination for college students. turning point usa is calling this new campaign "no force backs." charlie kirk is the cofounder, he joins us tonight. thank you for doing this, we've been waiting. this is one of the worst things i've ever seen happen in this country and i'm so grateful that someone is organizing resistance to it. tell us what you're doing. >> yeah, thank you, tucker buried my wife and i made the decision not to get the vaccine and i announced that at an event a couple months ago and some of our turning point usa students and said -- came up to me and said we can't make that same decision if we want to continueg to college. this at my university is basically mandating us to get the vaccine, saying that if we do not get the vaccine, then we're going to have to be subject to testing where we have to take online courses or wear a mask sometimes outside at universities where we've been told that masking makes almost no difference outside the

transmission -- what's happening here is force and controlled and what's been really strange to see is that few organizations or people are pushing back so we organized high school and college kids, this is obvious for us, saying that we are not going to tolerate students to be forced to get the vaccine against their will. this is a very simple issue, it's about medical freedom and privacy and if you have concerns above the vaccine, which by the way a lot of people do, including dr. malone and weinstein, you should be able to opt out of the vaccine where you are the lowest risk cohort in the entire country of dying from the -- the stories are mounting of young people have got got the vaccine and then have unusual health events afterwards. at turning point usa we are going to give it everything we have two make sure that students are not going to have to live in a medical apartheid because they don't want to get the vaccine. >> tucker: it's beyond belief. this is exactly what they told us right-wingers once they over

the government in the handmaid's tale we are going to do to the country. it would force you to put things in your body that you didn't want. they had full control of your body, you know longer have dominion over your body. what can college students do exactly? do you think you can force these colleges to pull back from this? >> so the first thing is we are going to offer eagle help through some legal experts we know to any sort of exemptions that might exist, especially at public universities where there might be religious exceptions. those are going to be tough, tucker, because unfortunately we have not seen the type of decisive action that these republican state legislators should have been taking in spring and early summer to be able to grant exceptions for their students. we are going to put pressure on republican governors and say you have to make sure the state universities do not mandate these vaccines and create these almost two realities, if this medical ultimatum. more than anything else, what we are going to do is a massive public relations campaign and make sure students know they are not alone. they don't have to hide in the

shadows all of a sudden they are concerned that if they get the vaccine they are going be treated as if there is something -- i said this earlier and this is a big statement but it's almost this apartheid-style open air hostage situation like you can have your freedom back if you get the jab. this is an acceptable, we are going to fight back against it. >> tucker: that's exactly right and i hope the people will not complied by any means necessary. i think it's that important not to force you to take medicine you don't want, don't need, and could hurt you. i mean, this is like basic. what countries this? charlie kirk, thank you for doing this, godspeed. >> thank you. >> tucker: is not getting a lot of attention in this country because we don't give canada any attention at all but all of a sudden canada looks like the soviet union. seem like we are exaggerating a little bit? well, they are burning catholic and anglican churches in recent days, leftist groups are approved. canada's leaders are condemning the burning of churches, no, they are endorsing the burning of churches. the head of the british columbia

civil liberty association, a monster, tweeted this. "burn it all down." then a close confidant of the prime minister of canada, justin trudeau, a man called gerald, called the arson, and we are quoting now, "understandable." a woman called heidi matthews of harvard law school described the attacks as "the right of resistance to systemic injustice, burning churches. now. this is not the span of the civil war, this is now in canada. they just tore down the statue of queen victoria in winnipeg on canada day. >> no pride in! [cheers and applause] >> tucker: would love to go

inside canada tonight but we can't get there, it's like 1985 albania, it's a closed country, so instead we are speaking by settle it tonight with rebel media within canada, thanks so much for doing the show, what is going on in canada? seriously. this is -- it's hard to believe what's happening. what is this? >> i'm reluctant to use the word kristallnacht because we are not there yet. that was the night of the broken glass in preholocaust germany where they smashed and burned and killed jewish synagogues. it was a precursor to the holocaust. obviously we are not that far gone yet but what you call it when literally dozens of churches are being systematically vandalized, torched? there was one fire in the bc interior that wiped out all village of -- two people dead and it is not yet determined who caused it, but it was in an area where other churches have been

torched, so it may actually have its first victims. the crazy thing is this is so explicitly and antichurch hate crime wave and yet justin trudeau, who is normally the first and the wokest, waited a week before saying anything and he literally said that's not the way to go. that was as tough as he got. he introduced an anti-hate crimes bill in parliament that's targeting mean tweets and facebook posts, but literally you have church after church being torched by antifa-style terrorists and he's almost silent on the matter and his right-hand man finds it understandable. i think these are dark days for religious freedom in canada. >> tucker: they are burning churches and the head of the bc civil rights commission says burn it all down? i mean, that person sounds like a dangerous lunatic. who is that? what is going on?

>> and she hasn't been sacked. that was over a week ago that she said it. in fact, various board members of her civil liberties association have supported her. by the way, these churches often have aboriginal, indigenous congregants and they are saying don't burn our churches down. it's the canadian equivalent of one black lives matter burns down black-owned businesses in black neighborhoods. that does not help black people. in canada, most of these churches are aboriginal-focused and you often have, in one case, white antifa-style vandals were filming themselves desecrating a church and from the very top it's either silence or tacit support. >> tucker: i'm ashamed to say the american christian leaders have mostly been silent about it too and i wish they wouldn't be. as were, i appreciate that report from canada, i hope sometime to be able to visit canada once the borders open but in the meantime, thank you.

>> thank you. >> tucker: so donald trump, former president of united states is still banned on pretty much every social media platform, but he is still taking steps to fight back against the censorship. you don't have to have voted for trump to think "what"? we will tell you exact we what doing next. ♪ ♪

>> tucker: donald trump is still banned on pretty much every social media platform. so are a lot of people, peoples whose views are inconvenient for the people in power. now donald trump says he's going to do something about this. he's announced he's suing facebook and twitter. michael knowles knows a lot about this topic, he's the author of the terrific new book "speechless: controlling words, controlling minds." if thanks a lot for coming on and congratulations on this boo. i think the title says a lot. when you control words, you do control people think. do you think the former president has a shot at changing the censorship regime?

>> i certainly hope so. what is so shocking to us is that a conservative is actually doing something to fight back against big tech central strip. i think there've been a lot of conservatives in the past who have made the argument that it's somehow not conservative for us to use our politics to reign in these woke oligarchs. let me tell you something. there is nothing conservative about allowing a handful of silicon valley oligarchs led by hipster rasputin jack dorsey control our entire speech in this country up to and including censoring the duly elected sitting president as they did on january 7th and january 8th. if when you are controlling 90% of those speech in the country, the public square, you are by definition engaging in a political act and we the people absolutely have the right to do this. as i argue in "speechless," speech is not just one aspect of our politics. in a republic such as ours, speech is politics, politics is speech, that is how we govern ourselves, it's how we persuade one another, is how we

deliberate, how to goes back to old uncle aristotle. the manipulative language is the most powerful tool for controlling a political order and that's why the been so extremely successful at it while conservatives have been twiddling our thumbs. >> tucker: that's exactly right. words determine how you think. if you don't have the words, you can't have the thoughts, as orwell famously pointed out, and it's true. i'm going to be blunt, are you hopeful that this will in fact roll back to where we were five years ago and we can have a free country again, or do you think this will accelerate? is there any stopping i guess is the question. >> i think the difference between a conservator optimist and a conservative pessimist is that a pessimist says things can get numerous and the conservative optimist says oh, yes, they can, but i have hope. >> tucker: [laughs] >> these parents were showing up to the school board and what they are saying is we don't want radical gender theory being taught to our 3-year-olds, we don't want critical race theory being taught to our students,

and we are going to stand up -- the simple fact is we need to articulate a standard of speech. we need to be able to say some things are true, some things are false, some things are good, some things are bad. free speech in the abstract means absolutely nothing to people who have nothing to say and so the argument i make in "speechless" is conservatives need to be a lot clearer about enforcing a standard saying no, we are actually going to stand for something here. if we really can't discern between drag queen story hour and going to church on sunday, if we really can't discern between a private company pursuing its business and three dudes in silicon valley controlling our speech, then we have given up the capacity for self-government, which requires our faculties of reason, or moral conscience and the political power and the courage to wield that political power when people give it to us. >> tucker: yeah, we need some fine motor skills here making subtle distinctions is important. by the way, speaking words, hipster rasputin is my new favorite phrase, which i plan to steal from you. i appreciate you coming on

tonight, congrats on the book. >> thank you, great to see you. >> tucker: a new episode in our document or series is out, it's called "surviving disorder." it's really good, we can say that. we will be that, every night, 8:00 p.m., the show that is the sworn and sincere enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. have a great night, sean hannity takes over now. >> sean: i like sworn and i like sincere. this is perfect and that is the truth, i'll add that to the list. tucker, great show, thank you. welcome to "hannity," tonight we are tracking multiple breaking stories, miranda devine, she will be here. we have a brand-new report on one of the sleaziest, most corrupt families in america. that would be the bidens and only the media tech mob gives them a pass because we also have a two-tiered justice system in america. sadly i report that tonight. one for democrats, one for republicans, we will explain. i do have good news. a patriotic moment that will put