This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," January 17, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: So we will see you back here on Monday night at seven and then we start the impeachment week, folks. So hang in there with us. Have a good weekend. We'll see you then.

TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS HOST: Good evening and welcome to TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT. Say what you want about the 2020 presidential race, it's not what they used to call a managerial election. It's not a contest to determine which branch of the establishment gets a turn of the wheel. This isn't a Clinton-Dole '96 kind of race where you're pretty sure that no matter who wins, things aren't really going to change very much. This year, the one thing you can be certain of is that things could be very different when it's over. The issues at stake are bigger than just the economy or even our foreign policy commitments. 2020 is about the broadest possible questions. What kind of country should we have? Who should live here? What will America look like 50 years from now? There are a lot of possible answers to those questions, but leading Democrats appear to have settled on their position. America, they're telling us should be a lot more like California. Listen to former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg explain his vision for the country he is hoping to lead.


MICHAEL BLOOMBERG (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I think that California can serve as a great example for the rest of this country. You have led the way on climate change, on fighting gun violence and on criminal justice, and you have as importantly, opened immigrants with open arms. California is part of this country that is something the rest of the country looks up to.


CARLSON: So Michael Bloomberg graduated from high school, almost 60 years ago. And at that time, a lot of what he just said was true. The rest of the country really did look up to California. Millions of Americans moved to California in search of a better life. It had the nation's best public schools, you know, a world class universities that essentially were free. Graduates from those universities created Silicon Valley, among other things, the birthplace of the Digital Age. Compared to the rest of America, poverty in California then was low, and opportunity was virtually unlimited. The people who moved here in 1960 when Bloomberg graduated high school found their American dream. But things have changed. Now, the children and grandchildren of those people are fleeing California. We spent the last week here in Los Angeles for the show, and in some ways, it's still a very beautiful place. The western parts of the city are some of the richest neighborhoods in the world. You'd want to live there. They're immaculate, nice people. But huge swaths of modern Los Angeles shock the conscience of anyone who drives by. Filth and disorder and clusters of homeless addicts. Tent cities continue for block after block. This is footage from one of our producers, Charlie Cougar, shot yesterday. California has 12 percent of the world's population, but it has a quarter of this country's homeless. Adjusted for the cost of living, California has the highest poverty rate of any state in America. Nearly a quarter of its people are poor. Why? Well, there are a lot of reasons, but here are some. The state has the most expensive housing in the continental United States. It has the most expensive gasoline, thanks to the taxes. The free world class universities, those are long gone. The University of California system has some of the highest in-state tuition rates in the country. As we chronicled last week in our series, "American Dystopia," no city more accurately represents the implosion of California than San Francisco.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get the [bleep] out of here. [Bleep] old ass [bleep].

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I've been here 42 years before you were [bleep] born. [Bleep] off.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: [Bleep] you. I'll [bleep] kill you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm scared for my safety.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You never know what's coming around the corner.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, film me, mother [bleep].

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bit into my arm.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I live a block away. [Bleep] you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This city is messed up. It is very messed up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm not forcing him to move, but I talk to him and encourage him to get to move.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think you'll be homeless for the rest of your life?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You put them out and in what state?


CARLSON: It's messed up, really messed up. That's right. And so finally normal people are leaving California. For decades, the state led the nation in attracting migrants from other states. Now, the flow has reversed. Every year, the number of people leaving California for other places exceeds the number of people moving in by more than a hundred thousand. If it weren't for the constant stream of immigrants from abroad, California's population would be falling and fast. The middle class utopia of old has evaporated. The state is in crisis. Now, that's obvious to everyone who lives here, certainly, but not to the people who run California. Instead of fixing the problems that are forcing people to flee, politicians here have spent the last few years on policies that are frivolous and counterproductive: Banning plastic straws, requiring background checks to buy shotgun shells, legalizing the intentional transmission of HIV. Governor Gavin Newsom's most recent budget proposes $80 million in additional funding to provide free healthcare for illegal immigrant seniors. Who wants that? This is the state the Democrats are calling the model for America. The state they want your state to be more like, at least you know what the election is about. Ethan Bearman is a California radio host. He joins us tonight. Ethan, thanks so much for coming on. It's great to be back in the state where I'm from. It's beautiful. The rich areas are nicer than ever. But in the last four nights, I've had four dinners and every person has said I love California and I'm preparing to leave because it's falling apart. How can this be a model that Democrats point to?

ETHAN BEARMAN, RADIO HOST: Well, it's still the fifth biggest economy in the entire world. We have a strong economic engine. We have Hollywood. We have Silicon Valley. We grow a third of the food for the entire United States. There are huge opportunities. One out of seven jobs created during the Trump tenure were actually created here in California even though we're only one eighth the population, so there's a lot still happening here. We have a brand new governor who is finally, finally taking bold action on the two biggest issues that everything relates back to that you are talking about: Housing and homelessness. And he is finally going to take a strong lead on that.

CARLSON: You know, he said he was going to take a strong lead on it when he was the Mayor of San Francisco, and he did absolutely nothing, and in fact, it got even worse. And that's been true of the past five mayors of San Francisco, the past three governors of the state. It is a one-party state. The State Senate has been controlled by Democrats for 50 years. There hasn't been a Republican mayor of San Francisco in 56 years. So this is a Democratic problem. And it's getting worse, not better. I don't know why nationally, Democrats aren't ashamed of it.

BEARMAN: Well, here's the issue. So while you're right in terms of those data points, we've had Republican governors through that whole process. But the issue with the housing problem which is a core issue that's happening here, we're short three and a half million units of housing. That's why it's so expensive, simple supply and demand.


BEARMAN: If you're short that many.

CARLSON: That's right.

BEARMAN: And it's been a combination of people on the left and the right at the local level, at the county level, at the state level. Nimbies who say I don't want this environmentalist on the left, as well, absolutely, who say we have to be careful of how we build. It's expensive. We need to streamline that process. We have SB-50 that's happening in the legislature right now.

CARLSON: Well, can I just ask a question that I've been wondering about a week -- why is no one pointing to the cause of the overcrowding, which is immigration? The state is too crowded. You can't get anywhere. The infrastructure is clogged, it's choked and that's because there are too many people and so the very people who say we're going to fix the housing problem are saying, we're going to invite in millions of new people and give them free healthcare. Is there -- I mean, has logic been suspended, or am I missing something?

BEARMAN: I don't think that people are inviting millions of people to California.

CARLSON: By offering free healthcare to illegal aliens?

BEARMAN: I don't believe that invites people whatsoever.

CARLSON: Are you being serious?

BEARMAN: Yes, absolutely. We've talked about this before. If I have kids and I'm living in a country in Central America and a gang threatens to kill them if I don't do their bidding in the cartels, I'm going to flee as well.

CARLSON: Well, wait a second. If you're walking down the street and you -- and you're not that hungry and you pass a restaurant that says free pizza. Would you go in? Of course, you would. Because there's free pizza.

BEARMAN: I like pizza.

CARLSON: Right. Who doesn't? I do, too, as you can tell. So if you say to the rest of the world, your single biggest problem is healthcare. We're going to give it to you for free and not kick you out. Why wouldn't you be invited by that?

BEARMAN: Because these people are already here. They're already our neighbors. They're part of our communities. They're already going to emergency rooms, which is far more expensive than preventative care.

CARLSON: But wait, wait, wait a second. You've got -- we just read you the numbers. You've got thousands of native-born Californians leaving every year primarily for Texas, but also Idaho and the contiguous states -- Oregon, Arizona. Why wouldn't you be worried about them?

BEARMAN: Oh, we are worried about them.

CARLSON: Really? Because I don't see the governor doing anything about their flight.

BEARMAN: And that's what goes back to the things like SB-50, to work on the housing issue. We have local cities, Republican-leaning cities who refuse to build housing, and when that is -- what's happening is that's what's killing the supply and the demand.

CARLSON: So the homelessness in the state which is controlled wholly by the Democratic Party, they've got a super majority in the legislature, you're telling me with a straight face is being caused by Republicans. Is that what you're saying?

BEARMAN: No, I am saying that it is definitely being contributed to. That's not exclusively a Democratic issue. But what is --

CARLSON: Will you concede that if you have a lot more people in a confined area, it's more crowded, there's more traffic and the housing is more expensive.

BEARMAN: As long as people are having more than two kids, that is going to be the case.

CARLSON: No, actually native born people in California are leaving. It's a hundred percent an immigration problem. Will you at least concede that inviting people from other countries, I'm sure they're all great people, it doesn't matter, makes the state poorer and more crowded? I mean, what else has happened?

BEARMAN: Well, I don't fully agree with that either. It depends on who the immigrants are and where they're coming from. We know that we have immigrants coming from wealthy European nations.

CARLSON: Absolutely. And I'm not -- this is not about ethnicity. It's about numbers. The state is too crowded, will you concede to that or no?

BEARMAN: So I don't. I don't. I don't agree with that. And the reason why is because we can address that, we can build housing. We do have processes in place that --

CARLSON: We could make it Hong Kong. Why would we want to do that?

BEARMAN: Or Singapore, but why not? Why not have more people? People are continuing -- as long as people have kids and our entire economy is based on growth which in the United States it is, otherwise, our system starts collapsing if we're not growing. Look at what happened with Japan.


BEARMAN: Then we need to build --

CARLSON: Right. I get it. That's just not actually working. I mean, it's one of those theories that at the Chicago School they tell us is true, but it turns out isn't. Ethan, great to see you.

BEARMAN: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: Los Angeles' homeless population is estimated at 59,000 people. So if all of those got together and became a city, they'd rank as the 31st of LA counties 88 cities. If you move them to Vermont, they'd be the largest city in the state, just the homeless, just here. The surging homeless population in LA combined with the toleration of garbage and feces and used needles they produce is becoming an absolute health hazard, for real, not a talking point. Last year, the city suffered outbreak of typhus, thanks for the surging rat population feasting on garbage on city streets. Last year, we profiled a victim of that on the show.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But far away from Skid Row, through rats and fleas, typhus traveled through the streets and the Deputy City Attorney who works way up on the sixth floor at City Hall got infected.


ELIZABETH GREENWOOD, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY: I felt like I was going to die. The homeless population has moved closer and closer. They surround the building. So as folks walk to work and back, they're walking through rotting food, raw sewage.


CARLSON: Yes, it's not the medieval period. It's just a one party state. Dr. Drew Pinsky hosts "The Dr. Drew Podcast." He joins us tonight. Doctor, thanks so much for coming on.


CARLSON: Typhus?

PINSKY: Typhus, my own home became overrun with rats, and when I saw that I thought, oh, we're going to have a typhus outbreak. I practice Medicine against the foothills here long enough to know that's what coming. What scares me is they've done nothing to reduce the rodent population. And what is endemic in this area after typhus, is something called Yersinia. You may know it as plague. So I'm worried that we're going to have that next. The city you talked about, 60,000 people on the streets defecating, feces flowing into the LA River bypassing sewage treatment, a city the size almost of Pasadena is bypassing sewage treatment. We're having mammalian -- sea mammal die off, we're worried about turtled straws. It's unbelievable.

CARLSON: So why isn't the -- and as somebody who cares about --

PINSKY: Where are the environmentalists? Where are they? I need them.

CARLSON: You know that's it. That's it right there. Where are they?

PINSKY: Where are they? I don't understand it. We are literally -- we have seen bird and sea mammal die off. We have 60,000 people's excrement going directly to the ocean. I can understand it. We have such a massive problem here. Listen, the other thing you were talking about, I've got so much to say, I'm sorry, Tucker, I'm having like a, you know, a rush of ideas.

CARLSON: You've been here all your life.

PINSKY: And I am upset about it. You mentioned the undocumented immigrants that are here. We've absorbed one million conservatively in Los Angeles, one million undocumented immigrants. Where's the housing problem? They got here with without a job, without money, without a family, without a passport. They find a place to live. Where's the housing problem?

CARLSON: Can I just pause and say, as you drive around Los Angeles you don't ever see. I've just noticed this, any Mexican immigrants almost. I haven't seen a single one.

PINSKY: But you will. But they are in certain areas, but they're not on the street. They're not homeless. The homeless is the mentally ill and until they start talking about that, this is not going to get better. Gavin Newsom, who is now going to --

CARLSON: So that's the core of the problem.

PINSKY: That is the core of the problem. What's remaining on the street, so they're chronically homeless, and that is due to addiction and mental illness. Look, all of those people you put in that video, they're not going to get better when you put them in a housing. They're going to continue to deteriorate. Gavin Newsom is going to put up -- sprung tents that I've been asking for, for a long time. I'm grateful that he is going to do that. There are no laws that allow us to get these people and put them in those tents. In fact, the laws prevent us from even approaching these people. That's why you saw law enforcement saying, well, I'm encouraging them with the law, but I can't really do anything. The laws prevent us from treating the mental illness.

CARLSON: So it sounds like we're missing the point completely.

PINSKY: Completely. The problem is the mental illness and the need to take resistant patients which is what we have in the street. I've been working in a psychiatric hospital for over 30 years. I know what these patients are. I see them. I know exactly what's going on. I know exactly what we can do and I know they will thrive in treatment and they will look back and they will be pissed. They'll be pissed the people let them deteriorate on the street. Weirdly, similar symptoms in the setting of dementia, if we don't rush in and treat that we're considered inhuman. That's a progressive illness that has no treatment. Schizophrenia, bipolar addiction, fatal illnesses, that if you let go untreated long enough, they are irretrievable. But early, you can change the course of the illness. We're not doing it. And we're murdering people as a result. Three a day are dying in the streets of Los Angeles. Three a day. So my question and I'll ask this of your audience as well. What does the body count need to be? As a physician, I'm incensed. What does the body count need to be before they will change their rhetoric? It's out of control. Thousands of people are dying. What does it need to be? 10,000? Hundred thousand? Then you're going to go, oh, maybe we should help these people. Housing is not the issue. Housing is part of it. Of course, they need a place to go. But you've got to address the mental illness and addiction that's underlying this and get them to the facilities and we have no ability to do that. So all these sprung tents that Gavin Newson is going to open, my prediction in six months, they'll be relatively empty, then what are we going to do?

CARLSON: The cruelty of this.

CARLSON: Beyond. Beyond.

CARLSON: So we just interviewed your old friend, Adam Carolla. The whole interview airs next week. We want to show you this bit where he brings you up while discussing politics. Watch this.


ADAM CAROLLA, COMEDIAN: And I loved what Ricky Gervais did. And I've said that -- Dr. Drew has always said to me, when is the pendulum going to start swinging back? We're so politically correct. Everyone's woke. We're getting everyone fired for the thought police are out there. I said, the comedians. The comedians are always the tip of the spear. The comedians are going to bring the pendulum back. Ricky Gervais did a great job as the tip of the comedic spear of bringing it back.


PINSKY: He also told me the Dave Chappelle Netflix comedy special, he said that was the moment. He said that's the moment that the comedian started becoming able to speak again. I always go to Adam and I ask him. He's got a crystal brain, don't you know?


PINSKY: He has got a crystal brain. And I asked him, how do you think this is going to go? Because I'm so disturbed by the situation where it's just rolling into -- it looks like we're rolling into disaster particularly in this state. How Bloomberg, a smart guy like that can say that this is a model for the country? It is deeply disturbing, deeply disturbing. You will not meet a person out here who doesn't have a plan to leave. You want me to --

CARLSON: And you won't meet a prettier place. You really won't. You won't find it --

PINSKY: I've lived here my whole life.

CARLSON: Yes, I mean --

PINSKY: And it breaks my heart and it kills me that my patients are dying on the street. It kills me.

CARLSON: Dr. Drew, that was -- that was remarkable. Thank you.

PINSKY: Appreciate it.

CARLSON: We have important creepy porn lawyer news breaking. Just before the show, CPL has left jail in California. He is now in New York. Specifically, he's been transferred to the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan. You may have heard of it. We're not making this up. That's the exact same rat-infested jail that Jeffrey Epstein was in when he allegedly committed suicide. Of course with this transfer, it's more important than ever that we monitor CPL's wellbeing, our offer of a jailhouse interview still stands. We will continue to track this story and tell you if he accepts. Well Beto O'Rourke hoped that by getting a nickname, people would believe that he was running as the first Latino President. He didn't fool any voters, of course, and had to drop out. But he didn't convince Joe Biden. Wait until you see this tape. Plus, Hillary Clinton's documentary seems perfectly timed for a last minute presidential bid, not to be cynical, but could she be planning one? We will tell you just ahead.


CARLSON: Well, in a recent interview with the "Dallas Morning News," Joe Biden was asked if he'd be willing to pick Beto O'Rourke or Julian Castro as his running mate for President. Biden was asked that of course because both O'Rourke and Castro are from the State of Texas and that's the state of the second most electoral votes in the country, obviously. And yet somehow Biden missed the point completely. Watch this.


JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE Yes, I would. I would consider either both of them. But -- and look, I've spoken to each of them and spent some time talking to them, and my plea to both of them is that they stay engaged. They are talented, talented people. I can guarantee you that there's going to be Latinos in my cabinet. I can guarantee you, there's going to be Latinos in my White House and both of them are qualified.


CARLSON: Yes. Biden, consider Beto O'Rourke, one of the most talented Latinos in our country. Really an impressive young Latino man with a future that's sure to be -- what's the word again? Callente. Joe Biden regards Beto O'Rourke as a tribute to the fine people of Guadalajara, as well as living proof that their immigration system works like it should. There's only one problem, Beto or Robert Francis, "Rob" to his friends isn't Latino. He is whiter than Elizabeth Warren. He went to boarding school in Virginia then Rhode crew at Columbia. He likes Pearl Jam. He writes poetry about milk. Here's a sample stanza. Notice, it's in English, "Oh sacred cow. I thirst for you. Provide milk." Now Rob did have a chalupa once on the way back from rugby practice, but no, he's not even a tiny bit Hispanic. Beto was just a nickname. Until now, it never fooled anyone. Hillary Clinton has a Hulu documentary about her life coming out in a month and a half. She hasn't been covered enough. A trailer for that documentary is here already. Here is a portion.


HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: There is a set of expectations for the First Lady. I violated them from the very beginning.

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We decided and asked Hillary to become Secretary of State. it surprised people.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hillary is polarizing.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: E-mails blew up.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It played into all of the suspicion, she is so sketchy.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Cold and calculating.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There is this sense that she knows that she is an ethical and moral person and that can blind anyone.

H. CLINTON: You know, you get scarred up a little bit.

BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It wasn't like I thought. How can think about the most stupid thing I could possibly do and do it.

H. CLINTON: I didn't want anything to do with him. You want to make a difference? You want to have an impact. Well, then you've got to get in the arena.


CARLSON: Not even subtle. You've got to get in the arena, Hillary says staring meaningfully off into the distance. It's possible this might encourage rumors that she's getting in the race. The documentary's release is perfectly timed to serve as in fact, a de facto campaign ad, even Democratic pundits openly discuss the weakness of this year's field with Joe Biden and the guy with the ear hair. So maybe the stage is being set for Clinton's late entry into the race. Could it happen? Buck Sexton hosts "The Buck Sexton Show." He joins us. Buck, I just one thing, politics aside, I'm just glad someone's finally giving this woman the attention she deserves.

BUCK SEXTON, HOST, "THE BUCK SEXTON SHOW": Yes, I think this is probably going to be more interesting than the 15 or so books she's had ghostwritten for her.

CARLSON: Or the 27 previous bio pics about Hillary Clinton. Like I don't know enough about her at this point.

SEXTON: But you have to look at this and think there are a few reasons why Hillary Clinton cannot be entirely discounted. One, is you get the sense that she has a hole in her soul that will only be filled -- and this is only on the personal level for her -- by becoming President of the United States.


SEXTON: Nothing else will ever suffice. It will never be acceptable. Then you also look at the Clinton political industrial complex. You know, they are still -- I know you know a lot of them in D.C., a lot of folks who Hillary's presidency was going to be the crowning achievement of their professional lives and they haven't given up on that idea yet. They really, you know, Hillary was the person they were hoping they're going to ride her coattails to whatever White House job and they're still very much in place, all of those consultants. You know, they might have got another Democratic jobs, but they would all lead back on the Hillary train if they could. And then, of course, the weakness of this Democratic field, which I mean, Bernie Sanders has to be taken seriously now as a as a presidential contender, as the possible nominee for the Democrats, and he is a socialist. We can call him a Democrat socialist. But a lot of the country still is going to have a problem with that, and some Democrats, I think, are savvy enough to understand that's an issue. And with Hillary, I guess, there's no such thing as overexposure because we need to see more of what Hillary Clinton's life was all about. For some reason, we don't know why because Hillary thinks we do.

CARLSON: Yes, because I honestly can't imagine someone who has been overexposed to the point that, like all the ink has faded. I mean, there's nothing about Hillary that you don't know. There's nothing interesting there. There's nothing that hasn't been chewed over repeatedly. You've got to think that this is just like an explicit campaign ad, I mean, I just don't see another explanation.

SEXTON: It definitely feels that way. And also, there is a narrative that makes some sense for a lot of Democrats that you'll talk to, if they really believe the election was stolen by Russia in 2016, which, despite all the investigations and everything, there are still people that believe that it was stolen. You can't really get them to explain why, but they'll tell you that the only way to set that right, there is this narrative, you can see it's implicit in all of this would be for Hillary to come back as a unity candidate in a brokered convention and be the person to set right what was made wrong in 2016 and effectively be the true counter revolution against Trumpism. Hillary, in a sense, is still a better place for that than any of these other candidates. I mean, certainly not Joe Biden, who Obama even knows, I'm not going to endorse this guy.

CARLSON: I wonder, though, I mean, clearly, she is the first choice. You're absolutely right, with the Samantha Powers of the world, sort of there's no way they are going to be Secretary of State --

SEXTON: The apparatus still looks --

CARLSON: I get it, exactly. But you wonder if the average Democratic voter is really going to want to hire Hillary Clinton to run the Democratic Party again?

SEXTON: Well, this would test out -- the question is, is it possible to want it too much and try too often to be President?


SEXTON: I think everybody has to look at this and say that this would be record setting in the sense that she's never giving up. She's never going to go away entirely. But it also is dependent on what ends up happening in the Democratic primary coming up. We'll have to see if somebody finally emerges, although, you'd think who could really even emerge? We know it's Biden. Maybe Bernie. Bernie has got the socialist issue. Biden wasn't able to get more than two or three percent as a candidate on his own back in the day in the Democratic primary before he was Obama's VP. So why would somebody be an inspiring choice all of a sudden? I mean, quite honestly, I think if they're going to pull somebody out of the stands, so to speak, somebody from the sidelines. Michelle Obama would make more sense than Hillary Clinton, but Hillary Clinton, I think wants it a whole lot more than Michelle Obama ever would.

CARLSON: Which is why Michelle Obama is far more likely to be the break glass in case of emergency candidate. I'm totally --


CARLSON: I totally agree with that. Buck Sexton, great to see you tonight. Thank you.

SEXTON: Thank you. Thanks.

CARLSON: Well, the "Harvard Law Review" has come up with a plan to give the left permanent unbreakable control of America. They won't have to fiddle around with these dumb elections anymore. How would it work? We'll start by turning the City of Washington, D.C. into 127 states. More than 250 new senators, not joking. They want this. We will explain the plan after the break.


CARLSON: Virtually every institution in this country is controlled by the left, the academic world is a one party state in effect. Leftwing ideologues dominate the Federal bureaucracy. The media, big tech. About the only power center remaining in America that has resisted total domination is the electoral system. People still get to vote here and about half the time they vote Republican. This is the last remaining check on the left's power, and it enrages them and that's why they're constantly looking for new ways to make voting irrelevant. Consider their latest plan. It comes from the "Harvard Law Review." That's America's most prestigious legal journal. It's a publication that Barack Obama once edited. The articles "The Review" publishes influence America's law professors, its political thinkers, our highest courts. It matters. In a recent piece written by an anonymous author, the "Harvard Law Review" proposes a strategy for giving the left permanent unbreakable control of this country, the strategy, admit more states. Now, it's not a plan to bring in Puerto Rico in D.C., you've seen that before. It's far more ambitious than that. The author calls for making every one of Washington, D.C.'s 127 neighborhoods, its own state. That would mean 127 new House members. It would mean 254 new senators, all of them taken from tiny slices of America's most democratic city. Now, that's not just enough new blue states to ensure permanent control of Congress though, of course it is that. It's enough to amend the Constitution at will, which of course is the point of it. The article calls for using this power to emasculate the U.S. Senate, abolish the Electoral College, expand the size of the House of Representatives, but that's just the beginning. With the opinions of the population now relevant, the left could abolish the Second Amendment. Get rid of free speech, ban private home ownership -- all ideas they have called for. They can do whatever they want, in fact, which is now and always their goal. Sound terrifying? It should. But liberals love the idea. praise the Harvard plan as brilliant and much needed. The website called it, "An entirely constitutional way to unrig American democracy." Unrig? Of course, the proposal is exactly the opposite of unrigging. It's a coup. Its purpose is to subvert our democratic system, to destroy our Constitution permanently in order to give a small group of rich liberal total control over everything. That's their plan, just so you know. As we told you repeatedly on this program and showed you with reporting, Big Tech fought hard to boost Hillary Clinton in the last election cycle, and they've worked hard to undermine the Trump administration ever since. With the 2020 election approaching right now, they have no intention of letting votes go against them a second time. They mean it. According to VOX, a secretive group of Silicon Valley donors called Mind the Gap is plotting to spend $140 million in an effort to defeat Donald Trump. Meanwhile, at Facebook, only a single employee has donated money to the Trump campaign so far, just one. At Twitter, none, not a single Twitter employee, and that's just how Big Tech is spending its money. Google and others tried to use their monopoly power to sway the 2016 results, and you can expect them to be even more aggressive this time. Blake Harris is the author of "The History of the Future," and he joins us tonight. Blake, thanks -- thanks a lot for coming on.

BLAKE HARRIS, AUTHOR: Thanks for having me, Tucker.

HARRIS: So Mind the Gap, $140 million within the context of recent American presidential campaigns, that's an extraordinarily aggressive posture.

HARRIS: Yes, the scope is extraordinary and their method, their raison d'etre is really -- what makes us unique, you know? Mind the Gap is a data driven organization. That's not unusual. You know, Trump and Brad Parscale used data driven analytics to help win the 2016 election and more power to them. But the problem here is really the secrecy. Like the first thing I thought, learning about the story is that there's so many times in modern day journalism where you use the word secret or secretly or secretive, to sort of imbue a sense, an ominous nature to ordinary things like Blake Harris appears on TUCKER CARLSON secretly, even though just because I didn't issue a press release. But here, this is actually -- I was like, wow, this is actually the word secretly applied. This is an organization, one of their members said their raison d'etre is stealth. That is what they're all about, and going back to what you said earlier, the scope of it is just incredible. The minimum suggested donation is $40,000.00, so this is not small potatoes we're talking about here.

CARLSON: But isn't this exactly what the left wonders about for -- I don't know, about 40 years? The democracy would corrode in the face of a small group of rich people, exerting undue influence in elections. I mean, they said they hated this, and now they've kind of cornered the market on it.

HARRIS: Right. Because they're doing it for the right reasons in their mind. You know, I spent few years speaking with Facebook executives in working on this book, and there wasn't a single person that seemed to have any doubt about their mission. They were so certain of it and you know, when you have a mission in mind, everything that helps you achieve that mission is, you know, for the "greater good." And that's really what the problem is here. You said there's only one person in all of 2019 that donated to Trump. I think maybe the second or the last quarter, there was another person, but two people out of a company that has 35,000 fulltime employees. That's insane. I mean, two of anything out of 35,000 is insane. And these, you know, it really is a mission driven organization like many of those companies in Silicon Valley, and they believe that they're doing the right thing. And there is a by any means possible sort of asterisk to all of it.

CARLSON: So a company of 35,000 that has two Republican donors lectures the rest of us about diversity. Everything is irony. So I wonder, I mean, I'm skeptical that the President can prevail against forces this big and well organized. I think this is a challenge to our democracy. I wonder if Republicans understand what they're up against here.

HARRIS: I mean, again, I sort of -- I tip my cap to their data driven market analysis aspect to it. You know, one of the things that they did was they said they suggested putting money on underdogs instead of candidates who are likely to win because that money wasn't really going to help make an actual difference. But the real problem is just the secrecy, the not knowing where it's going and you know, for Silicon Valley, whose ethos is always so much based on transparency and openness, why the stealth?

CARLSON: So they often tell us that the first thing they would do is overturn the Democratic candidates and say, it's the Supreme Court decision that made all of this possible. It made these dark money contributions possible, classifying them as political speech, protected speech. Have they changed their view on that? Are they not for campaign finance reform anymore?

HARRIS: I think that you could sum it down into like, what a second grader would say, they did it first. So anything they want to do to any bad behavior, it is justified because the other side did it first. We're just balancing the scales.

CARLSON: Yes. Well, I think Republicans should be worried about this. I really do. I think people should be worried about. It's too much power for too a small group.

HARRIS: For sure.

CARLSON: Blake, great to see you tonight. Thank you.

HARRIS: Thanks for having on, Tucker.

CARLSON: The Democrats are going all out to get rid of the Second Amendment in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Now, they're trying to suppress public protests against them. We'll have a live news update to that. Plus, the left knows that ridicule is sometimes the most effective weapon against tyranny. So of course, they're trying to destroy a humor website. The CEO of "Babylon Bee" joins us after the break, and we're happy to have him.


CARLSON: Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, the guy in blackface, one thing we know he believes in, guns. That's why his bodyguards carry guns. But doesn't want you to carry a gun to protect yourself. His administration is trying to prevent you from doing that, trying to pass new gun control bills. Now, he is using executive fiat to ban protesters from bringing firearms to the state capitol. Chief breaking news correspondent, Trace Gallagher has more on this unfolding story. Hey, Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CHIEF BREAKING NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Tucker. Monday as Martin Luther King, Jr. Day which in the Virginia Capital of Richmond is also Lobby Day where groups on both sides of various political issues including gun rights traditionally show up to lobby their state lawmakers. But for the first time in 25 years, Democrats control both chambers of the legislature and have already introduced a number of gun control bills. And some on the left, including "The Washington Post" and "New York Times" are reporting that gun rights activists and others may be looking to stir up trouble quoting, "A sense of crisis enveloped the capital of Virginia on Thursday, with the police on heightened alert and Richmond bracing for possible violence ahead of a gun rally next week that is expected to draw white supremacist and other anti-government extremists." But gun rights activists called that alarmist saying that except for a few obscure Facebook posts from out-of-state residents, reporters for "The Times" and "The Post" have no evidence of an impending Civil War. But Democratic Governor Ralph Northam saying that nobody wants another Charlottesville has temporarily banned weapons at the Capitol saying that some activists are not planning to be peaceful. Watch.


GOV. RALPH NORTHAM (D-VA): We have received credible Intelligence from our law enforcement agencies that there are groups with malicious plans for the rally that is planned for Monday.


GALLAGHER: The governor cited dark webs used by violent groups in the arrest of suspected white supremacist in other states, but many gun rights groups have told their members to be on their best behavior and say they are not nearly as concerned about violence as they are about finding a place to park -- Tucker.

CARLSON: Not surprising. Trace Gallagher, thanks so much.


CARLSON: Well, of all the good things and bad things the internet has brought us, one thing we're celebrating is the renaissance in satire and comedy online. No website represents that Renaissance better than "The Babylon Bee." Here's some recent headlines they've run, "Democrats grasping at straws to impeach Trump now regret banning straws." Or this, "El Paso man comes down from insane acid trip where he hallucinated that he ran for President." Or how about this one, "CNN attacks Babylon Bee: The internet is only big enough for one fake news site." Those headlines are all amusing, but they're also satirical. It's obvious they are, they're not real. But as the left has grown steadily more radical, it's also lost its sense of humor -- completely, in case you haven't noticed -- and become far more tyrannical. CNN bullying high schoolers from Kentucky, that's fine. A website poking fun at America's most powerful media figures must be destroyed. And so the left has set out to crush "The Babylon Bee." "The New York Times" suggested that when the right pokes fun at the left, it's not satire, it's "deceit." A CNN reported recently accused "Babylon Bee" of spreading "clickbait and misinformation." In other words, Facebook, better censor it and fast. Seth Dillon is the CEO of "The Babylon Bee" and we're happy to have him on tonight. Seth, thanks so much for coming on.

SETH DILLON, CEO, "THE BABYLON BEE": Thanks for having me.

CARLSON: Why do you -- and by the way, I think your site is hilarious and a lot of people think that is doing well.

DILLON: Thank you.

CARLSON: CNN doesn't think it's funny at all, and they're trying to get Facebook to ban you. Why are they doing that?

DILLON: Everything is irony. You said that earlier, right? I mean, how funny is it that, you know, CNN is coming after us for spreading disinformation? I find that rich.

CARLSON: It did occur to me, absolutely. But -- and you're right, it's hilarious on one level, but on another, it's ominous. The idea that a "news organization" could try and put you out of business because it doesn't like your jokes. I mean that's not a world you want to live in, is it?

DILLON: Well, you have that clip of Adam Carolla earlier saying, you know the pendulum if it's going to swing back the other way that could be driven by you know, humor and comedy. If that is true, and they see it as a threat, and you know, we're aiming at the wrong targets and they don't like that, you know, personally they like to smear and denigrate people they disagree with, right? And so while they're not actively and openly calling for us to be de- platformed, it's implicit when they say these guys are spreading misinformation. They just call themselves a satire site to get on Facebook's rules and things like that. Those suggestions. I mean, what's the solution there? If that's what we're really doing, if it's true if they're not spreading fake news about us and they're really being honest, then Facebook should shut us down. Right? I mean, that would be the proper response to a site that's just misinforming people on purpose. So that seems to be their goal, and they just don't like the targets we're aiming at.

CARLSON: I mean, it's clearly true. They're building the predicate for censorship. They're essentially saying that you shouldn't be allowed to continue doing what you're doing. And, and the baffling thing to me is there are a lot of hard-end sites on the internet, but there's a kind of sweetness to, I would say, "The Babylon Bee." It's not a cruel sight at all. You always sort of pull back a little bit, at the end, I think, as a reader of it. It's kind of the last site that you'd think the left would want to squelch because, you know, there are other targets. What is it about you that they really don't like?

DILLON: That's a good question. I mean, we do -- the interesting thing is that we don't just target the wrong targets, right? I think one of the things that's really refreshing about the Babylon be is that we -- there's a lot of self-deprecating humor, you know. We poke at Trump a lot. The right is not off limits. You know, we're a Christian satire site. Christians aren't off limits. We often, you know, we throw things with a projector up on the wall that are our own issues that we try to deal with and say, are we comfortable with this? So, you know, it's very interesting to us that rather than recognizing the fact that, you know, we kind of hit all sides, we're pretty balanced with it. Like you said, we're not vicious. What's the real reason for trying to take us out?

CARLSON: Are you worried about it?

DILLON: I'm not. I'm not because every single time this type of thing happens, and it's happened repeatedly. It happened with "Snopes." We've had a couple of different CNN personalities now come out and call us a fake satire site. We're not really doing satire, they put satire in scare quotes, right?

CARLSON: A fake satire. What's that? That's so mad, I can't even -- I don't even know what that means. What does it mean to be fake satire site?

DILLON: Right. It's redundant.

CARLSON: Yes, right.

DILLON: Now, I mean, I'm not worried about it because the response we get is incredible. I mean, look, I wouldn't be talking to you if they weren't doing this. Our fans are really loyal. They rally behind us. We get a lot of support. And the pushback is really tremendous. And so I think it backfires on them, and it only amplifies our voice when they try to silence it.

CARLSON: Yes, I don't think it's going to work. I mean, I must get a text today of one of your headlines. So Godspeed. I think you're doing great.

DILLON: That's great.

CARLSON: A great thing, making America a little bit lighter is really a virtuous thing to do in my opinion. So thank you for doing it.

DILLON: All right, thanks for having me on.

CARLSON: Well, this country narrowly avoided a war with Iran last week, how to American voters feel about that? It's interesting. We've got brand new polling on this subject. Plus the EPA has announced a new policy that helps some, but it might not be good for you at all. We don't do a ton of environmental stories on this show. This one is worth doing, so stick around.


CARLSON: Despite its name, the Environmental Protection Agency doesn't just exist to protect the environment. It also exists to protect you by policing against the many pollutants that are generated by modern life. But soon, the EPA will be doing a little bit less to protect you and a little bit more to protect big agriculture. Atrazine is a pesticide. It's the second most common one in the United States. Half of America's corn crop is treated with it. Atrazine is banned in the European Union and here's why. When administered to male frogs, atrazine chemically castrates them and even causes some to change their sex entirely. In humans atrazine is an endocrine disrupter. That means it causes changes to your natural hormonal balance. For newborn boys, atrazine exposure in utero is correlated with lower birth weight, undescended testicles and deformities to sex organs. Now, it may be that atrazine's risk is low enough and its value is high enough that we don't need to ban it. But the EPA isn't just keeping atrazine legal, it's decided to stop closely monitoring its use. Buried within a recent 60-page regulatory document, the EPA has announced it will soon end its Atrazine Monitoring Program, which tests drinking water to make certain that atrazine levels are safe. According to the EPA, the risk is simply so low that it's not worth even checking to make sure the situation is under control. In fact, it's so low they're allowing 50 percent more atrazine to enter America's waterways. Now, that's despite the fact that in 2017, the year with the most recent data are public, 30 million Americans had measurable amounts of atrazine in their tap water. Now, according to researchers at Purdue University, a single part per billion of atrazine may be linked to low birth weights. In Evansville, Illinois, the water is already testing at 22 parts per billion. For the EPA, that's not a concern. Their concern is corn. When President Trump ran in 2016 on keeping America out of Middle Eastern quagmires, we came close to getting in one last week after the assassination of Qasem Soleimani and then Iran's retaliatory missile strikes. It looks like we're on the brink there for a minute. In the end, of course, we avoided it. The question is, what does the public think of the whole thing? Well, a new Morning Consult poll finds this -- fascinating -- 71 percent of voters approved have not attacking Iran. Just 14 percent disapprove. Imagine that. Avoiding far off wars is popular. You could win an election on that. We will be back Monday. Have a great night. Sean Hannity is next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2020 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.