This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," January 31, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Good evening and welcome to "Tucker Carlson Tonight." With America's institutions under relentless attack successfully. In some cases, they're crumbling, it is a moment when it's worth thinking through what we would like to save from the ashes. When the revolution finally ends, and it will, what do we hope to have left?
In other words, what are our best traditions? There are a lot of them. But at the very top of that list is equality under the law. Equality is the most basic of all-American ideals. It's the very first principle articulated in the Declaration of Independence. It's why the founders broke with England.
In America, they said all citizens will be subject to the same rules, the same standards, the same penalties. Rich or poor, black or white, all of us are equal under the law. That's the promise. Of course, it's easier to explain than it is to achieve, but we have tried hard through the centuries and we should be proud of that.
Yet, some in power are no longer trying at all. Equality, the thing that we have fought to keep for hundreds of years is slipping away. The Jeffrey Epstein case is just the latest example of that.
Last night, dozens of unsealed court documents from the Epstein case emerged online, some of them we'd seen before; others we hadn't. They paint collectively a picture of a justice system in which the rich and well- connected can do virtually whatever they want without penalty.
In one sworn deposition, a woman called Virginia Giuffre claims that Epstein and others including Prince Andrew of England and Attorney Alan Dershowitz sexually abused her when she was a minor.
Giuffre says an F.B.I. agent told her at the agency though they knew, didn't plan to do anything about it. Epstein's case, she claims he said wasn't going anywhere because of quote, "the chain of command." That's her claim.
The documents then describe what appears to be a remarkable abuse of power. Epstein's accusers say that Alan Dershowitz and Prince Andrew helped Epstein beat Federal charges for sex crimes in 2008. They allege that Dershowitz crafted the immunity agreement so that he himself would not face criminal prosecution.
Dershowitz hotly denies all of this in detail. He joins us in a moment to speak for himself as he can.
Alex Acosta though will not be joining us tonight. We wish he would. He is the former Labor Secretary who at the time was a Federal prosecutor. Acosta is the one who agreed to the Epstein deal. When asked why he let a sex abuser skate, Acosta reportedly said this quote, "I was told Epstein belonged to Intelligence and to leave it alone."
Well, what exactly does that mean? What Intelligence service did Jeffrey Epstein work for, if any? And why did our government allow him to sexually abuse girls? We deserve answers to those questions. We should be demanding them. But so far no one is answering them. Epstein can't tell us obviously, he is dead.
And the media strangely doesn't seem very interested in pressing to find out. It's possible that's because Epstein was close to a remarkable number of prominent Democratic politicians.
The new documents suggested former President Bill Clinton, for example, visited Epstein's private island with two young girls. Giuffre claims that Epstein made her have sex with former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and former U.S. Senator George Mitchell and a famous M.I.T. scientist and others.
Is any of that true? Well, we don't know if it's true. Ghislaine Maxwell probably does know. She is in custody right now. She is set to go on trial. Will she explain what happened and why?
It doesn't look promising. Her lawyers fought the release of these documents. In just a minute, we will talk to Alan Dershowitz about the accusations against him and the case in general.
But first tonight, Monica Lindstrom is a former Federal prosecutor. She's been following the story very closely and we're happy to have her on tonight.
Monica, thanks so much for coming on. How would you summarize what we have just learned?
MONICA LINDSTROM, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, it's very interesting because it's basically a nail in the coffin for Maxwell. If this victim -- alleged victim, right, is proven to be very credible and believable. She is essentially saying that not only Epstein, but Maxwell was just as bad as Epstein.
In fact, Maxwell does even worse because she is the one that brought her into this. She is the one that taught her how to give these massages and how to act towards these men and continue to do these things with Epstein.
So it's very, very bad for Maxwell and you can understand why Maxwell's attorneys are fighting against unsealing these documents.
LINDSTROM: Number one, because they hurt her, but they're also thinking, wait a minute. This was a settlement that happened several years ago. Why are we dealing with this again now?
CARLSON: So, what I don't understand is why she came back to the United States. She has three foreign passports. She has connection. She has a great deal of money. In fact, in denying her bail, the authorities made this point.
She knew she was wanted here, but she came back anyway and spent a million dollars in a house in New Hampshire. That doesn't make any sense at all. Why do you think she did that?
LINDSTROM: Well, one of them could be that she believes that she is innocent. She believes that she did not do anything wrong, so she has nothing to hide. It could also be the fact that she got away allegedly with a lot of things, right, with Epstein, and so maybe her ego is so big that she thinks she is untouchable, right?
Allegedly, there's a lot of people, a lot of higher up in the government or used to be in the government that would protect her so she is really not worried about anything happening. That could be the other reason why she came back -- ego.
CARLSON: What if she has a deal in progress with prosecutors to testify against somebody else, and she came back here to effectively surrender herself, do you think that's possible? Do you see any evidence of that?
LINDSTROM: I think it's possible and the evidence we see from these unsealed documents, for example, that people like Bill Clinton and other high-ranking officials in this kind of bubble of what we're dealing with, right? So there's evidence that she was somehow connected.
Now, if I was a prosecutor, I'd want to protect her. I wouldn't want her coming back here if she was going to testify and give additional information about other people. I would want to keep her safe because the reality is, she is in jail right now. Who knows what's going to happen to her? Think about what happened to Epstein.
CARLSON: Right. No, it's -- that is an obvious peril. I'm sure she thinks about that.
CARLSON: Thanks so much for joining us tonight. I appreciate it.
LINDSTROM: Thank you.
CARLSON: Well, as we told you, Professor Alan Dershowitz was named repeatedly in the documents released Thursday night. He has been accused by at least one person having sex with an underage minor on several occasions. He strongly, vehemently denies these charges.
Dershowitz helped broker the deal -- the immunity deal -- between Epstein and the Federal government. Epstein's accusers claim that Dershowitz crafted that deal to give himself immunity. Again, we're merely repeating the claims of others.
Alan Dershowitz has been on the show many times. As you know, he wrote the book, "Guilt by Association" and we're happy to have him on tonight. Professor, thanks so much for coming on. I appreciate it.
ALAN DERSHOWITZ, ATTORNEY AND AUTHOR: Well, thanks. The book is "Guilt by Accusation."
CARLSON: "Guilt by Accusation." Right.
DERSHOWITZ: Right, and it's available from Kindle. Look, I agree with you, Tucker. I think there ought to be a very extensive investigation. I brought this case to the F.B.I. I went to the U.S. Attorney's Office. I went to the District Attorney.
I wrote an op-ed piece for "The Wall Street Journal" saying F.B.I., please investigate me. I have been asking for an investigation from day one.
I wanted all of this material unsealed. It's Giuffre, my accuser who tried to get everything redacted, everything unsealed. She deep sixed tapes, and she deep sixed e-mails. She deep sixed a manuscript -- all of which prove she never met me in her own words.
The e-mails, she say between her and a friend, why don't you name Dershowitz in your book? He is famous. We know there's no proof he did anything wrong, but name him in your book. Then she names me in my book -- as somebody -- in her book, as somebody she did not have sex.
She said she had sex with George Mitchell. She said she had sex with some of the other people. But she explicitly said she saw me once talking to Epstein and did not have sex with me.
Her own lawyers admit that she made up stories about prominent people. Her own lawyer, David Boies is on tape, saying she is wrong, simply wrong to accuse me. That it was impossible that I could have been in the places she said she saw me. So the evidence that she is lying about me is overwhelming.
CARLSON: Let me ask you about those places. So in 2003, "Vanity Fair," the magazine prepared a piece about Jeffrey Epstein having sex with underage girls. They were later bullied into not running those accusations.
But the point is, a glossy magazine in New York had heard them. They were known. They were out there. You were friends with Jeffrey Epstein. You went to his home in New York, his home in Palm Beach. You went to his island, so called Pedo Island. You flew in his plane many times. How did you not know?
DERSHOWITZ: Of course, I didn't know. I first met him through the Lady Rothschild, a very prominent woman. She told me he was very, very charitable to Harvard. I went to the island with my wife and my daughter when it was not yet called -- he just bought it.
I was at his home mostly when I was his lawyer. I was not a close personal friend. He lived his private life very privately. President of Harvard, the Provost of Harvard. Nobel Prize winners all had the same kind of academic relationship with Epstein that I did.
As soon as I found out that he was accused, my relationship with him totally changed. It was mostly attorney-client relationship and I charged him for pay.
CARLSON: May I ask -- may I just interrupt you there.
DERSHOWITZ: Say again?
CARLSON: Right. But when you were on Pedo Island or at his place when you borrowed his place in Palm Beach or house in New York.
DERSHOWITZ: With my grandchildren.
CARLSON: Okay, but every picture I've ever seen of his properties, you see young women around. Were there no young women when you were on this plane or in any of these properties? None?
DERSHOWITZ: Absolutely not. I never saw him in the presence of a young woman. When I was there with my children and grandchildren, there was a housekeeper and the housekeeper's wife. That's it. Nobody else was there. There were no pictures. I never saw him in the presence of a young woman. I never saw him the presence of an underage woman, if I had, I would have turned him in immediately. My wife never saw him in the presence of a young woman.
The only time I was with him was in academic situations, when I was representing him as a lawyer. Yes, he lent me his house because my granddaughter was in a soccer tournament, but it was empty. It was only the housekeeper, and it was just a friendly gesture to lend me his house.
If I knew that anything had gone on in that house, improper, you think I would have brought my grandchildren? My children in that house?
CARLSON: Well, but you continued -- no look, I'm not accusing you of anything. I'm just -- I am asking the obvious questions. "Vanity Fair" knew, but you didn't know.
Let me ask you though, in the plea, I mean, you went on to represent him to get him off the hook.
CARLSON: You are accused of writing an agreement that exempted yourself. We do know that the agreement exemplary --
DERSHOWITZ: Well, let me be very clear.
CARLSON: Let me finish.
DERSHOWITZ: Okay. Right.
CARLSON: The agreement exempted, and I'm quoting, "potential co- conspirators." Potential co-conspirators.
CARLSON: You're saying that didn't apply to you. Why would the Federal government agree to something like that? I'm honestly confused.
DERSHOWITZ: Well, first of all, let me be very clear, I hereby waive any possible immunity. I would never accept immunity. I didn't do anything wrong. Why would I accept immunity?
CARLSON: I don't you can unilaterally do that.
DERSHOWITZ: I did not draft that provision. It was drafted by another lawyer. I didn't even know that provision was part of the agreement. It never applied for me. No lawyer on the prosecution side would ever allow anybody who was suspected.
You mentioned in the beginning, if she went to the F.B.I. Yes, she went to the F.B.I. and she told me who she had sex with. She did not mention me.
She never mentioned me in her interviews with her lawyers, with the F.B.I. But writing in her book --
CARLSON: And I am not claiming that -- I am not claiming otherwise, right.
DERSHOWITZ: The first time she mentioned me was when she met her lawyers who told her she would make a lot of money by falsely accusing me.
CARLSON: Okay. No, and you've definitely impugned her motives and character and we will just let the viewers decide. And I think you make a really strong case.
But I want to get to your defense of Jeffrey Epstein. You did get him off the hook, and you did so with a lot of other prominent people. Were you concerned -- I mean, so the accusations were clearly true. You knew that at the time. Did you have moral qualms about it --
DERSHOWITZ: We knew he was pleading guilty.
CARLSON: And why do you think the Feds went along with this? It just doesn't make sense.
DERSHOWITZ: Well, ask the Feds.
CARLSON: What would you think? You were there.
DERSHOWITZ: It's exactly why I think they went along with it.
DERSHOWITZ: We have very, very strong Federal defense. It doesn't matter how many young women he may have had sex with in Palm Beach, the government had to prove that he transported them in interstate commerce and they couldn't do that.
They had a very weak Federal case and a very strong state case. So, the deal we arrived at was he would plead to a state charge, serve 18 months and would not plead to the Federal charge. That's very common.
The job of the criminal defense lawyer is to get the best deal he can for his client. The job of the prosecutor is to do justice. The job for the judge is to make sure that justice is done.
DERSHOWITZ: But the job of the defense lawyer is to defend the client ...
CARLSON: Oh, I know.
DERSHOWITZ: ... to the best of his ability in all ethical ways. I did that. I'm proud of it. I will continue to do that. I've done it for 55 years. That my job.
Would anybody wants a lawyer who would not defend them zealously? Of course not.
CARLSON: So, let me ask you a bit -- just -- and I don't understand the law around this, but I know that you do. The claim is that once that immunity deal was reached, the victims alleged real -- people making the accusations had a right under Federal law to know the outcome and they weren't told the outcome, and that's a violation of Federal law. Is that true?
DERSHOWITZ: No, that's being debated. The District Court found one way, the Court of Appeals found another way. That's being litigated. Let it be litigated. That was not my job.
As a criminal defense lawyer, my job was to get the best deal. Look, if I had gotten him acquitted and had him walk completely, I would have done an even better job. You know, Jeffrey Epstein almost fired me. He wouldn't pay me my fee, because he didn't think I had done a good enough job that he had to serve 18 months and register as a sex offender. He thought I did a terrible job.
I think I did a pretty good job. But that's for people to judge. But that's what a defense attorney is supposed to do, and we're not supposed to throw the case.
CARLSON: I'm certainly not suggesting that you should have. Since you knew him very well, I mean, that's beyond dispute.
DERSHOWITZ: I didn't know him all that well. I knew him as an academic acquaintance, yes.
I never met his mother. I never met his brother. I didn't know what he was doing in life, I never had.
CARLSON: When you stay at people's houses, look, I am not attacking you. I think it's fair to say -- I mean, you know, people who come and stay in my three houses, if I had three houses would know me fairly well.
DERSHOWITZ: Well, he offered the house because nobody was there.
CARLSON: Do you think he was murdered? Do you think he was murdered?
DERSHOWITZ: No, I think he committed suicide, but I think he may have paid off guards to allow him to commit suicide. It seems to be very difficult if he would have been allowed, the video cameras off, the cellmate taken out of the cell.
I wouldn't put it beyond him to have paid guards to close their eyes. I don't think he could bear the possibility of having to spend the rest of his life in jail.
CARLSON: Right. Was he -- so Alex Acosta suggested in the vetting before his confirmation as a Cabinet Secretary that he was told by the Feds that Jeffrey Epstein was working for an Intelligence service or many claims to that effect?
Did you ever hear anything about that in your defense of him? Do you believe it's true? And if so, which agency?
DERSHOWITZ: I don't believe it's true. If it was true, he would have told me that and asked me to use it for his benefit, and I would have used it for his benefit. I've had cases where I've defended people who have had some intelligence contact.
He never told me about that. I don't think he had any -- he certainly had no connection to the Israeli Mossad. He certainly had no connection with the C.I.A., so I can't believe that he had any Intelligence connection.
But it's not beyond the realm of possibility, but he never told me about that. Lawyers don't often learn things about their client. Remember, when he pleaded guilty, it was only to two charges, one to soliciting an underage prostitute who was 17 and a half, and the other was soliciting an overage prostitute.
We were not aware of all of these other allegations at the time. That's why we were able to get the deal we got.
But look, the most important point is this woman, Giuffre, who was at the center of all these accusations. She has accused everybody in his Rolodex.
DERSHOWITZ: It must be investigated.
DERSHOWITZ: We must look into her background. She has accused Al Gore after boarding with Epstein on his island. They never even met Al Gore.
DERSHOWITZ: Al Gore didn't know them. She was lying through her teeth and the media has an obligation to investigate that.
CARLSON: I understand. Well -- right. I mean, considering a former President -- a former president was on Epstein's island. I think we can say that Bill Clinton, it seems clear.
DERSHOWITZ: No, no, no.
CARLSON: He was never on the island.
DERSHOWITZ: Let me tell you -- the former head of the F.B.I. did a thorough investigation. He went to the Secret Service. The Secret Service told us there is no evidence that he was ever on the island. He has categorically denied it.
Her story is so fake. Her story is that Ghislaine Maxwell flew him on her helicopter where she had just gotten the license with Secret Servicemen on board and flew Bill Clinton to the island where he sat next to two under age young girls. Totally false story. The Secret Service -- but that. Everything this woman has said is false. Everything is rebutted but the Secret --
CARLSON: Wait, wait, wait. I'm sorry. Look. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm not. I would just say two things -- hold on -- the Secret Service is not required to disclose the manifest or the facts of it. They can say whatever they want, A.
B. Bill Clinton said he was never on the guy's plane and that turned out to be a lie. We know from the manifest.
DERSHOWITZ: No, no, no. He admitted he was on his plane. Look, I'm not here to defend Bill Clinton.
CARLSON: He has now.
DERSHOWITZ: Bill Clinton was on his plane numerous times. I was on his plane. I never flew to his island on his plane. I was on his island once with my wife and my daughter when he just bought the island along with Professor Michael Porter at Harvard, his wife, family.
Look, let me be very clear. I have had sex with one woman since the day I met Jeffrey Epstein. I have done nothing wrong. I am being falsely accused.
This woman has made up stories about so many people. It's time for the media to investigate this woman. I call for an F.B.I. investigation. I agree with what you said in the beginning. Let's have a thorough investigation. I wanted all these records to come out. I want all the rest of the records to come out. I want everything to be made public because I have nothing to hide.
I hope we are clear with that.
CARLSON: You are your own best defense lawyer. I would say that. I would definitely say that.
DERSHOWITZ: I am telling the truth. That's more important than being a defense lawyer and I have the evidence to prove it.
DERSHOWITZ: And she has not a scintilla of evidence beyond her own word, which is worthless because she has such a long history of lying. She is a serial liar who does it for money, and she is continuing to do it.
And the media has been taken in by her that the time has come to investigate me and her.
CARLSON: Got it.
DERSHOWITZ: I call for the F.B.I. to do that. I hope they will. CARLSON: Got it. Professor, thank you. I appreciate you coming on tonight.
DERSHOWITZ: My pleasure. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to tell the truth to your viewers. Thank you.
CARLSON: Well, absolutely.
DERSHOWITZ: I appreciate it.
CARLSON: I always want people to speak in their own defense. Great to see you.
Anthony Fauci has ordered the rest of us to wear masks. He has helped shut down the economy, put millions out of work and completely transformed our lifestyles.
But you know what he is not concerned about, thousands of people rubbing up against each other in the street and shouting leftwing slogans. He is not going to judge that. Meanwhile, put on your goggles, buddy.
Plus, every summer, there's hysteria in the media about sharks. You think we're above it? No. No, we're not. A great white attack off the coast of Maine. We'll have the very latest on that.
CARLSON: Anthony Fauci is likely the most powerful physician in the history of this country. He is one of the forces behind the mass quarantines that tanked the economy and put millions out of work. He says it's worth it, though, because the threat is just so profound.
So profound, so imminent, that you should wear goggles and stop shaking hands in the name of science. So, it's interesting in light of that the one thing that Anthony Fauci doesn't seem concerned about at all are the riots going on, the mass protests where thousands of people are crowded in together, touching each other without goggles.
Fauci was asked about this on Capitol Hill today. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): Should we limit the protesting?
DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: I'm not sure what you mean -- should -- how do we say limit the protesting?
JORDAN: Should the government limit the protesting?
FAUCI: I don't think that's relevant to --
JORDAN: Well, you just said, if it increases the spread of the virus, I'm just asking should we limit it?
FAUCI: Well, I'm not in a position to determine what the government can do in a forceful way.
JORDAN: Well, you make all kinds of recommendations. You make comments on dating, on baseball, and everything you can imagine. I'm just asking you -- you just said, protesting increases the spread, I'm just asking, should we try to limit the protests?
FAUCI: No, I think I would leave that to people who have more of a position to do that. I'm just making a statement. That's a broad statement that avoid crowds of any type no matter where you are.
JORDAN: No limit to protests, but, boy, you can't go to church on Sunday.
FAUCI: I don't know how many times I can answer that. I'm not going to opine on limiting anything. I'm just going to tell you --
JORDAN: You've opined on a lot of things, Dr. Fauci.
FAUCI: Yes, but I --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Wow. Finally, a Member of Congress capable of asking a follow-up question, and he is absolutely right. There's nothing that Dr. Anthony Fauci won't opine on as long as it doesn't offend the popular, the fashionable left.
Sex with strangers online, no problem. Shaking hands, bad. Every day for the past several months virtually, Dr. Fauci has advocated for a new coronavirus policy. Here he is on tape doing it earlier this month.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FAUCI: I can say as a public health official that I would urge the leaders, the local political and other leaders in states and cities and towns to be as forceful as possible in getting your citizenry to wear masks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Oh, so he is willing to weigh in on specific responses. Government response -- what a fraud this guy is. Put on your mask. Get off your powerboat. Put on some goggles. Do it for public health.
And by the way, the consequences don't matter. They're just inconveniences, he explained.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FAUCI: I know, it is difficult. But we're having a lot of suffering and a lot of death. This is inconvenient from an economic and a personal standpoint, but we just have to do it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Oh, we just have to do it. Really? Fauci is 79. But maybe if he had like 22-year-old kids who are trying to make their way in this world in an economy that is headed down the tubes, thanks largely to his recommendations, he would feel differently.
It's not merely an inconvenience when your economy collapses, it's the end of the American dream. That's not a small thing. Maybe it's worth it. Maybe it's not.
But if it is, then you probably shouldn't take a pass on the question, are protests and riots okay? Unless you're a total fraud, like a complete fraud.
Buck Sexton has been watching all of this very carefully. He hosts "The Buck Sexton Show" and we're always happy to have him on. Now look, Buck, especially in the case of Fauci who we've interviewed, always seem like a nice guy to me, not a stupid guy, no impressive bio and all of that, but you want to believe that he is making recommendations purely on the basis of the science.
If he was, don't you think he would have said something about the protests?
BUCK SEXTON, FORMER NYPD INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, absolutely. We've known all along that Fauci is a bureaucrat, but today, he really sounded like a Democrat and that makes people really uncomfortable. Because put aside for a moment, you know, anything else you know, if you're Dr. Fauci and you get the opportunity to tell people if you're as concerned as he clearly is about this virus, where he's willing to do all of those things you've said, push for lockdowns, push for mandatory masking.
And we've gone from no masks, to suggested masks, to mandatory masks in the blink of an eye. And now, he has an opportunity to tell everybody, look, no mass gatherings, and yes, that includes protests right now and he won't touch it. It couldn't be any more clear that this is exactly the same bias that we saw from the beginning of this from public health officials who by the way, in some cases, some of the experts you see going on TV, were saying, oh, it's good for public health that there are these protests, because Black Lives Matter. That's what they were saying.
CARLSON: So in Northwest D.C., which may be the most democratic neighborhood in the United States, literally, there are signs and I'm quoting, that say, "Thank you, Dr. Fauci." He is a political figure now, it seems to me.
SEXTON: Well, this continues with a trend where the left, the Democratic Party elevates any government figure that they find useful for bashing Trump, right? So we're supposed to believe, you know, Federal agents are Storm Troopers. They're bad right now because of Democrats.
But Dr. Fauci, we call him St. Fauci in some quarters cannot be questioned, and I would just want to know, how is it that Fauci also doesn't weigh in on all the people at John Lewis's funeral yesterday in Georgia, going back to D.C.
Tucker, they're supposed to go into quarantine for two weeks, aren't they? I don't think anyone believes that that's going to happen because rules are for little people.
CARLSON: That's totally right. The death of equality and we see it at John Lewis's funeral. Oh, the irony.
Buck Sexton, great to see you. Thank you so much.
SEXTON: Thanks, Tucker.
CARLSON: So the governments of all 50 states have issued warnings about mysterious seeds that have arrived in the mail from China, one of the weirdest stories of the year, but potentially a really significant story. We'll have to details on it just ahead.
CARLSON: Yesterday, CNN aired a 16-minute interview with the Commissioner of the NBA, Adam Silver. In cable news time, that's eternity and they needed it because there's a lot to discuss with Silver, not least the NBA's long and very close relationship with the communist government of China, the government that's sending minorities to reeducation camps, and facilitating slave labor.
But those questions never got asked. Instead, a cascade of softballs. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Commissioner, I assume you would cancel the NBA season, Adam, if that was the right -- that would be the right thing to do if it involved the player's health and safety and other personnel, coaches, et cetera. You would just end the season, right?
What will it be like watching these games on TV to the cause of racial justice in our country?
How do you see the NBA's role and your role as Commissioner when it comes to supporting those players?
How do you think whoever wins the NBA title should be remembered?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Wow. How to powerful people get a pass from the media? Simple. By being woke. The NBA painted Black Lives Matter on its courts. It allows its players to kneel for the National Anthem giving the finger to the country that made this sport possible.
Burgess Owens never kneeled when he was a professional athlete. He joins us tonight to respond to all of this. Mr. Owens, thanks so much for coming on. So what do you make of it?
BURGESS OWENS, FORMER NFL PLAYER: Thank you, Tucker.
CARLSON: A basketball league that has taken an explicit and partisan political position?
OWENS: Well, this is why I'm running, Tucker. What we need to do is make sure we understand who we're dealing with. We are talking about the radical left. It is more than Antifa. It's more than the socialists in the Democratic legislation.
It's actually the corporate cowards that hide behind the misery of others to give them a way to get to their bottom line. Their bottom line is profits and power.
CARLSON: That's right.
OWENS: With the NBA, it is a $1.5 billion contract and they know that if they are going to get that, they have to make sure that if they cause havoc here and get a President elected that would make them make sure to get back to China. It's all about -- it's all about November 2020 when it comes down to Democrats, particularly leaders, particularly these radical leftists who care less about We, the People.
They don't care about the blacks in the black community, and they don't care about the Chinese people that are being oppressed in China with slavery and child labor and the whole bit.
So, no, these people are really -- they're about themselves. It is power and profitability. NBA, NFL, Nike -- they all fit the same no vote. They care less about We, the People.
CARLSON: Corporate cowards hiding behind the suffering of others. I don't think I've ever heard it better than you just put it. Quickly if you don't mind, what do you think this is doing to the sport itself?
OWENS: It is dividing us. The sports has always been used to bring us together. That's the power of sports and our flag and our National Anthem. It brings us together.
These folks do not care about dividing. They do not care about destroying the game, the sport, as long as they can get their profitability. If they get Biden in there, they are in to China. They are in to their money and they can care less about the rest of the country.
So keep in mind, these folks, these are the worst of Americans because they care more about their profitability, their growth and their power again than they care about, We, the People.
So they're destroying the game. They're destroying cities because they want to get Biden elected in 2020.
CARLSON: I wish I could disagree with you. Burgess Owens, thanks so much for coming on tonight. I really appreciate it.
OWENS: Thank you. Thank you, Tucker.
CARLSON: Well, over the decades, we've received really a torrent of brightly colored plastic crap from China, but that's not all they've sent us. They've sent us contaminated dog food, lead-infused toys, fentanyl enough to kill hundreds of thousands of Americans.
Now, apparently they're sending mysterious seeds. They have arrived in cities all over the country unsolicited from China. What are they exactly? It's a very weird story.
Gordon Chang thinks he knows what's behind it. He's the author of the book, "The Coming Collapse of China" and a Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute. We're happy to have him on tonight.
Gordon, thanks so much for coming on. So, Americans are receiving unsolicited seeds from China. Officials in all 50 states are upset. What is this?
GORDON CHANG, SENIOR FELLOW, GATESTONE INSTITUTE: I think that China is testing the response of U.S. officials to what in the future could be a horrible biological weapons attack. They're seeing how we react.
Now, these seeds, even if they are, let's say harmless are invasive species and that means that they can damage agriculture. They can cause harm to livestock. And they, of course can ruin the environment.
And so even if this were, let's say a brushing attempt, which is what some people say, in other words, and attempt to generate online reviews that are fake, this can cause real harm to the U.S.
And by the way, it's not just the U.S., the U.K., Taiwan, Canada, other countries have also been the subject of these unsolicited packages of seeds and soil.
CARLSON: So I guess the coronavirus wasn't enough. This does seem like a very aggressive act. Why would the Chinese government want to provoke the United States by doing something like this?
CHANG: I think that they see that this is asymmetric warfare. That it's hard to identify the malevolence behind it. We know that China's People's Liberation Army in 1999 wrote that book, "Unrestricted Warfare: China's Plan to Destroy the United States." And they talked about biological attacks in that book.
Probably, we are seeing them actually execute on part of that strategy. Right after the coronavirus, as you point out, Tucker, because China took steps in December and January to deliberately spread the disease beyond China's borders.
CARLSON: It's amazing. It's an amazing story. It almost doesn't sound real, but it is real. Gordon Chang, thank you so much.
CHANG: Thanks, Tucker.
CARLSON: By the way, ask yourself, the news organizations that dominate our media: CNN, MSNBC, "The New York Times," "The Washington Post," who do they spend more time attacking? The Chinese government or the United States? It's not even close, is it? The United States.
They attack the United States every single day and they give China a pass. What does that tell you? It tells you a lot.
Well, up ahead, we have a new scandal for Ilhan Omar. There have been many. In this one, apparently, she has been enriching her husband with campaign contributions. Is that even legal? We'll investigate it, next.
CARLSON: As Ilhan Omar's congressional district was burning because of riots, Omar herself was busy funneling $600,000.00 of campaign contributions to her husband's consulting firm.
Scott Johnson is writer based in Minneapolis. He writes for Power Line, always happy to have him on the show. Scott, thanks so much for coming on.
Please explain how this apparent scam worked.
SCOTT JOHNSON, POWER LINE BLOG: Well, it's working. It has worked for the past two years more. I'd say it has become a scam since the two of them married this past March. Ilhan Omar married her political consultant and fundraiser who is also her biggest vendor this past March.
And the $600,000.00 number that you refer to is what she has spent with her campaign funds just in the past three weeks, as things are ramping up to a Democratic primary that's very competitive in her district on August 11th.
So she spent $600,000.00 on her husband's political consulting firm. That money is going to buy digital and other media advertising. But his firm, of course, takes a commission on that.
So congressmen aren't supposed to be able to enrich themselves or convert campaign funds to their own use. But unlike other scandals she has been involved in, I would say, this one seems to be legal.
CARLSON: I mean, this is someone who clearly married her own brother in an immigration scam and got away with it. And now, I mean, it is clear to me, and you're really the primary driver behind uncovering all of that. How can she get away with this? I don't understand it.
JOHNSON: Well, she seems to be writing new chapters in scandal management, but you know, with respect to her brother and that whole story, the lack of serious media interest I would say has served to protect her.
Anyone who has looked into it, she accuses of multiple instances of bigotry, given her being a woman and a Muslim and so on. So that served as a great shield for many of her scandals.
CARLSON: But just to be clear, because I think you were an attorney, too. You're not allowed to take campaign funds and shovel them to your own family. Right? That would be a violation of the law.
JOHNSON: Tucker, you may recall that Senator Thomas died, the father of --
CARLSON: Oh, very well.
JOHNSON: Senator Christopher Dodd back in the 60s was censured by the United States Senate for converting campaign funds to his personal use.
No, they aren't supposed to be able to do that, I think, maybe until they are on their way out the door. But there's no question but that campaign funds are ending up in what's now their joint bank account.
CARLSON: It's unbelievable. I would say in defense of the Dodds, father and son, at least I don't think they despised the country that made their success possible than Ilhan Omar does.
Scott Johnson, great to see you tonight. Thank you for that report.
JOHNSON: Thanks so much for having me on, Tucker.
CARLSON: So we don't want to whip up hysteria. There's certainly enough of it in this country. But we've got to be honest with you, there are murder hornets on the West Coast. There is a hurricane now hurtling toward Florida, and there was a shark attack off the coast of Maine. We're going to get in to the last tragedy next. It's shark night.
CARLSON: Earlier this week, a woman swimming off the coast of Maine, off Harpswell was killed by a great white shark. Numbers of shark sightings appear to be rising across the East Coast. Hempstead, New York for example, started shark patrols because they've seen so many there.
Jeremiah Sullivan knows a lot about sharks. He's a marine biologist, creator of "Shark Suit." He says he's been bitten by sharks countless times. He joins us tonight from San Diego.
Jeremiah, thanks so much for coming on. Obviously, you're not afraid of shark bites. Should the rest of us be?
JEREMIAH SULLIVAN, MARINE BIOLOGIST: Well, yes, yes. If you do get bit, you don't want that to happen, trust me. But there are plenty of ways to try and limit or restrict that kind of event happening in your life. It's tragic about what happened in Maine, but not entirely unexpected.
CARLSON: Why do you say that?
SULLIVAN: Well, you know, there have been increases in the numbers of white sharks that you're seeing up there. Now, mind you, they've been around the whole time. But there were some things that have happened, not just the East Coast, but the West Coast as well with the Marine Mammal Protection Act with the enactment of that some years ago.
The marine mammals, the gray seals, in this case up in your neck of the woods were heavily depleted. There are multiple reasons for that. They always are going to follow the food, but fishermen weren't happy with them, obviously, because they were competing for fish.
SULLIVAN: And large predators need the prey, so they're going to be moving around and following prey wherever they can find it.
In addition to all these other shifts that have been happening globally with the environment, water temperatures, the predator-prey relationships, all of that has been changing. So we're seeing an expansion of the localities in which you're seeing higher numbers of some of these apex predators, along with their preferred prey species, which are not humans, by the way.
CARLSON: So there was speculation because the woman was wearing a wetsuit that she was mistaken for a seal by the shark, would you recommend against black wetsuits? Sincere question.
SULLIVAN: You know, I approach this in a locality kind of way. In places like the Northeast where the preferred prey species of these large sharks are, you know, the large seals, I would not want to wear anything that resembles in any way what they are looking for.
SULLIVAN: So I would prefer something that if you're down, if you're down underwater looking up, what you're seeing is a silhouette meaning that the lower side of that thing is going to appear black to whatever is down below, right? You won't see the light from above.
If I had my druthers, I would be wearing a lighter colored suit that would distinguish me from the prey in that area. And unfortunately, that's not that that kind of thing because of color, you know, I love the colors and black wetsuits your course famous for -- you know, among the divers and film people.
SULLIVAN: Go ahead.
CARLSON: So bottom line, no wetsuit.
SULLIVAN: No, just don't wear a black wetsuit in areas that white sharks are hunting. That would be my -- that'd be my wisest, wisest recommendation, number one.
Number two, if there are predators around like that, obviously you don't want to be in the water with these guys, particularly if you're in an area that they -- that is within range of their hunting territories.
SULLIVAN: Well, no, I wouldn't do that if I wasn't fully prepared. No.
CARLSON: I think that's wise. That's wise advice. Jeremiah Sullivan, it's great to have you on tonight and our nod to Shark Week. Thank you very much.
We're out of time. Have the best weekend.
We will see you Monday. Here's Hannity.
Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of Fox News Network, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.