Are progressive billionaires exploiting their workers?

This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," February 8, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Good evening and welcome to “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” We expected a slow news output this evening. It's Friday, but that's not what happened. There's a torrent of it.

If you are watching this from a restaurant, have the bartender turn up the volume, it's worth it. First, we have new security footage that shows details of the FBI's pre-dawn raid on Roger Stone's house in South Florida. Three separate cameras captured all of it. From the moment that Robert Mueller's PR team from CNN arrived with a tripod to Roger Stone's arrest at gunpoint. You won't believe the T-shirt Stone was wearing when they cuffed him. We're staying for that.

And then lunatics in the Congress have a brand new plan to destroy our economy and drive America into darkness and poverty, it's called the Green New Deal and we will talk to one of its supporters in just a second. Also the media are supposed to hold the powerful to account, that's what they always tell you. If that's true why are they sucking up to the world's richest man, Jeff Bezos? Why are they calling him Bezos Bear, because he is the world's richest man. We've got hilarious details in a second.

But first tonight, more chaos in the beleaguered Commonwealth of Virginia. That state's Democratic Governor and Attorney General as you know have both admitted to blackface scandals. One of them has been called upon by Democratic luminaries to resign and neither one has shown any intent to leave office.

Now, that State's slippery Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax has been accused of rape for the second time by a second woman. New allegations just hours ago. Fairfax says he is not resigning either.

For the latest on the glowing fireball of insanity that is Virginia Democratic politics, Fox's Ellison Barber is live outside the State House in Richmond, Virginia -- Ellison.

ELLISON BARBER, CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Tucker. Calls for the Lieutenant Governor to resign are growing tonight. It's difficult to keep track of how many people have now come forward and said that he needs to step aside. All of this, after a second woman came forward detailing a second sexual assault that she claims happened with Justin Fairfax.

A Virginia state delegate says if the Lieutenant Governor does not resign by the end of the weekend, he will introduce Articles of Impeachment on Monday. The Lieutenant Governor is denying all of the allegations against him and in a statement he this, quote, "I have never forced myself on anyone ever. I demand a full investigation into these unsubstantiated and false allegations." He called the claims part of a vicious and coordinated smear campaign.

According to a press release from the law firm Smith Mullen, they are representing a woman named Meredith Watson who says she was raped by now Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax in 2000 when they were both students at Duke University.

The statement says quote, "Mr. Fairfax's attack was pre-meditated and aggressive. The two were friends, but never dated or had any romantic relationship." The Lieutenant Governor was optimistic this morning briefly speaking to reporters as he headed to preside over a legislative session in the Virginia Senate saying, "We will have our say. I am confident in the truth."

Tonight, in a statement, he is defiant and clearly says "I will not resign." Even though a lot of Democrats now want him to. Senator Cory Booker tweeted this, quote, "The multiple detailed allegations against Lieutenant Governor of Virginia are deeply troubling. They are serious, credible and corroborated by others. It is no longer appropriate for him to serve. He should resign."

And now, attorneys for this second victim, they have come out with a new statement saying that the Lieutenant Governor is trying to smear their client. They say they had heard that he had told various members of the media that she is crazy and that she had been the victim of a prior rape.

They say that it is true that she was the victim of a prior assault, but they say that Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax actually used that prior assault, which she reportedly had told him about, in order to justify the assault that he allegedly perpetrated. They say the pair had one encounter after the alleged assault in 2000 at a campus party and this is from the statement here.

"The left the campus party when he arrived and he followed her out. She turned around asked why did you do it? Mr. Fairfax answered, 'I knew that because of what happened to you last year you would be too afraid to say anything.'" We have reached out to the Lieutenant Governor's office on this new statement. So far, Tucker, we have not heard back.

CARLSON: Hard to remember a seedier story than this one. Ellison Barber, thank you very much, from Richmond for us tonight.

So what's going to happen to the three top ranking elected Democrats in the Commonwealth of Virginia and more broadly, what's the standard for the rest of us in the wake of this scandal? Chris Hahn is a progressive radio host and he joins us tonight. Chris, thanks a lot for coming on. And I should just say, and I mean this sincerely.


CARLSON: I don't know the truth of the allegations against Lieutenant Governor Fairfax and I think he is due, as we all are, the right to explain himself and to have this adjudicated by some impartial body.

So I'm not passing judgment on him or his accuser, I'm passing judgment on the self-appointed defenders of women who just a couple of months ago jumped up and down and told us that Brett Kavanaugh deserved to be in prison because we must believe all women. And yet, they are dismissing these women. They clearly don't believe them. Where is Mazie Hirono? Where is Kirsten Gillibrand in all of this? What is the answer?

HAHN: Well, I don't know that they have dismissed these women. I sure haven't. It seems to me like he is toast. Like he is done. You know, there will be an investigation, but he is not surviving this. These women seemed credible to me. The stories seemed chilling.

And we should all be appalled by it. Now, should this turn out to be some sort of real political hit job, which I don't think it is, then maybe he survives. But barring that, his career is over and he needs to resign.

Now, I know we have two other Democrats in top positions in Virginia who also have issues that we need to deal with, and I have already called for the Governor to resign on this show last week and I am not taking that back. I think his statements on Saturday made it worse than they were on Friday night. And we will see what people think about the Attorney General. But I think people need to be consistent when they make calls for things and if it is --

CARLSON: Well, I think you're taking -- I mean agree or disagree, you are taking a position that is undergirded by integrity. I mean, consistency is right. I am just a little -- I mean, just as an American, I think I'm most disgusted by this Mark Herring character, the chief law enforcement officer in the State of Virginia, purely because of the hypocrisy.

He jumps up and down when he finds out that the Governor has this yearbook in blackface and then it turns out that he appeared in blackface, too. So why shouldn't he resign? That's the most confusing part of this to me.

HAHN: You know, look, I think he came out and he apologized and I think maybe, you know, we might determine that he should resign. He was 19 years old and he did something really stupid and quite frankly offensive and racist that should not be tolerated in this country. So we will see what his fate holds. The people of Virginia should ultimately be able to ultimately make the decision.

CARLSON: Well, I mean, you're absolutely right. No, no, you make a fair point.

HAHN: There should be some sort of petition to get rid of him.

CARLSON: Okay, but that's not the standard. Look, I think voters should make all of these decisions. If someone commits a crime in office, impeach him. We have a method for removing people who shouldn't be serving and it's not Twitter.

My question is about the standards of the Democratic Party applies to the rest of us. So Northam did something that was beyond the pale and Cory Booker and all these other totally false self-righteous chest beaters who really have no, no reason to lecture the rest of us about how to live, I would say.

But I mean, I'm serious. I live here. But the point is they don't apply the same standard to this guy because they don't want the seat to wind up in Republican hands. That's the actual truth as you know.

HAHN: You know, look, something needs to be said for the voters of Virginia who chose three Democrats for statewide office and something has to be done to preserve the will of the people. Whether these three men should serve, that needs to be determined. I really think that the top two need to go right now. I think they are both unfit for office and the third one, you know, I think he is teetering on the edge.

But Virginia needs to do something to make sure that the will of the people is actually recognized and that's something that has to be determined.

CARLSON: Hypocrisy is certainly not just a Democratic problem. There are a ton of hypocrites on the right, too. I mean, I know a lot of them personally.

HAHN: Sure, absolutely. I mean, I call it out every week on my radio show, it is --

CARLSON: But just -- but the intensity of the hypocrisy in the last week is kind of hard to ignore. So, if you have appeared in blackface, you can't serve in public office. You can't stand on a public stage. You really need to be pushed outside of polite company, and now it turns out that all these prominent progressives have appeared in blackface. I mean, that's a pretty high level of hypocrisy. Have you noticed that or am I just imagining it?

HAHN: It's not all of these, it's two men in Virginia and, frankly, we don't want to --

CARLSON: No, no. I mean it's --

HAHN: We don't want --

CARLSON: It's Joy Behar and it's --

HAHN: We don't want to replace --

CARLSON: Okay, but it's a lot of the people who are the quickest to judge others turned out to have worn this blackface themselves. You don't notice a theme here, attacking people for what you do?

HAHN: I think that there needs to be something done about the people who serve in public office. It's a higher calling than, you know, in a higher standard than people who are entertainers and other things. We need to focus on that. We need to remove these people and we need to put people in there who care about Virginia and care about the values that these men were elected to defend.

Voters of Virginia wanted people like them there because of what they said on the campaign about their values and governance. They did not know about their histories with women and with blackface and racism. Now they know it and the voters of Virginia should be heard and the voters of Virginia deserve --

CARLSON: So I just want to correct and we are out of time. But I just want to get the final word and correct something. Apparently, Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii has called on Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax to resign.

HAHN: Good, and you will hear more.

CARLSON: So she is consistent that way.

HAHN: You'll hear more.

CARLSON: Chris Hahn, thank you very much.

HAHN: Thank you, Tucker.

CARLSON: So let's say these weren't three progressive Democrats at the helm of the Commonwealth of Virginia, but they were three Conservative Republicans, what would that look like? Dan Bongino is a former congressional candidate, former Secret Service agent. He joins us tonight. Dan, I mean, do you notice the political imperative overriding moral concerns here?

DAN BONGINO, FORMER CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: Yes, I mean, this is a very simple binary choice here, Tucker. Is it going to be power or is it going to be principle? If the standard here in your principles are as the Democrats have stated and I think a lot of people would agree that listen, blackface is unacceptable in a position of public prominence, you have to go, you handle that on your own later, but you can't govern then Mark Herring has to go, the Attorney General and the Governor. That's the principle, right, Tucker? There is nothing I'm saying that is controversial.

CARLSON: That's their stated principle.

BONGINO: Exactly.

CARLSON: For the record, I think it's ridiculous. I think calling for infanticide might actually make it impossible for you to govern because it's murder.


CARLSON: Dressing up like an idiot or being a bigot in college is something that you should apologize for. I'm not sure that 35 years later it makes it impossible for you to govern, but whatever, but you are right. That's their standard and they have stated it clearly.

BONGINO: They have been on the record that this is -- but notice how it became a little more nuanced, Tucker, when they found out that the fourth person in line, the Virginia Speaker is a Republican. Now, all of a sudden there is a little more nuance in the argument.

Again, is this binary or is it not? If it's about principles, which they have already stated openly, then you must call for both of them to resign. Now, talking about the number two, Justin Fairfax, the Lieutenant Governor. I mean, we went through this with Kavanaugh.

If you have watched this station or any other cable news network, we went through this for two troubling weeks where I don't think there is a Democrat on the record actually defending Kavanaugh.

So, again, if the principle there is all women are to be believed, accusations are, in fact, enough evidence for you to leave and that have you no right to defend yourself, then, Tucker, this is all clear. The answers are clear as day by as you stated the Democrats' own on-the-record statements they have already made.

CARLSON: And I think that may be kind of percolating up to members of the Senate. Apparently Kirsten Gillibrand has just on Twitter called for the resignation of Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax. So we will see what happens there. Dan Bongino, thank you very much.

BONGINO: You got it. Good to see you.

CARLSON: Good to see you. Jeff Bezos wrote a piece on medium yesterday saying he was extorted by the "National Enquirer." Is it true? I don't know. We know who is on his side though, the media, why? He is rich. Plus, exclusive new video tonight of the FBI raid on the home of Roger Stone. It's pretty unbelievable. We'll be right back.


CARLSON: Well, the world's richest man, Jeff Bezos claims that he has been the victim of an extortion plot, not by ISIS or some international criminal syndicate out of a James Bond movie, but by the "National Enquirer," the supermarket tabloid.

The one you page through as you are unloading groceries from your cart. Trace Gallagher has been following this story since the beginning and he join us tonight. Hey, Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, CORRESPONDENT: Hey Tucker, he owns "The Washington Post" but Jeff Bezos chose to make his stand on a blogging platform called "Medium" where he posted details of the alleged extortion including message sent to him from the "National Enquirer," its parent company America Media and its CEO, David Pecker threatening to release intimate photos of Bezos and his girlfriend, Lauren Sanchez unless Bezos agreed to call off his investigation of how the "Enquirer" got the pictures.

And then issue a statement saying the investigation that uncovered the affair was not politically motivated. Well, Bezos refused writing, quote, "Of course, I don't want personal photos published, but I also won't participate in their well-known practice of blackmail, political favors, political attacks and corruption. American media has now responded saying it wasn't blackmail, the messages were good faith negotiations quoting again, "American Media believes fervently that it acted lawfully in the reporting of the story of Mr. Bezos."

But David Pecker says the company will conduct an internal investigation into what, if any action needs to be taken. And to up the ante, Federal prosecutors are now looking into the "National Enquirer's" handling of the Bezos affair.

As for how the intimate photos were leaked in the first place, a reporter for "The Washington Post" says he has spoken with Bezos' lead security consultant. Watch.


MANUEL ROIG-FRANZIA, FEATURE WRITER, "WASHINGTON POST": Gavin de Becker told us that he does not believe that Jeff Bezos's phone was hacked. He think it's possible that a government entity might have gotten ahold of his text messages.


GALLAGHER: Earlier Gavin de Becker, the security consultant said publicly he thought the brother of Bezos' mistress, Lauren Sanchez played a role in leaking those private photos and texts -- Tucker.

CARLSON: Mr. Muster with a candle stick. Trace, thank you very much. So a lot of confusing parts about this story, but one thing that is crystal clear is where the media stands. Journalists love Jeff Bezos. Now, some of them literally work for him at his personal PR operations/lobbying shop, it's called "The Washington Post."

But even those who don't take his money directly think Jeff Bezos is great. Why do they think that? Because he is rich. He is the richest man in the world in fact. Of course, journalist will tell you that their job is to hold the powerful to account. Pretty funny.

In real life, they assiduously suck up to power. They can't help themselves. The more powerful, the more flamboyant, they are groveling. Louis XIV never had more self-effacing man servants. "May I wash your feet, sir? How about a hot bath." Watch.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bezos, the wealthiest man in the world, the founder of Amazon going from being the punch line of this sordid affair to all of a sudden becoming - praised as a hero of journalism. He has pulled off a master stroke in terms of recasting his own image, in terms of making himself look like a good guy again.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Makes him almost human, just like "Us" magazine, "Hey, he's just like you and me," and he is playing this brilliantly.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There is a certain amount of bad assness about Jeff Bezos that I think makes us all proud to work for him. They messed with the wrong guy and they have found that out.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As source close to Bezos told me last night, do not poke this Bezos Bear.


CARLSON: Oh, he is a bear now, not a dorky accounting major with an entirely predictable midlife crisis and a sad, but obvious steroid problem. No, he is a powerful masculine bear. A grizzly -- don't mess with Jeff Bezos, growl.

Jeff Bezos is so tough that Donald Trump just can't handle him. There is only room for one alpha bear in this town, so Trump is trying to take out Bezos Bear with a far reaching secret conspiracy. Seriously? That's what they are saying.


DON LEMON, ANCHOR, CNN: We know how he despises Jeff Bezos, is AMI still doing Trump's dirty work? What is going on here?

RYAN LIZZA, POLITICAL ANALYST, CNN: I don't know. I mean, the two leading theories seem to be that AMI is either doing the Saudi's dirty work, President Trump's dirty work or a combination of the two.

JERRY GEORGE, FORMER LA BUREAU CHIEF, NATIONAL ENQUIRER: Trump has had a hard on for Bezos. So it's no surprise that he turned to his good buddy, David Pecker at the "Enquirer" to, you know, do a hatchet job on him.


CARLSON: Suddenly, the left believes in the deep state. We can't let them hurt Bezos Bear." It's hilarious and nauseating.

All right, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal will save the planet. In exchange, we just give up cars and airplanes and rebuild every structure in the United States. We'll also by the way need to invent brand new forms of energy that science hasn't conceived of yet. How much will this cost? That's unclear. How will we pay for it? Unknown. Who will make this happen? Well, workers, obviously, though anyone who is quote, "unwilling" to work will still get paid by the government.

In other words, not all of the details have been ironed out as of tonight, that's why we're grateful that Robert Hockett is here. He is a Law Professor at Cornell. He is advising Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on the Green New Deal and he joins us. Professor, thanks very much for coming on.


CARLSON: So can I just ask the obvious question, why would we ever pay people who are quote "unwilling to work"?

HOCKETT: We never would, right? And AOC has never said anything like that, right? I think you are referring to some sort of document that -- I think, some doctored document that somebody other than us has been circulating.

CARLSON: Oh, I thought that came right from her - that was in the backgrounder from her office is my understanding.

HOCKETT: No, no. She has actually tweeted it out to laugh at it. If you look at latest tweets. It seems that apparently, some Republicans have put it out there. I don't know the details.

CARLSON: Well, good. Well, then thank you for correcting me. I mean, because it seemed a little ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as the idea that we're going to build enough light rail to make airplanes unnecessary, which I think actually is from --

HOCKETT: I don't know where you got that either, Tucker. I actually believe that you are actually on our side about this. If you actually read the actual plan, right, there is nothing about getting rid of anything. It is about expanding many options, right?

I mean, there are many, many things we want to be able to do now in addition to what we already do. So what's -- where is the airplane disappearance coming from? I'm not really clear on where that originated?

CARLSON: Well, I could actually get it for you. This is a --

HOCKETT: That would be great because I keep hearing that.

CARLSON: ... frequently questions released by her office and I'm quoting from it. Maybe this is fraudulent in which case, I hope you will correct me. But it says that the Green New Deal -- and I am quoting, "Totally overhaul transportation and that would mean," quote, "building out high speed rail at a scale where air travel would stop becoming necessary."

Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono responded to that by saying, "That would be hard for Hawaii." So I don't think that's made up. The Senator from Hawaii.

HOCKETT: No, no. But I mean, apparently it is being misunderstood, right? We are really talking about expanding optionality here. We are not talking about getting rid of anything, right? We are talking about basically making it cost effective to move into more modern forms of technology and more modern forms of production which would then enable people actually cost effectively to transition to that stuff. We are not talking about requiring anything or prohibiting anything, that's sort of 1980s style environmentalist.

CARLSON: Okay, but hold on, I don't want to you back away from what she herself has said and all of this with the caveat that a lot of this won't happen, maybe none of it, but these are the ideas that she is articulating. She did so on NBC last week.

HOCKETT: Well, I promise you, Tucker, I won't back away from thinking she said, and see, we are pushing forward, right?

CARLSON: Then, she said, well, yes at high speed.

HOCKETT: Yes, very high speed. Yes.

CARLSON: That we are going to supplant all fossil fuels in 12 years.

HOCKETT: Yes, yes.

CARLSON: Okay, so that would mean --

HOCKETT: But that doesn't mean prohibiting them. It means rendering them obsolete by doing something better. And we can do it. This is America. We can do anything.

CARLSON: Then good. Then I am glad, and it's nice to have a smart person on the show to explain this. What about air travel which is critical to our economy? This is a continental country.

HOCKETT: It stays the same, right?

CARLSON: Okay, but no, because that requires fossil fuel.

HOCKETT: That might, wait, we are not talking - we are talking about carbon neutrality, remember? We are talking about net zero emissions. That doesn't mean there is never any burning of anything, right? I mean, until we come up with solar panel flying airplanes, of course, we are not going to --

CARLSON: I'm sorry to interrupt you. I just want to correct you. I just had - because this seemed like we were making news on this show. The "unwilling to work" thing was in her backgrounder, that has been absolutely confirmed.

HOCKETT: No, no. Definitely not.

CARLSON: You're saying no.

HOCKETT: No, definitely not. Definitely not.

CARLSON: Okay, so NBC and lots of other news outlets are saying that that was in the backgrounder and you are saying it is fraudulent.

HOCKETT: No, that's erroneous, right. Now, there might be new details now that you know about that I don't because I have been doing media all day. But the story all day --

CARLSON: Yes, I think that was actually in the document. I read it as it came out.

HOCKETT: Well, it's the wrong document, Tucker. If that was --

CARLSON: Well, yes, well, it's definitely the wrong document.

HOCKETT: That's not us. No, we certainly don't believe in anything like that, right?

CARLSON: So what you're saying is, we're getting rid of fossil fuels actually, even though you just said we were because --

HOCKETT: Yes. No, no, we're rendering them obsolete for most purposes they are used for now, right?

CARLSON: BUT air travel is a huge source, a huge source.

HOCKETT: But that's -- hence the word "most" before, right? We eliminate them for most purposes for which they are used now by rendering them obsolete.

CARLSON: Okay, so -- but that would include cars. So I have got two gasoline powered cars at home.

HOCKETT: Yes, but imagine how much better it is going to be when it's cost effective to drive electric cars. But that can't be done simply by individuals, right, you have to coordinate. You have to have charging stations everywhere and, of course, individuals can't do that, right?

So in that sense, the government is acting like kind of orchestra conductor here, we are trying to coordinate some of that stuff that could only be centrally coordinated and enable everybody to act individually within that framework, right?

CARLSON: Yes, that doesn't -- I don't fully understand what you are saying, but let me just, I mean on the low end, this would be the most expensive thing that the United States has ever undertaken including rural electrification in the Second World War and I am just kind of wondering in a country that has got more debt than it has GDP, how would we pay for that?

HOCKETT: Well, here's the key, right? Remember that we racked up enormous debt to finance the Second World War effort and the deal and of course the interstate highway system in the 1950s. But here is a key point, he is a takeaway.

I want you to remember this, I hope everybody will remember this. Remember that inflation is a relation, right? It's the relation between the quantity of money and the quantity of goods. Now, if the money that you are spending is resulting in the production of a great many more goods, you have no inflation problem.

More production absorbs more expenditures. The problem with the $7 trillion that was spent during the Bush years and then of course, in the last tax cut was that it wasn't actually productive, but note, that even that didn't bring about inflation.

CARLSON: Okay, we're still not getting close to it, and by the way I am just getting all of this in my ear, we are actually going to follow up on this next week. That "unwilling to work" line which you are obviously embarrassed about and you should be of course.

HOCKETT: No, no, I am not embarrassed, it's just not us.

CARLSON: That was in the document.

HOCKETT: It's not embarrassing. No, Tucker. No, no. We are not embarrassed by what is not ours.

CARLSON: And we're going to -- paying people who are unwilling to work, there's nothing more embarrassing than that.

HOCKETT: No, Tucker. We're not embarrassed by what's not ours. Okay, we will clarify this, it's not ours.

CARLSON: Okay, we're going to get to the bottom of that.

HOCKETT: Yes, we are.

CARLSON: We are going to prove it one way or the other and I hope you will come back.

HOCKETT: I will. I welcome it.

CARLSON: Professor, thank you.

HOCKETT: Thank you so much, Tucker.

CARLSON: I am glad -- I am always grateful when people on your side come on, including you. Thank you.

Well, the billionaires of Silicon Valley are ripping off their employees and shifting the cost to you. One member of Congress is offended by this anyway and he will join us after the break.


CARLSON: So back in the old days, before the gig economy arrived, tipping was a fairly straightforward arrangement. Workers in the service industry made a salary, a low salary, but still a salary. And then in return for a job well-done, you added to their base pay with tips. The system seemed to have the right incentives built in. The best employees in the right places could do pretty really well. Waiters, for example.

But what if you took away the salary and left the lowest paid workers in our society with only their tips? What if the richest people in America were doing that right now and keeping it secret?

Well, it's actually happened. You won't be surprised, it's the billionaires of Silicon Valley who did it. Consider Instacart, it's a company that lets you order your groceries online. Instacart is already worth about $7 billion. But an effort to boost profits, the company changed the way it pays its employees.

Starting last year, every driver at Instacart was guaranteed to make a minimum of 10 bucks for every delivery, that's the good news. The bad news is the company used driver's tips to meet the minimum. In other words, the sanctimonious moguls who run that company shifted their payroll cost to the customer and shafted their own employees in the process.

In one case, a worker who was tipped 10 bucks for a delivery received only $10.80 in total compensation. That's a pretty good deal for Instacart, $0.80 per delivery is definitely below the minimum wage.

In another case cited by the "New York Times," two Instacart workers earn $10.00 each for delivery even though one got $6.00 tip and the other got a $4.00 tip. In other words, a bigger tip meant less base pay. If you did a better job for the customer, the Stanford grads who run Instacart just took more money from you because that meant more money for them.

When this policy came to light last week, Instacart CEO acted embarrassed enchased and promised to stopped doing it, but it really doesn't matter because exploitation is now the standard in the brave new economy, the donor class has created.

Almost all gig economy workers are contract employees. That means they don't get health insurance. They don't make enough to support themselves. Taxpayers make up the difference with social programs and that's one of the reasons your taxes keep going up so that the hipsters who run Uber could afford to buy another compound in Hawaii and write another check to the DCCC. That's the deal. It's a rip off and voters know it.

And that's why so many of them suddenly seems so radical and if you keep it up, sensible people will become socialists and if you keep it up long enough. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will be President of the country. That will happen.

So can Congress do anything about billion-dollar companies ripping off their employees? Congressman Ro Khanna is a Democrat who represents Silicon Valley. He is also an Instacart customer and has been on these issues for quite some time and we are happy that he is here tonight.

Congressman, thank you very much for coming on. So did I misstate the way this works?

REP. RO KHANNA, D-CALIF.: It's outrageous. I mean, it's outrageous. It's a $7 billion company. They are going to IPO and they are basically having wage theft. They are stealing the tips that should go to the employees to lower their base pay.

Here is what's outrageous, also, because I use Instacart. You know the default tip is 5%. I mean, who tips 5%? Usually you want to tip 10% or 15%. So they actually have a lower default tip because they don't want to make it seem like customers should pay more and then, if you do pay more, they are taking that tip away. I mean, it's just a scam.

CARLSON: You have been one of the only people in the Congress to press an issue and I'm grateful that you have that I think is really important where these companies basically send to the taxpayer a lot of their labor cost. They don't pay their employees enough. They don't even admit they are employees and then the public takes up the slack in the form of social programs. Have you made any headway in getting the companies to pay for that?

KHANNA: Well, we had the Stop Bezos Act because Amazon was doing this and we were paying for food stamps and we're paying for a lot of the social programs and here, the richest company in the world wasn't paying a $15.00 minimum wage.

In response to that, Bernie Sanders and I had that legislation. Bezos announced a $15.00 minimum wage. So they felt some pressure and did raise wages. That said, there is a long way to go. I mean, these are mostly employees and as you point out, they are being treated as independent contractors and here's the point.

The digital revolution is creating an extraordinary amount of wealth. They can afford to make sure that there is a middle class and I think it's almost ridiculous for these people not to see the divide in how they are contributing to the divide.

CARLSON: They can afford to make sure there is a middle class. I don't think I could put it better. So I just have to ask you because I can't control myself. You represent Silicon Valley.


CARLSON: You are one of the only members of Congress saying this out loud. What do they think of you?

KHANNA: Well, here's what I'm telling them. I say, look, you are brilliant. You are doing innovations. But if you want to make sure we have a unified country, then do some basic things.

First of all, make sure everyone is participating in a benefit of technology, not that all the wealth is just going to a very, very few individuals. Second, go out to rural America. I have been out to Painesville, Kentucky; West Virginia, Jefferson, Iowa. We don't need to be outsourcing 200,000 tech jobs.

Why aren't we partnering with rural communities to participate in the digital revolution? What's going on is there is this revolution and all of the wealth is going to a very few geographies. We want to have a unified country. We have got to expand tech opportunity for other people.

CARLSON: What do they say when you say that?

KHANNA: Well, they say we are trying, et cetera. But I said, I mean, if you want to prevent a populist backlash in this country to what's happening, you need to be forward-looking.

You know when I went to Beckley, West Virginia do you know who the most popular teacher there was? A Pakistani-American woman with a thick accent, but she was teaching computer science to coal miner's kids who were going to actually get jobs. We have got to create economic opportunity. We just had half the country vote against the coals, why? Because they didn't see that they had economic opportunity in the new economy? Why don't we wake up? Henry Ford woke up when he had in the early 1900s and he said I'm going to double wages. By the way the other thing is who is going to buy the Instacart groceries?

CARLSON: Such a good point. It's such a good -- I wish more people were saying what you just said. I really think what you were saying is true. Thank you for that.

KHANNA: Well, thank you. I mean, I don't think it's a partisan issue.

CARLSON: It's certainly not a partisan issue. I'm sure there are things we don't agree on. I'm certain of it. But I agree with every word you just said and thank you for that.

KHANNA: I appreciate it, Tucker.

CARLSON: Thank you very much, Congressman. Congress sets age limits for cigarettes and alcohol because both are bad for kids. Is it time to do the same for cell phones, too? A libertarian who knew this, disagrees. He will join us after the break. Plus shocking footage of the pre-dawn raid on Roger Stone's house. Wait until you see the shirt he was wearing, pretty amazing.


CARLSON: Well, if you read "USA Today" this morning, you may have seen the list of the 50 worst cities in America and the highly non-coveted number one spot was a place called Mendota, California. It's town of about 11,000 outside Fresno in the Central Valley. It used to be the cantaloupe capital of the world.

But now, sadly in Mendota, pretty much all the numbers are depressing. The unemployment rate there is maybe the highest in the country. Half the city lives below the poverty line. The per capita income in Mendota is about $9,000.00 a year.

Crime, not surprisingly, is completely out of control. The former City Manager of Mendota says the city is ground zero for MS-13 on the West Coast. Last August, the Feds made more than two dozen arrest of MS-13 members. This was primarily in response to 16 recent murders in the area. It's bad.

The local Police Department is so outmatched by MS-13 that according to local media, gang members have been threatening individual cops by name and with impunity. It's like another country.

So what's so striking about this and so sad about it is, it's the opposite of what they promised. Here's how. A third of Mendota's population is temporary farm workers. Both Republicans and Democrats in Washington are telling us right now that we need many more of those and they are pushing for it in secret talks at the White House.

But, if what they are claiming is true, then why are there so many unemployed people in Mendota? This is a city at the center of America's most productive farmland. If you can't get farm work in the central valley of California, there is a huge problem.

We clearly have a major oversupply of low skilled labor. We do. But we are planning to import much more anyway? Because Democrats and the Chamber of Commerce want it? Okay.

We know what the net result is going to be -- more sad, poor cities like Mendota. It's lunacy. It's horrible for the people who live there and for everyone else. Someone who cares about the country should say that because it's true.

Something else that's true is that too much time staring in the cell phone can lead to delayed cognitive development for children and it could also lead to depression and self-harm. Those are just a few of the perils that kids face when they have access to their own cell phones which are the portal through which they experience social media.

There are many studies on this and all of them show that increased use of the iPhone and smart phones like it make kids sadder, slower, more isolated. They are also tied to depression and suicide risk.

In a feature last week, we suggested one obvious solution that somehow seems crazy, but why would it be crazy, Congress should ban smart phones for kids. They ban cigarettes and alcohol. Why wouldn't they do this?

Radio host Amy Peikoff, didn't like that message. She texted us and says I want to respond because we are her fans, we said of course you can respond, Amy, they still -- great to see you. So I guess it's really simple.

Look, I know you are a libertarian and an orthodox one, not an attack on you. You are consistent. But if you accept that a society can regulate the behavior of children because they are not adults and they are not able to make adult decisions and so we can keep kids from buying Marlboros at 15 or buying a 12-pack of malt liquor, why can't we keep them from hurting themselves with smart phones?

AMY PEIKOFF, RADIO SHOW HOST: Okay, now first of all, you are assuming that I agree with those existing laws on the book, I don't necessarily, but -- now listen, now you can draw a distinction though, Tucker. Don't laugh, come on.

CARLSON: Wait, wait. I just want to be clear.

PEIKOFF: Don't laugh, don't laugh. Let me say. Let me even give you a distinction.

CARLSON: I am laughing out of affection. I just love libertarians. Libertarians are hilarious. The more you push -- so you're saying that like an 8-year-old should be able to buy a deck of cigarettes?

PEIKOFF: We are principled, Tucker, we are not hilarious. We are principled. So you could draw a distinction between those two because you are talking about physical substances. And I might say very, you know, sort of in a rights-based theory way that maybe youths are not capable of making a contract for something that is going to do them physical harm.

But, here, again, it's very important when we talk about government to make sure that government is operating on a principle of individual rights, which means the right to be free from physical harm. And so if you are going to talk about government getting involved or stepping in, I would look for evidence of some sort of actual physical harm.

I think, Tucker, if you want to look at government and what it should do to improve kids --

CARLSON: But I am confused with the distinction. No one has ever died of an overdose of LSD. But it's clear that if you were to take a huge quantity of LSD, the chance of you becoming schizophrenic are much higher. We know this. So there is no physical harm, but you can scramble someone's brain with drugs.

PEIKOFF: Okay, but there is a physical substance that is in your body, but let's standpoint. Let's assume that cell phones are potentially detrimental. You talked about the issue of high use and you mentioned in particular that app, Facebook, of course high levels of use and Facebook are things that are easily avoided. I don't even think the cool kids go on Facebook.

But think about this. Do we really want government more involved in raising our children? As it is, government is harming our children because we have government schools based on progressive education and I would look to them for youth unhappiness that -- the unhappiness among our kids. I would look to progressive education ...

CARLSON: Well, look, that doesn't mean -- hold on.

PEIKOFF: ... way more than cell phones.

CARLSON: You may be right, but hold on --

PEIKOFF: And if you are going to ban something, why not ban sugar, for example. Sugar does detrimental physical harm.

CARLSON: By the way, I think that's something worth talking about. In other words, why are we standing back and letting kids --

PEIKOFF: I don't think it is. I disagree with banning sugar. I think that all of these decisions should be left to the parents unless you could show that the decision made by the parents to allow a kid to do something or do something to the kid is abuse, and you would really in order to have objective law want it to be physical abuse.

CARLSON: I think we are getting into that. Amy Peikoff, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

PEIKOFF: Okay, thanks for letting me talk. Bye.

CARLSON: Remarkable security footage of the pre-dawn FBI raid on Roger Stone's home, like a military operation. More extensive even than we imagined. We're going to show that you exclusive video after this break. We'll be right back.


CARLSON: Well, earlier in the show we told you about Jeff Bezos, the richest man in the world and the alleged extortion plot perpetrated against him by the "National Enquirer." That's not the only big story he is at the center of. So Amazon spent much of the last year manipulating cities to compete against each other to host its second corporate headquarters.

Mayors and governors from all over the country begged like circus animals for the privilege of sending tax dollars to the world's richest company. In the end, the socialist mayor of New York bowed the most deeply and offered the biggest bribe. Bill de Blasio won, or seemed to. Now, the "Washington Post" says the deal may be off.

"The Post," a formal newspaper that functions as the personal PR agent for billionaire, Jeff Bezos suggests that the opposition from the local politicians may be to blame for this. If so, that would be likely Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Now, Ocasio-Cortez may be the single most self-righteous person ever elected to Congress, not to mention the least informed, but she is dead right on one thing. There is no reason that taxpayers should subsidize Jeff Bezos or Amazon. Let's hope other cities come to their senses on that also.

New home security video shows multiple angle of the FBI's predawn raid on the home of political consultant, Roger Stone. Unarmed, 66 years old without a passport, barefoot. Until now, the only public footage of the raid came from CNN which somehow knew to arrive one hour before the FBI got there.

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker was asked about the CNN footage in his testimony before Congress today. Here is part of it.


REP. DOUG COLLINS, R-GA: Are you familiar from public reports or otherwise that a CNN reporter was camped out outside of Stone's house when the FBI arrested him?

MATTHEW WHITAKER, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL: This wouldn't be part of the investigation --

COLLINS: I am aware of that and it was deeply concerning to me as to how CNN found out about that.

WHITAKER: I share your concern with the possibility that a media outlet was tipped off to Mr. Stone's either indictment or arrest before it was - before that information was made available to the public.


CARLSON: The new footage from Stone's home shows CNN arriving about an hour before the agents did. The footage depicts what you would expect if the FBI raided the home of the Mexican drug lord, maybe even SEAL Team 6 going to bin Laden's compound.

For context, Roger Stone is a senior citizen accused of false statements to Congress. Take a look at what happened.


CARLSON(voice over): It's just before 5:00 a.m., and an SUV with a CNN cameraman arrives first to this quiet street in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Within minutes, the driver gets out and begins to set up his tripod. So far no sign that anything is about to happen. But the cameraman gets back in his car with his equipment to wait.

Almost exactly one hour later, trucks with heavily armed men arrive in front of Roger Stone's house. Immediately, CNN's cameraman jumps out of the car, camera on shoulder capturing the footage. The Feds assemble on Stone's driveway. They are wearing ballistic armor and carrying assault weapons with 30-round magazines. Red dot sights and tactical flashlights mounted to their barrel strap. One has a gun hanging by a strap while he carries a battering ram in his left hand. All of the men have side arms holstered on their waists.

A second camera mounted on Stone's front door shows another angle of the raid. A heavily armed FBI agent approaches the door with his gun drawn, while others stake out positions behind. This looks like a high stake's raid, but CNN's cameraman is 40 feet away filming it all. One agent swings his firearm around as he scans and surveys Sone's front porch.

Behind the home, a third camera captures agents approaching the back of the house from the side yard. Behind the property, a boat arrives with at least two agents on board. They shine a flood light into Stone's home. Back in front, an agent pounds on Stone's door and finger on the trigger in case something goes wrong. He tries again as he and his colleagues wait in position.

Within minutes, Stone exits his home to greet the agents who have the rifles pointed at him. Stone raises his hands and spins around apparently trying to show that he is unarmed. Another FBI agent approaches Stone from behind and cuffs him. It's just after 6:00 in the morning. It's still dark out.

Twenty minutes later, the same camera shows agents leading Roger Stone back in his house. He is barefoot. Stone is wearing a T-shirt that says, "Roger Stone did nothing wrong."


CARLSON: The FBI and their water carriers and corporate media tell us totally commonplace, by the book. It happens all the time. No, it doesn't.

We will be back Monday. 8:00 p.m. The show that is the sworn enemy of the lying, pomposity, smugness and group think. In the meantime, have the most relaxing weekend with people you love. And we will see you in a couple days. Good night from Washington.

"Hannity" is next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. 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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.