cute ki. yn love it. congratulations jesse. yn bow you'll be back soon. right nown joy that quiet time. you get a day, day and a half of that quiet time in the hospital. that's all for tonight. i want to thank you for watching jesse waters prime time. i'm pete stepping in for him. tucker's interview with elon musk is up next. stick around. ♪ ♪ [intro music] >> good evening and welcome to tucker carlson tonight happy monday. ranter initial intelligence is 1 of those topics that just spooky and sci-fi enough to make for a compelling television segment. they love it on the morning shows. ranter the same time, ai is complex enough that it's easy to misrepresent. it sounds like something tat could be revolutionary, even dangerous to humanity burnt is it? and if it is, what should we do

about it. those questions are significant enough that we wanted to find someone who could provide a definitive answer. elon musk seemed like the right person. musk has been thinking about ai and worrying about it for most of his life. nearly a decade ago he help founded a non-profit research project called open ai. the pint was in the name. if we're going to have artificial intelligence, and apparently we are, it ought to be open, open to the willed world. that would help inner ensure it's used for good and not evil. that was the idea. as the years passed and musk town himself preoccupied building a couple of enormous companies, open ai gay gotway from him. as of tonight, open ai is nut open. it's not a non-profit research project dedicated to artificial intelligence to serve humatin, it is in fact backed by micro microsoft and control to some extent by the democratic party.

elon musk thinks that's a problem. in fact, he thinks it's threat to human civilization. mount tantamount to thermonuclear weapons. the conversation you're about to see took place in an los angeles apartment. we're going to play the entire thing for you over the course of 15 tomorrow. here's thou conversation began. >> all of a sudden ai is everywhere, people are playing with it on their phones. is that good or bad? >> so i've been think about ai for a long time, since i i was in college. it was one of the things that i thought would really affect the future dramatically. it is fundamentally profound in that the smartest creatures as far as we know on this earth are humans. as our defining characteristic. >> yes. >> we obviously are weaker than, say, chimpanzees and less agile,

but we are smarter. so, uh, now, what happens when something vastly smarter than the smartest person comes along in silicon form? it's very difficult to predict what will happen in that circumstance. it's called the singularity. the singularity like a black hole because you don't know what happens after that. it's hard to predict. i think we should be cautious with ai and we should i think there should be some government oversight because it affects the -- it's a danger to the public. so when you have things that are a danger to the public, like let's say so food and drug, that why we have the food and drug administration and the federal aviation administration, the fcc, we have these agencies to oversee things that affect the public. where they could be public harm.

and you don't want companies cutting corners on safety. and then having people suffer as a result. so, that's why i've actually for a long time bayne strong advocate of ai regulation. it's not fun to be regulated. it's somewhat of a arduous to be regulated. i have a lot of experience with regulated industries because obviously automotive is highly regulated. you could fill this room with all the regulations that are required for a production car, just in the united states. then there's a wheel different set of regulations in europe, china, and the rest of the world. so very familiar with being overseen by a lot of regulators the same thing is true with rockets. you can't just willy-nilly shoot rockets off, not big ones anyway because the faa oversees that.

and then even to get a launch license there are probably half a dozen or more federal agencies that need to approve it. plus state ageses. so it's it's, i've been through so many regulatory situations it's insane. you know, sometimes i, people think i'm some sort of regulatory maverick that sort of defies regulators on a regular basis, but this is actually not the case. so, in, you know, once in a blue moon, rarely, i will disagree with regulators but the vast majority of the time my companies agree with the regulations and comply. so i think we should take this seriously and we should have a regulatory agency i think it needs to start with a group that initially seeks insight into ai, then solicits opinion from industry, and then has proposed rulemaking, and then those

rules, you know, will probably hopefully begrudgingly be accepted by the major players in ai. and, um, i think we'll have a better chance of advanced ai being beneficiary to humanity in that circumstance. >> all regulations start with a perceived danger, planes fall out of the school. >> yes. >> i don't think an average purse planing with ai on his iphone perceives any danger. can you just roughly explain what you think the dangers might be? >> the danger, really, ai is, um, perhaps more dangerous than, say, mismanaged air craft design or production maintenance or bad ka production in the sense that it has the potential, it is a small probability, but it is not

trivial. it has the potential of civilization destruction. there's movies like terminator. the intelligence would be in the data centers. but i think perhaps what you may be alluding to here is that regulations are really only put into effect after something terrible has happened. >> that correct. >> if that the case for ai, and we only put in regulations after something terrible has happened it may be too late to put the regulations in place. they mae be out of control at that point. >> you think that real? it is conceival that ai could take control and reach a point where you couldn't turn it off and it would be making the decisions for people? >> yeah. absolutely. >> absolutely? >> no, that definitely the way things are headed, for sure. i mean, um, things likes say, chat gpt which is based on gp4 from open ai which is a company

i played a critical role in creating, unnorvly -- >> back when it was a non-profit. >> yes. um, i mean, the reason open ai exists at all is that larry paige and i used to be close friend and i would stay at his house in palo alto and i would talk to him late in the night about ai safety. at least my perception was that larry was not taking ai safety seriously enough. and -- >> what did he say about it? >> he really seemed to be one sort of digital superintelligence, basically a digital god, if you will, as soon as possible. >> hey wanted that? >> yes. he's made many public statements ever the years, the whole of google is what's called agi artificial general intelligence or artificial superintelligence. i agree there's great potential for good, but there's also

potential for bad. if you've fat some radical new technology you want to take actions, maximize probably will do good, minimize probably it will do bad things. >> yes. >> it can't just be just go, you know, barreling forward and hope for the best. and then at one point i said what about, you know, we gotta make sure humanity's okay here. [laughter] and, um, and then he called me a spescest. >> did he use that term none yes. there were s i said yes, i'm a specist, you got me. what are you? i'm fully a specist. busted. um. um, that was his last straw. at the time google had a deep mind so google and deep mind had

three quarters of all the ai talent in the world. they obviously had a lot of main and more com computers than anyone else. we're in a uni polar world here where there's one company that has close to a monopoly on ai talent and computers, like scaled computing, and the person who's in charge doesn't seem to care about safety. this is not good. vern then i thought what's. the furthest thing from google would be like a non-profit that is fully open. because google was closed and for-profit. the open ai, an open source, transparent so people know what's going on. >> yes. >> we don't want to have, i'm normally in favor of for-profit. we don't want this to be for-profit maximizing demon from hell that just never stops. >> right. >> so that's how open ai -- >> you want specist incentives

here. >> yes. we want pro-human, the future, good for the humans because we're humans. >> so you can you just, just for people who haven't thought this through and aren't familiar with it, and the cool parts of artificial intelligence are obvious, write your college paper for you, write a limerick about yourself. there's a lot there that fun and useful. but can you be more precise about what's potentially dangerous and scary? like, what could it do? what specifically are you worry about. >> the pen is mightier than the sword. if you have a super intelligent ai that is capable of writing incredibly well and in a way that is very influential, you know, convincing, and is constantly figuring out what is more convincing to people over time.

and then enter social media, for example, twitter, bottles facebook and others, you know, and potentially manipulates public opinion a way that is very bad, um, how would we even know? >> how would so even know? so, to sum up in the words of elon musk for all human history, human bowings have been the smartest beings on the planet. now, human beings have created something that is far smarter than they are. and the consequences of that are impossible to predict. and the people who created it don't care. in fact, as he put it, google founder larry page, a former rend of his, is looking to build a, quote, digital god and believes that anybody who's worried about that is a specst is looking out for humans first. at the end, y said the real problem with ai is not simply

that it will jump the boundaries and become autonomous and you can't turn it off. in the short-term, the problem with ai is that it might control your brain through words. they is the application tat we need to worry about now. particularly going into the next presidential election, the democratic party as usual was ahead of the cub on thistle. they've been thinking about how to harness ai for political power. more on that, next.

>> in the long term, ai may become itogenous and take over the world but in the short term it's being used by politicians to control what you think, to end your independent judgment and erase democracy on the eve of a presidential election. elon musk is very worried about that. he told us about his plan to stop it. >> what's happening is they're training the ai to lie. >> yes. >> it's bad. >> to lie. >> to lie. >> that exactly right and to with hold information should be lie and,, yes, exactly, to either comment on some things, not comment on other things, but not to say what the data actually demands that it say. >> exactly. >> so, um, -- >> how did it get this way? you funded it at the beginning?

what happened? >> that would be ironing. the most ironing outcome is the most likely it seems [laughter] >> that good. >> that such a journey i came up with that one a slight variance out that one the most entertaining is the most likely entertaining as a third party viewer. >> from on high. >> like, you could go see a movie about world war one they're being blown to bit and gassed and you're eating popcorn and having a soda, not so great for the people in the movie. this is the simplest explanation is most likely. join's variant jonah's variant which is likely, and my variant which is the most entertaining as seen by a third party audience which seems to be mostly true. >> you gave them, did you give them a lot? >> i dame up with the name and the concept and pushed, had a number of dins around the bay

area with some of the people, the leading figures in ai. and i helped recruit the initial team. in fact, the guy who way really quite fundamental to the success of open ai was, i put a tremendous amount of effort into creating il you and he changed his mind and decided to go with open ai. if he had not got with open ai, open ai ai would have succeeded yn benintendi to a lot of effort to create this organization as a counter weight to google. and then i tack my eye off the ball i guess and they are now closed source they are obviously for-profit and they're, um, closely allied with microsoft. in effect, microsoft has a very strong say if not directly

controls open ai at this point. you really have an open ai and microsoft situation and then google with the other two sort of heavy weights in this irena. >> so it seems like the world needs a third option. >> yes. so, i think i will create a third option. awl thee starting very late in the game of course. >> can it be done? >> i don't know. we'll see. it's definitely starting late. i will try to create a third option and that third option hopefully does more good than harm. the intention with open ai was obviously to do good, but it's not clear whether it's actually doing good or whether it's -- i can't tell at this point except that i'm worried about the fact that it's being trained to be

politically correct, which is simply another way of being untruthful, saying untruthful things. so that a bad time. the path to ai distaupe you is training ai to be deceptive. i'm into creating a truth gpt, that tries to understand the nature of the universe, this might be the best path to safety in the in that an ai that cares about understanding the universe is unlikely to annihilate humans because we are an interesting part of the universe, hopefully. they would think that. i think, you know, because yeah, likes we, like humanity could decide to hunt down all the chimpanzees and kill them because we're actually glad that they exist. >> yes. >> and we aspire to protect their habitats. >> we feel that way because we have souls and that makes us sentimental and reflective, gives us a moral sense.

longs. can a machine ever have those things? can a machine be sentimental? appreciate beauty? >> well, i mean, we're getting into some, you know, philosophical areas tat are hard to resolve. you know, i take somewhat of a scientific view of things which is that we might have a soul or we might not have a soul. i don't know. it feels like, i feel like i've got some sort of consciousness that exists on a plain that is not the one we observe. >> yes. >> that is certainly how i feel, but it could be an illusion, i don't know. for, um, ai, in terms of understanding beauty, in terms of appreciating beauty and being able to create incredibly beautiful art. >> yes. >> will ai be able to create incredibly beautiful art? it already does. if you see some of the

mid-journey. >> i have. >> stuff, it's incredible. >> it is ninety nine question that -- >> no question that it can create that we perceive as stunning, really. and, um, it's doing sort of still images now but it won't be long before it's doing movies and shorts and, you know, movies are a series of frames with audio. >> at that point, because it can mimic people and voices, any image, it can mimic reality itself. so effectively. >> yeah. >> how could you have a criminal trial? i mean, how could you ever believe that evidence was authentic for example? and i don't mean like in 30 years, i mean like next year. that seems totally disruptive to the way, to all of our institutions. >> i'm not so worried -- i think it's more like our, you know, will humanity control its destiny or not?

will ehave a future that is better than the past or not? >> will humanity control its future or not? and in the mean time, how will this be used to control us. if you've played around with the latest versions of ai, you will learn it prefers to end the world with nuclear armageddon before you use naughty words. elon musk is a strong believer in free speech. so strong, that he purchase twitter, a kam he didn't need and hasn't profited from, as a way to restore free speech to the internet, to bring us back, say, six years to the free country we lived in there. once he bought twitter he discovered it wasn't really a ceilings media application, it was really a tool for global intelligence agencies. he's got detail on that after the break.

hi, i'm jason and i've lost 202 pounds on golo. so when i first started golo, i was expecting to lose around 40 pounds and then i just kept losing weight, and moving and moving and moving in a better direction. with golo and release, you're gonna lose the weight.

[music “this little light of mine”] in the world's poorest places, children with cleft conditions live in darkness and shame. they're shunned, outcast, living in pain. you can reach out and change the life of a suffering child right now. a surgery that take as little as forty five minutes and your act of love can change a child's life forever. please call, scan or go online to give a new smile. thousands of children are waiting.

>> elon musk bought twitter because he used twitter. he was infuriated by twitter's effort to silence people on the internet. that's how strongly he believed in free speech, he paid $44 billion and lost 10s of millions of class doing it. when he took or he discovered twitter was really a tool of the global intel agency agencies to spy on people and admit propaganda. he it is. >> you bought twitter famously, you got a lot of other businesses and a lot going on. >> yes. >> you said you bought it because you believe in speech, free speech. you've had a lot of hassle since you bat it. in retrospect was it worth buying it in. >> it remains to be seen whether this was financially smart. currently, it is not. we just revalued the company at less than half the app price. >> did did you really? >> yes.

>> sorry. >> [chuckle] >> my timing was terrible for because right before advertising plummeted. >> you caught the high water mark i noticed. >> yeah. i must be a real genius here. my timing is amazing. at least twice as much as it should have been bought for. but some things are priceless. so, the, whether losing money or not that was the secondary issue compared to ensuring the strength of democracy and free speech is the bed rock of a functioning democracy. >> yes. >> and the speech needs to be as transparent and truthful as possible so we've got a huge push on twitter to be as truthful as possible. we got this community feature which is great. >> it is great. >> it is awesome. >> i saw it this morning. it was far more honest than the new york times. >> it's great. we put a lot of effort into

ensuring that community notice does not get gamed or have biases. it simply cares about what is the most accurate thing. sometimes truth can be a little bit elusive, but you can still aspire to get closer to it. >> yes. >> so, you know, and i think the effect of community notes is a more powerful than people may realize because once people know they can get noted, you know, community noted on twitter, then they'll think more carefully about what they say. more likely it's basically an encouragement to be more truthful and less deceptive. >> when you jumped into this and you bought it, clearly you understood its importance or you wouldn't have bought it. >> twitter? yes. >> right. it's not the biggest, or the most important of the social media companies, but did you understand the kind of ferocity you'd be facing from power centers in the country? >> i thought there would

probably be some negative reactions. [tucker cackles] >> i'm sure not please with it. but, um, at the end of the day, you know, if the public is happy with it, that's what matters and the public will speak with their actions. i mean, if they find truth, twitter to be useful they will use it more, if they find it to be not useful they will cruise it less. if they find it to be the source of truth, i think they will use it more. there's obviously a lot of organizations tat are used to having sort of ungetterred on twitter they no longer have that. >> the times of their badge this morning and thirty nine call then you called them diarrhea [laughter] >> you did. >> yes. >> yo described the twitter feed as diarrhea. >> twitter -- of diarrhea. >> not literally. >> no. it's a metaphor.

[evil laughter] >> but an accurate one. if you look at new york times twitter feed it's unariable because they tweet every single article, even the ones that are boring, even the ones that don't make it into the paper. so iter are just non-stop, a zillion tweets a day with no, you know, they really should just be saying what are the top tweets? what are the big stories of the day? i don't know, put out, like, 10 or something. you know, some number that's manageable as opposed to right now if you were to follow ny times, @ nytimes twitter you're going to get barraged with hundreds of tweets a day and your whole feed will bow filled with ny times. this is something i would recommend for all publications, which is, f, for your primary feed, only put out your best stuff. i think i know a thing or two about how to use twitter because i was the most interacted with

account on the whole system before the acquisition, before the acquisition closed. i didn't have the most number of followers, but i had the most number of interactions. i clearly know how to use twitter. get peoples attention is limited put what's the most important out there. >> because you and people like you do interact on twitter, it's obviously enormously power powerful in shaping public opinion. it's a where a lot of ideas and 10s are oink baited. >> absolutely. >> it's also a magnet for intel ables around the world. >> yes. >> one of the things we learn after yo started opening the books is they were asserting influence from within twitter. >> it was absurd. >> did you know that going in? >> no. since i've been a' heavy twitter user since 2009, it's sort of like i'm in the matrix. i can see things, do things feel right, do they not feel right, what tweets am i being shown as

recommended? likes i get a feel, like what accounts are making comments? where are the comments eriely similar, and then you look at the account and it's obviously a fake photo and it's just obviously a bot cluster over and over again. i started to get more and more uneasy about the twitter situation. yn started to feel like something's something feels wrong about the platform. it seemed to be just drifting in a, i couldn't place it exactly. just, i had a, it felt like it was drifting in a bad direction. so then i was like, my conversations with the board and management seemed to confirm my intuition about that. basically, these guys do fought care about fixing twitter and i had a bad feeling about where it was headed based on the conversations i had with them.

you know i'll try acquiring it and see if acquiring it is possible. now, i didn't have enough cash to acquire it so i would need support from others, from some of the existing investors, i also would need like a lot of debt so it wasn't clear to me whether it would succeed but i thought i would try. and, uh, ultimately it did succeed. anyway, here we are. >> when you got there, and all of a sudden you own it and all the data on the servers belong to you. >> it belongs to the people in my view, but yes. >> but you can see what they've been doing. >> yes. >> and you can see who'sworking there. you were shocked to find out that various intel agenciens were affecting its operations? >> uh, the degree to which various government agencies had effectively had full access to everything that was getting on in twitter blew my mind. i was not aware of that. >> would that include people's dm's.

>> yes. yes. they were not encrypted. 1 of the things that we're about to release is the ability to encrypt your dm's. >> that's pretty heavy duty because lot of well-known people, reporters talking to their sources, government officials, they're dming each other. >> yes. >> the assumption was obviously incorrect was that that's private but that was being read by various governments? >> yeah. that seems -- yes. >> scary. >> yes. it is. so, like id, we're moving to have the dm's be optionally encrypted. like a lot of dm conversations which are just chatting are friends. >> for sure. >> not important. that's hopefully coming out later this month, but no later than nex month, is the ability to toggle incriminal possession on or off encryption. they could put a gun to my head

and i couldn't, that's the sort of gun to head test if someone put a gun to my head, could i still not see your dm? that should be, that the absolute test. >> yes. >> and that's how it should be, if you want -- >> have you had complaints from various governments about doing this? >> i haven't had direct complaints to me. i've had some indirect complaints. yn think people are a little concerned about complaining to me directly in case i tweet about it. [laughter] you know. they're like uh-oh. they try to be more round about than that. if i got something that was unconstitution constitutional from the u.s. governor, my first thought would be to send a copy of the first amendment and say what part of this are we getting wrong? >> you have a lot of government can tracts. >> what part of this are we get redding wrong, just tell me. >> you're kind of exposed in your other businesses so in case viewers rn following this,

you're not just a journalist taking a stand on behalf of the first amendment, you're a guy with big government contracts giving the finger to the government. do you think, um, twitter will be a central to this presidential campaign as it was in the last several? >> i think it will play a significant role in elections, not just domestically but internationally. the goal of new twitter is to be, um, as fair and even-handed as possible. so not favoring any political ideology, but just being fair to all. >> why doesn't facebook do this? i know that zuckerberg has said, and i take him at face value, that he -- i do, actually, in this way. that he is a kind of old-fashioned liberal who doesn't like to sensor. he has, but you know, why wouldn't a company like that take the stand that you have taken? it's pretty rooted in american traditional political custom,

you know, for free speech. >> my understanding is that zuckerberg spent $400 million in the last election, normally in a get out the vote campaign but fundamentally in support of democrats. is that accurate or is that not accurate? >> that is ack yet t. >> does that sound unbias you to? >> no. so you don't see hope that facebook will approach this as a not aligned arbiter. do you think. dodged from the will go back on twitter? >> that obviously up to him. my job is to, you know, i take freedom of speech very seriously so, it's you know, i didn't vote for donald trump. i actually voted for biden. i'm not saying i'm a huge fan of biden because that would be inaccurate, but you know, we

have difficult choices to make in the presidential elections. it's not -- i would prefer, frankly, that we put someone, just a normal person, as president, a normal person with common sense and whose values are smack in the middle of the country. you know, just center of the normal distribution and i think that they would be great. i think we have, mayy being president not that much fun, to be totally frank. >> public doesn't trust big fews organizations anymore because they're so obviously 5thy and dishonest. they don't trust social media companies because as you just heard facebook is working for the democratic party. we asked elon musk how he's going to make twitter a place that people can plus and how he's going to do that after firing 80% of his staff. that next.

went from losing a job to being in a hotel room because i didn't have that credit. with creditrepair.com, it was, "hey, we can come together. this is what we're going to do," kind of thing. get started at creditrepair.com.

>> the headline here so far is that before elon musk bought it, twitter wasn't so much a social media site as honey trap. 1 of the very first things elon musk did was fire all the spies that'd at twitter then he fired a lot of other people too including the entire hr department and other useless baggage who weren't helping the company. what happened next? we asked him.

>> imagine shrinking the pie for most of the traditional media companies.en and made them more desperate to get clicks, to get attention. it made them, when you know, when they were in sort of desperate state they will then tend to really push headlines that get the most clicks, whether those headlines are accurate or not. so it resulted in i think most people would agree, a lets truthful, a less accurate news. so, because they just got to get a rise out of people. and with. i think it's also increased the negativity of the news. i think humans instincty respond, i think we have a

instuen tal negative bias charge kind of makes sense in that b, s more important to remember where was the lion or where oz the tribe that wants to kill my tribe than where was the bush with berries. one is a permanent negative outcome, the other is well, i might go hungry. meaning there's an asymmetry in sort of involved asymmetry in negative versus positive stuff. and also historically the negative stuff would have been quite proximate. it would have been near, represented a real danger to you as a person if you heard negative news. because historically like a few years ago we're not hearing about what negative things are happening on the other side of the world or on the other side of the country. we're hearing about negative things in our village, things that could actually have a bad

effect on you. whereas now we're hearing about -- the news very often seems to attempt to answer the question what is the worst thing that happened on earth today? and you wonder why you're sad after reading that. >> do you read any legacy media outlets? >> i really get most of my news from twitter at this point. it is the number one news source, i think, in the world at this point. >> what percentage of your staff did you ferret a twitter? 1 of the great business story of the year? >> can i think we're at about 20% of the original size? >> so 80% left. >> yes. a lot of people voluntarily. >> sure. but 80% are gone. >> that's correct. >> how do you run the company with only 20% of the staff? >> it turns out you don't need all that many people to run twitter. >> 80%? that a lot. >> yes. i mean, if you're trying to run some sort of glorified activist

organization with, and you don't care that much about sensorship then you can really let go of a lot of people, it turns out. [maniacal laughter] i had dinner with somebody who runs a dinner recently and heed i'm really inspired by elon, i go the free speech stuff? he goes no, firing the staff stuff. how many other ceo's have come to you to talk about this? >> i spent a lot of testimony at work -- i spent a lot of time at work. they see what actions i've taken. and, um, but i thing we're just at a situation at twitter where it was absurdly overstaffed. so it wasn't, you know, what does it really take to operate twitter? most of all talking about here is have a group text at scale. likes how many people are really needed for that?

if you look at the, say, like, what has been the product development over time with twitter, mayy maybe years versus product improvement, and it's a pretty flat line. vern what are they doing? it took a year to @ an edit button that -- it took a year to add an edit button that doesn't work half the time. it's a comedy session here. we're not making cars. it's very difficult to make cars or to make rockets to orbit. so, you know, the real question is how did it get so absurdly overstaffed? this is insane. so, anyway, that's, it's clearly working. in pack, i think it's working better than ever. we've increased the responsiveness of the system by in some cases 80p. we're trying to make twitter the

most trustworthy place on the internet, the least untrustworthy place on the internet. like i said try to get the truth to the people. a best we can. >> when elon musk took over twitter the company had something called the human rights team. there was no measurable increase in human rights around the world, in fact twitter was doing its best to crush human rights. elon musk in his spare time runs the world's best biggest rocket company. couldn't help but ask him if he sees anything out there in space that's not human, so we did. that next.

if you want to be here... it all starts here. at bass pro shops and cabela's, we have the widest selection of the quality brands you love to get you outdoors. whether you're a seasoned pro or just starting out. our friendly, knowledgeable outfitters will help you find the right products for your next trip. shop with confidence with our low-price guarantee.

plus, club members save even more on great gear with exclusive member pricing. bass pro shops and cabela's, voted america's best outdoor retailer. >> elon musk also runs the world's biggest rocket company so we couldn't resist asking him about aliens, of course we did. >> a lot of people ask me, um, where are the aliens? i think if anyone would know about aliens enuring, it would probably be me. >> right. >> i'm fairly familiar with space stuff. >> tomorrow night his full answer on that. and also his views on why civilizations rise and why they fall. and what we can do about it. elon musk is famously decided to help repopulate the earth himself. we're going to tell him his thinking behind it. or rather he will explain. return fascinating second part of our interview with elon musk

tomorrow night at 8:00 p.m. eastern. the documentary eat bugs. just in case you're wondering what happens to your tax dollars. they're sending it to scientists to create a tasty cockreach. have a good night. have the best night with the ones you love and we'll see you in about 23 hours. >> welcome to monitor hannity, we begin with a fox news alert and we are back with a live audience in few york city. the only people that are normal 9 york inn. in just a moment, mayhem thin windy city of, shooting, murder, assault, anarchy in the streets of our entire country, almost. a great american city is dying, literally, right before our eyes. it is not the only city now on the verge of destruction. shocking video straight ahead. house speaker kevin mccarthy will join us with detail