This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," November 14, 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.” You can see from the screen, the President is about to rally his supporters night in Bossier, Louisiana. That's right across the river from Shreveport.
Given what's going on in Washington right now, a city in the grip of slobbering hysteria, it's likely the President will have newsworthy things to say this evening, and of course, we'll be monitoring what he says and we'll go there when he does.
In the meantime, though, the fallout continues from the very first day -- the full day -- of impeachment hearings. What exactly have we learned?
Well, that really depends on who you are. If you're, for example, mid- level nonprofit executive from Williamsburg, Brooklyn, someone who announces your pronouns to strangers and regularly writes fervid letters to "The New Yorker," your preconceptions likely were confirmed by what you saw.
You hated Donald Trump when you woke up yesterday morning, and you hated him slightly more when you went to bed last night after watching 11 straight hours of CNN.
But if you were anyone else in America, a normal person, someone with kids and a job and a marriage you care about, the hearings likely had no effect at all.
You keep hearing distant rumblings about Ukraine and ambassadors and transcripts of phone calls, but you're not quite sure what it adds up to, you suspect, it is mostly politics. The people who run things hate Trump obsessively, they always have, you know that, they're not hiding it, and maybe they have good reasons for that. Maybe they don't have good reasons for that.
But there's an election just a year from now and you can decide that. For now, you wish the buffoons on television would stop yapping about Trump 24/7 and talk about something that maybe is relevant to your life.
But they won't stop. They're single mindedly focused on despising Trump. It's weird and it's unhealthy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Taylor and Kent handled hard questions, thoughtfully, stayed away from rank speculation. They acted without animus. And we're clearly driven by a sense of duty to the rest of us. Taylor and Kent should make us proud of the people who serve us in government.
DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: We saw two credible witnesses give sworn testimony, patriots here --
MAX BOOT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: And they are utterly convincing. They come across as men of integrity as civil servants who are patriots.
NEAL KATYAL, AUTHOR: The credibility of this really patriotic American coming forward and then saying what he said.
NICOLLE WALLACE, MSNBC ANCHOR: I am gob smacked by the contrast, the patriotism, the stoicism.
GLENN KIRSCHNER, MSNBC ANALYST: These guys give you patriotic goosebumps. They don't have a dog in the fight. They are not never Trumpers. They're in there just telling it like it is.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: You got that? So that people you're watching making slashingly partisan arguments in Congress during the hearing don't in fact, quote, "have a dog in this fight."
So contrary to all appearances, ignore your own perceptions, these people are neutral. They're disinterested. There as blind to partisanship is Lady Justice herself.
Trust us say the news anchors. This is all totally on the level as believable as Jeffrey Epstein's autopsy results. You'd have to be a total wacko to doubt it.
In fact, says Chuck Todd, you, by the way, hosts a TV show on Sunday mornings right here in Washington, anyone who questions the official version of the story literally has been brainwashed like an inmate at a North Korean prison. Chuck Todd, honestly feels sorry for people like that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHUCK TODD, MNSBC HOST: These conditions, 30 to 40 percent of the country, to essentially whatever you hear, it's not what you think.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right, sir.
TODD: But we are living in a moment where we have a part of one of our major political parties that is just not accepting the premise, is just not accepting facts that are facts.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Just not accepting facts that are facts. Pretty funny. But it's not actually real. Partisans on television like that guy, say things like this not to convince you, that's not going to work. They say things like that to reassure themselves that their ruse is working. And on some level, they know that you don't believe them, which is why they double the volume.
But the adults in the conversation and by the way, there are some know the score. According to a CNN report this afternoon, top Democrats secretly admit to one another, this isn't working, they're not going to get Trump through impeachment hearings. They are not convincing voters the President should be removed a year before the election. It has nothing to do with getting that done.
They're impeaching Trump for the benefit of the true believers who watch MSNBC in primetime who think Chuck Todd is like a newsman.
This is all a sham. It's a variety show staged for the benefit of the party's donors and its activists. It's not actually going to move votes.
And by the way, the sober Democrats -- and there are some -- there's a lot at stake here. Not everyone is a buffoon, there are some smart people in this game, and the smart ones know that.
They also know that in the end, impeachment could very well wind up hurting them, hurting the Democratic Party, just like it hurt the Republican Party in 1998 when they impeached Bill Clinton, for much clear reasons than they are impeaching Donald Trump.
So in fact, it likely will hurt the Democrats and that's starting to dawn on them now and that realization is having an interesting effect. It always does.
At the moment you realize you're not convincing anyone, the moment you get that your propaganda is impotent, you change and in this case, the establishment is basically doing less and less to conceal what they're really up to.
Here's one example. Early this morning, Bloomberg News, named after the guy who is running for President, by the way, published this tweet summarizing the first day of hearings. Keep in mind, Bloomberg News is a news operation and we're quoting, "The first public impeachment hearings against Donald Trump laid out how a handful of loyalists led by Rudy Giuliani wrested control of U.S. policy from seasoned diplomats."
Wrested control of U.S. policy from seasoned diplomats, presumably in whose hands it should remain.
Consider that for a minute, by the way, that's the underlying assumption of all the dumb people. Chuck Todd believes that as a matter of faith, but is there a clearer inversion of the Constitution of the United States? Hard to think of one.
Diplomats don't control foreign policy, they carry it out. Who controls foreign policy? Well, voters do. They control their country, in fact, through their elected officials, so it doesn't matter if every single bureaucrat in the State Department disagreed with the President's policy on Ukraine or whatever, Russia or Burkina Faso -- fill in the blank. It doesn't matter.
Their job is not to make policy, it is to affect it. It's to carry it out. They work for the President. All presidents -- Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Obama, Trump -- it doesn't matter, whoever is elected next.
When Chelsea Clinton becomes President, they'll take orders from her. Good. They take orders from the elected person because that person was elected and they weren't.
The President is the only person with power in the Executive Branch - that how democracies work. And that's why in Washington, almost nobody still supports democracy.
Buck Sexton is host of "The Buck Sexton Show," and he joins us tonight. What do you make of it? It's like my favorite tweet ever on the internet, says Bloomberg News. The problem here is that Trump and his minions were trying to wrest control of policy from the diplomats.
BUCK SEXTON, HOST, "THE BUCK SEXTON SHOW": Well, I think it shows us what we've known all along, which is that this isn't about getting to facts. This isn't about really even gathering evidence, it's about pushing a narrative and it's a narrative that reminds everybody that the Democratic Party obviously wants to do anything to impeach this President and get rid of Trump.
It's a narrative that the crime that he committed or the wrong that he did, if it were serious, Tucker, they wouldn't change what it was every week.
I mean, I don't know, next week, you know, now they're saying bribery, extortion. For a while, it was campaign finance if you were in the very early days.
CARLSON: Why not just cannibalism? Why not just go there?
SEXTON: It's just --
CARLSON: Why not just accuse him of eating someone?
SEXTON: It's slightly absurd, but I do think that there's a broader issue here and that is that the media, by and large, has conditioned its audience to expect their Watergate moment, and they're not going to back down from that.
And I actually think that a lot of you the viewing public, I mean, I give CNN and MSNBC viewers more credit than a lot of conservatives, I think, and that I think they're smart enough to know that this is actually a ruse.
That when Nancy Pelosi says, this is a solemn day, and she is practically tearing up because she is having her party lead an impeachment of a President based on nonsense, that this is all theatrics, but as long as it's meant to get Trump, they'll be fine with anything.
CARLSON: Well, but it's actually a kind of pornography. I mean, what these are doing are massaging the erogenous zones of their audience. It's like no one thinks it's real. I think you're absolutely right. They're not stupid. I used to work in those. I know the viewers, they're not stupid, but they hate Trump so much that they want to hear that he is a very bad man and he could be gone soon. And it's just, oh, they love it, but it's fundamentally a lie.
SEXTON: Yes. And also when you have no more integrity to protect as journalists, then you have a lot of latitude. So I just -- I think this is actually just going to get worse at this point.
But just the fact that there are so many of them who are saying that we should have no interest in the whistleblower or his identity or his background or anything about him, but then they're also praising these guys who are giving their family history going back to Bunker Hill, acting like they are hearing, you know, people playing flutes and marching the flags in the background.
It's just -- it's utterly absurd, but that's supposed to matter. By the way, one rule, one lesson through all of this has to be anytime the media tells you that a public official is beyond reproach, everyone at home should be very skeptical whether it's Mueller or Weissmann, or Comey or Brennan -- go down the list, these are all the best of the best, the smartest we've ever seen and when they come out, they say insane things on TV. They run to CNN and MSNBC and elsewhere to get contracts.
We see that they're the rabid partisans we knew they were all along, but then they just move on to the next storyline. It's absurd.
CARLSON: Any journalist who tells you, you must trust a politician is not a journalist. He is a partisan actor. You know, I've got strong political views. I've never trusted a politician in my life and I never will. Why would I? They are all liars.
SEXTON: Yes, there is no cynicism and when you have someone like Adam Schiff, I mean, does anyone really believe that he doesn't know the whistleblower's identity, Tucker? Journalists are well, if he said so, he must not. It's absurd.
CARLSON: The great Buck Sexton. Great to see you tonight. Thank you so much.
SEXTON: Good to see you, Tucker.
CARLSON: As impeachment continues, it has shifted from being a drama to a kind of soap opera. Trump adviser, Kellyanne Conway's marriage doesn't have anything to do with Ukraine. But over on CNN, they decided it is fair game.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: A final question, a sensitive question and it's a political question. It's a substantive question. I don't want to talk about your marriage. I know that there are issues there. Your husband George Conway is a lawyer.
KELLYANNE CONWAY, COUNSEL TO DONALD TRUMP: Did you just say --
BLITZER: Your husband, George.
CONWAY: No, no. Did you just say there are issues there? You don't want to talk about my marriage.
BLITZER: I don't want to talk about -- no, I don't want to talk about that --
CONWAY: Why did you say that?
BLITZER: I don't want to talk about your marriage.
CONWAY: You should not have just said to your audience, I don't want to talk about your marriage quote, "I know there are issues." Why would you say that? What is it that you know that I don't?
BLITZER: I don't want to talk about your -- I don't want to talk about your marriage.
CONWAY: Why would you say there are issues? What you just quoted is said every single day by other voices, but you wanted to put it in my husband's voice because you think somehow that that'll help your ratings or that you're really sticking it to Kellyanne Conway, and let me make very clear, you didn't stick it to Kellyanne Conway.
I think you embarrassed yourself and I'm embarrassed for you, because this is CNN now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Author and columnist, Mark Steyn joins us tonight. Hey, Mark, what do you make of this?
MARK STEYN, AUTHOR AND COLUMNIST: Well, I have to say, Kellyanne does a terrific job just shoving it back down Wolf Blitzer's throat there. You have to feel for her because it is an extremely bizarre situation.
You showed that clip of George Conway yesterday leaning like the Leaning Tower of Pisa, as you said, there is no -- what's interesting is that Wolf quoted him supposedly because he is a serious legal scholar.
That's not why he's on TV. He wasn't talking about any points of law. He just goes on and talks about Trump being a sociopath. And actually whether or not Trump is a sociopath, the sad thing here is that it is actually rather more sociopathic to be so obsessed with Trump that you'd actually go on MSNBC.
Well, there he is. Even if you're totally unsuited for television, that guy 25 years ago, I told Andrew Lloyd Webber to get rid of that haircut. I had no idea he would actually sell it to George Conway. Andrew can be vicious like that. But when you've got bad haircut, you should not be on television.
But this is --
CARLSON: But you know what's going on here because you've been in show business and television for so long. This is stunt casting. This is another example of television producer -- I mean, clearly there's something wrong. I mean, this is like a freak show.
This guy, you shouldn't put him on TV. It's too ugly and weird and unfair. I don't know what his -- I don't know what's going on in the house. I don't want to know I'm not going to speculate. But television producers are making it worse by putting this guy on the tube, I would say.
STEYN: Yes, and it's actually cruel and it actually speaks rather well for Donald Trump, whatever you think of the guy that he is actually -- she has been there since day one.
CARLSON: That's true.
STEYN: Everybody else has come and gone. He is on his 27th National Security adviser or whatever it is by now. She stuck by him, and he stuck by her even though this guy who is just famous because he is Mr. Kellyanne Conway, no one is interested in his legal scholarship.
And Wolf Blitzer made him look -- made himself look utterly pathetic sitting there as Kellyanne push back against him until some intern feeds into his ear, why don't you mentioned Mary Matalin and Carville because they were a mismatch couple, too.
They were a double act. That was showbiz. This is something that is, I think, as you say they're just doing it because the couple of Foggy Bottom Stiffs they put up yesterday didn't work.
Every normal person just looks at them as a couple of dorks and they are doing the freak show because that's actually better for them.
CARLSON: That's true. Because exploiting people is what the media are all about -- I can say having spent my life in it. Anyway, Mark Steyn, great to see you.
STEYN: Thanks a lot, Tucker.
CARLSON: Thank you. When impeachment may have not just hurt Democrats by boosting the President's approval, it also directly hurt their own candidates.
So if the House impeaches Trump, his trial will be held in the Republican- controlled Senate, and that means Mitch McConnell could reschedule proceedings to cause maximum discomfort to the opposing party and given the schedule of the primaries this winter, it could actually sting and might possibly affect the outcome of those races.
Ned Ryun, founder of American Majority joins us tonight to explain how that might work. Ned, good to see you.
NED RYUN, FOUNDER, AMERICAN MAJORITY: Good to see you, Tucker.
CARLSON: So I'm beginning to think -- and I don't think it's just wishful thinking -- I'm beginning to think that maybe this was a massive tactical error on the part of the Democrats. Tell us how it could play out in the Senate for them.
RYUN: Yes, no, I absolutely agree with you, Tucker. They wanted this. They've been pushing this. I think in many ways they've brought this upon themselves, and I'm not sure they really know what they've gotten into.
Again, after yesterday's hearing, it was more festivities came early in airing of grievances from those self-important bureaucrats. But if there is an impeachment vote, I'm not convinced of that, Tucker. I'm not sure if there's more of what we saw yesterday that the Democrats will actually have the votes.
But if it goes to the Senate, I think Mitch McConnell could wreak a lot of havoc on the Democratic 2020 presidential campaigns. He could make it go as long as he wants to. I don't think there will be a dismissal vote.
I talked with Senate offices today, there's not enough of them. There are swing state Republicans up in 2020. They're not going to vote for a quick dismissal, and they're not going to have a two-week trial. So Mitch McConnell might as well stretch it all the way into February 3rd for the Iowa caucuses, get all of the senators off the campaign trail, bring them back to D.C., blow up their campaign schedules, blow up their campaign fundraising, wreak havoc on them.
The thing that people have to understand, too, Tucker, the Senate can compel witnesses. I would love to see the Trump defense team if this goes to trial, call everyone -- Brennan, Clapper, Comey, bring in Hillary, ask Hillary about the Steele dossier, call up Schiff, bring in Schiff's witnesses that are -- the witnesses that Schiff blocked in the House, bring all of these people, swear them in, show it on national TV, but most importantly, give a fair trial of Trump and give him the due process that he has been denied for the last several years.
CARLSON: It'd be interesting to see if the Republican Senate is capable of that, you know, they'd have to want to stand up for themselves. But maybe -- you know, maybe they've changed. I don't know. We'll see.
RYUN: This is the one thing that does --
CARLSON: The best case though, for sure. Yes, go ahead.
RYUN: Well, it concerns me a little, but I don't trust the Pierre Delecto's in the Senate, but I will say this, people have to understand Mitch McConnell has two goals. He wants to be the longest serving Majority Leader in Senate history, meaning he has to win next fall and he has to keep the majority.
RYUN: And he wants to reshape the Federal Judiciary and the only guy that's giving him the judges that he really, really wants -- Donald Trump. He wants Trump to get through this because he needs him to keep the majority.
CARLSON: I think it's a very fair point. Ned Ryun, good to see you tonight. Thank you.
RYUN: Thanks, Tucker.
CARLSON: There's an awful lot going on. We have more ahead. But we wanted to note an anniversary. It was three years ago tonight, November 14, 2016 that this show launched. Donald Trump had just been elected days before, the unlikeliest President in American history.
We didn't know what was going to happen. Nobody did know. But even then, it was clear the battle would be over democracy. Would the people who held power, relinquish it after an election outcome they didn't like?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: What's the show going to be about? You can judge for yourself, but here's the basic theme of it. People in power tend to lie not because they want to, but because they can't help themselves. That's human nature. The more power people have, the bigger the temptation to misuse it.
The press is supposed to be the watchdog against all of this and it worked fine for a couple of centuries, then the press decided they have more in common with certain politicians than with readers or viewers, and that sort of fell apart.
We're going to get back to basics here. We're going to hold the powerful accountable, pierce pomposity, translate doublespeak, mock smugness and barbecue nonsense every night, I hope you'll watch.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: People in power tend to lie. We'll save that tape. It will be fresh and true 10 years from now, in fact, it will always be true. Human nature doesn't change.
We've been honored to cover that unchanging story for the past three years here at Fox. What a great and fascinating time that's been. Thanks for hanging in there with us through it all. If it weren't for you, we'd be long gone. Trust me.
We want to thank Fox and especially the Murdoch family for their unwavering support of this show day after day. God bless them.
When we come back a lot more -- millions of people, including medical experts, and even a Member of Congress doubt the official story of Jeffrey Epstein's death. There are questions.
So why is the left calling those people fascists and demanding a cover up? What is that about?
And with impeachment taking up every hour of television coverage, do you remember anything else from this past week? Play along with Jesse Walters and Katie Pavlich in tonight's Special Edition of "Final Exam."
Plus, as we told you, we are watching the President's rally in Louisiana. We'll hear what he has to say, just ahead.
CARLSON: It's been three months since Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in his jail cell in Manhattan. How exactly did he die? Well, the autopsy says he killed himself. But more and more people doubt the official story, so many that it's becoming almost a trend nationally and even a Member of Congress has raised doubts in the most amusing possible way.
Chief breaking news correspondent, Trace Gallagher frames the story for us tonight. Hey, Trace.
TRACE GALLAGHER, CHIEF BREAKING NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Tucker. Attorney General Bill Barr said the jailhouse death of convicted child rapist Jeffrey Epstein quote "raises serious questions" and said both the F.B.I. and D.O.J. Inspector General would investigate the unusual circumstances.
But now three months later, we just contacted the D.O.J. and F.B.I. and there is no investigation update and no comment.
But Epstein's brother Mark is speaking out telling the "Miami Herald" that his brother was innocent and did not commit suicide quoting here, "I could see if he got a life sentence, I could then see him taking himself out, but he had a bail hearing coming up."
Mark Epstein then went on to reinvigorate the suicide-murder debate saying quote, "Jeffrey knew a lot of stuff about a lot of people."
The brother also says it was inappropriate for Jeffrey to have sex with 18- year-olds, but not illegal. Apparently, Mark Epstein doesn't remember his brother pleading guilty in 2008 to having sex with a minor.
And if you haven't noticed, the Epstein didn't kill himself meme is showing up in unusual places like in the background of college game day at the University of Alabama, a Texas State basketball game and beer cans of a Fresno brewery.
And now Arizona GOP Congressman Paul Gosar is getting in on the meme stream. Yesterday, during the live Impeachment Inquiry, Gosar sent out a series of tweets commenting about the hearing, and it wasn't long before the Twitter sphere noticed that the first letter of each tweet spelled Epstein didn't kill himself, adding a bit more fuel to the conspiracy fires, Gosar later sent another round of tweets that spelled out Area 51 -- Tucker.
CARLSON: Things we laugh about, but you know, it turns out maybe they're real. Trace Gallagher, great to see you tonight. Thank you.
GALLAGHER: Thank you.
CARLSON: Congressman Gosar we are proud to say joins us on the set tonight. I don't think I've -- you sent out 23 tweets in a row.
REP. PAUL GOSAR, R-ARIZ.: Yes.
CARLSON: Spelling in an acrostic code, the first letter of each tweet spells out Epstein didn't kill himself. It made my day personally. But tell me why you did that.
GOSAR: Well, we wanted to have a different delivery mechanism and to a group of people that may not even be following what's going on with this fake inquiry -- Impeachment Inquiry of the President.
GOSAR: And it got the results that we wanted. It's now hit over 15 million, looked at and it's been passed on around the world. It's now global.
CARLSON: So why as a Member of Congress, did you think that was worth commenting on?
GOSAR: Because we have to include people to find out how big of a hoax we're actually seeing right now the Democrats put the President of the United States through. He did nothing wrong. And we were very poignant. Our 23 tweets itemized each different instance a fact right why he is not guilty.
GOSAR: And so what this basically did is it showed you know, Area 51, and now this meme Epstein didn't kill himself. It goes around the world. And now people identify with it. And now it shows that how big a hoax we're actually seeing with this Impeachment Inquiry.
CARLSON: Do you think that Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself?
GOSAR: I think there's a lot of things there that don't make sense. But I leave it up to the --
CARLSON: So why -- and that's right. I mean, we don't -- I guess the answer is we don't know.
CARLSON: Of course not. But why do you think it is that some of our betters, the people in charge, the smart kids are demanding that we believe that he killed himself? Why is it important for people to stop the questions that you're asking?
GOSAR: Well, I've never been one that likes to be told what to think, and so from that standpoint, when people tell me I've got to think some way, it's usually the opposite.
GOSAR: And so you know, inquiring minds want to know and if we put it in the right context, you're going to get a whole much more people included into it.
And so from people from cab drivers to people that work on the Hill to everyday people back home, they say yes, signing off, Epstein didn't kill himself.
CARLSON: Amazing. Well, it certainly woke some of us up.
GOSAR: Well, thanks.
CARLSON: And it was great. Congressman, thanks so much for joining us tonight.
GOSAR: Thank you very much, Tucker.
CARLSON: Well, somehow just the only people who aren't curious about Jeffrey Epstein's death appear to be members of the press. Over at "The Nation," Jeet Heer, maybe the single dumbest person in the press corps tweeted that Epstein skeptics were being recruited by quote, "fascists." You're a fascist if you have questions. Shut up and stop asking questions says the reporter.
Countless other publications dismissed questions about his death as a conspiracy theory. But it isn't just cranks and people in tinfoil hats are asking honest questions about Jeffrey Epstein.
Plenty of physicians, for example, have questioned the official version given to us in the autopsy report, sometimes they even ask those questions on this program.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEANINE PIRRO, HOST: The breaking of a hyoid bone and I've tried strangulation cases. That's classic in a strangulation, not in a hanging. So there is a rush here. I don't know if it's to shut it down, but it makes no sense to me as a prosecutor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: And then not that long after that, Dr. Michael Baden, the famous pathologist revealed an independent autopsy review, which added to those theories and bolstered those questions. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL BADEN, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: I think that the evidence points to a homicide rather than suicide.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why?
BADEN: Because there are multiple -- three fractures in the hyoid bone, the thyroid cartilage that are very unusual for suicide.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Dr. Marc Siegel is the man we go to, to get our medical questions answered. He's a Fox medical contributor. He has helped us understand this story from the beginning. He joins us tonight.
MARC SIEGEL, MEDICAL CONTRIBUTOR: Hi, Tucker.
CARLSON: Hi, Doctor. You believe in science. Of course you're a physician, a researcher, you're a man of science. Does it make you nervous when people say, you know, don't ask too many questions. This is settled and we don't want to hear your questions.
SIEGEL: The first thing that comes to my mind is what might they be hiding? What might they be not wanting to release because they don't know what the public's reaction is going to be.
And I, as a scientist and a physician want the public to know, I want the brother to know, but I want the public to know what's going on here.
Why, as Dr. Baden says, are the three fractures that occurred in the neck more much more common in the homicide, rather than a sheet hanging off of a bunk bed where you have to be contorted in a strange angle? What about the hemorrhages that Dr. Baden who observed the autopsy found in his eyes? What about the marks that were found on the neck? What does all that mean?
Why did two guards fall asleep simultaneously and he is left unobserved for two hours? We're supposed to believe that. What about the video cameras being turned off miraculously?
If -- and one more thing that no one has ever said on the show before, how come the person who did the autopsy and at first did not have a ruling of suicide is not the one who issued the report. Her boss issued the report and called it a suicide a few days later. What changed? What's the information here that we don't know? I want all of this information released.
The Bureau of Prisons next week is going to be testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I want them to be grilled on this. What information hasn't been released here?
CARLSON: Well, we shouldn't sweep it under the rug. And I never ask you political questions, because I don't think he was a political man. But what a shame this is that it's becoming a political issue. Why is it only on Fox News that we're asking these questions? Why is the left demanding that we shut up and stop questioning the ruling class? Do you think -- I mean, that's not healthy, is it?
SIEGEL: No, and especially in a situation like this where there's been one suicide in this prison in 40 years and homicides for known sexual predators occur regularly and where his cellmate was a known murderer who had murdered three or four other people, was whisked out of the room.
All of these facts, as you've said, belong on a "Columbo" episode.
CARLSON: Of course, they do.
SIEGEL: How could this be swept under the rug? Why would someone have a political agenda here? The public wants to know the truth. What really happened here?
CARLSON: They don't want to know.
SIEGEL: We don't know about it.
CARLSON: Jeet Heer is telling us, you're a fascist if you have questions.
SIEGEL: That's ridiculous.
CARLSON: Dr. Siegel, thank you.
SIEGEL: Good to see you.
CARLSON: We are less than three months away from the Iowa caucuses, and somehow Pete Buttigieg is in the lead. Really? So it's time to seriously ask for the first time. Who exactly is this guy? He's the Mayor of South Bend. Where is South Bend? What do they do there? Can he really be President? Our investigation next?
Also, Jesse Watters and Katie Pavlich face off in an epic "Final Exam" and needless to say, we are monitoring the President's rally in Louisiana. Breaking news. We'll be back.
CARLSON: This is a Fox News Alert. The President of the United States taking the stage in Louisiana right across the river from Shreveport, the Red River, for a Make America Great Again rally. These rallies are obviously more frequent, so we are monitoring them.
News often made and we're going to bring you it when it is. We'll play it back to you the second it happens. But first with Joe Biden's presidential campaign appearing to be in a freefall, the superficially moderate wing of the Democratic Party has a new favorite. He is Mayor Pete Buttigieg.
The most recent poll of Iowa Democrats shows Buttigieg leading by three percent in the state. So he could be the nominee, at least theoretically. So maybe it's time for us to take Pete Buttigieg seriously. Who is this guy?
Well, he's running on his executive experience as the Mayor of South Bend, Indiana. What exactly does that mean? Well, as Buttigieg campaigns, his city is experiencing an epidemic of violent crime. Aggravated assaults have more than tripled compared to when he took office. He seems responsible for that. What kind of place is it? What kind of mayor is he?
Tony Katz is a radio show host. He knows the answers to these questions. He joins us tonight. Tony, thanks so much. So what kind of mayor has he been of South Bend, Indiana?
TONY KATZ, RADIO SHOW HOST: Well, I think that with all these things, you've got a mixed bag conversation.
KATZ: He likes to point to, for example, unemployment going down in South Bend. But unemployment went down across Indiana in the eight years that he was mayor. And there is nothing given to the fact that it started with Mitch Daniels, the current President of Purdue University -- boiler up -- and of course, one of the great executives in American state history.
Then you have the current Governor, Eric Holcomb, who has been maintaining this pro-business kind of growth, and there was a guy in the middle by the name of Mike Pence. I don't know if you know the name or not, who absolutely was part of this growth and some of those policies that he put together are the policies that Pete Buttigieg was able to utilize to bring down unemployment in South Bend because it was happening in Indiana.
CARLSON: So in the actual city of South Bend, though, violence seems like and violent crime seemed like they are rising pretty dramatically.
KATZ: Yes. And this is a very, very interesting story that you take a look at murder rate 2019, that's down even in my beloved Indianapolis, the murder rate seems to be like it's going to be less than it was last year. But it's been going up for eight years in a row. And it was going up, of course in South Bend.
But the other crimes that you're talking about, and you're referencing there, those are going up. Great article from "Washington Free Beacon" on this exact subject that if you're going to point to hey, look, I'm the mayor who reduce crime, well, you don't actually have the whole story there on Pete Buttigieg because these other crimes have gone up, and if he wants to take credit for a lower murder rate, it's not the whole story.
CARLSON: Yes. And by the way, I think he was elected with fewer than 10,000 votes. Can that be true?
KATZ: I trust you on that one. But understand this is a city that also elected his deputy, his Chief of Staff to replace him. So they went along with this. The story of Pete Buttigieg and the question you're asking is the right question which is about executive experience.
Does Pete Buttigieg -- is he the guy who is a leader? Or is he a manager who took advantage of other situations and other things happening around him? The leadership question came into real question with the shooting of Eric Logan by Sergeant O'Neill who had to resign from the force.
The way Pete Buttigieg handled that was abysmal and everybody knows it. Harvey Mills is the Fraternal Order of Police and he said that nobody has faith in Pete Buttigieg. What he has done to the police is horrific.
So on the leadership question, which is the executive question, one still has to wonder whether he has that kind of ability not to just push a policy or an idea or get people to follow.
CARLSON: Right. What he really is, is a McKinsey consultant.
KATZ: Well --
CARLSON: And if you don't know what that is, you can Google --
KATZ: He doesn't like to talk about that at all.
CARLSON: Yes, I know he doesn't. But, I do. Tony, great to see you tonight. Thanks so much.
KATZ: Of course.
CARLSON: Well, if Buttigieg just doesn't work out, Democrats have yet another option they want if they want a management consultant, a hedge fund guy, as President, former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick has entered the race, and this will force Wall Street Democrats, the ones who control the party to make a tough choice.
Do they prefer McKinsey or Bain Capital? Bain Capital? Can you believe it? A Democrat? Howie Carr is a Massachusetts radio host and author of "What Really Happened?" He joins us tonight. So I was talking to one of my producers before the show and he said, you know this guy works Bain Capital and I said, it can't really be true that Democrats after attacking Mitt Romney for his work at Bain Capital, would seriously consider to nominate a guy who works at Bain Capital. No?
HOWIE CARR, RADIO SHOW HOST AND AUTHOR: Right. Well, you know, I mean, could the headline be vulture capitalist enters the race for President? I mean, that's what they called Mitt Romney. You know, they win the Mitt Romney --
CARR: -- ran first against Ted Kennedy and then against Barack Obama. They said he had basically killed women in Indiana, you know by -- they had cancer and he had canceled their insurance. He put half of the State of Indiana out of work by closing factories.
Well, you know -- they so then Deval Patrick leaves this governor after two terms, and Bain Capital says, well, I guess we can kind of immunize ourselves against this kind of media persecution, so they hire Deval Patrick, the first black governor of Massachusetts, to work for them. They set up one of these green investment funds. And sure enough, they've been immune from any kind of criticism for the last three or four years. But now, he is in the race.
CARLSON: Can I just ask you, I mean, I wish we had more time on this. I don't think he's going to be a real candidate. But I mean, how can -- how can you -- if you're the Democratic Party, how can you with a straight face even consider nominating, you know, a finance guy like this or Michael Bloomberg, Tom Steyer? Like are they for real? The Democrats, do they believe anything at this point, do you think?
CARR: Well, I know. You know, Bernie Sanders is going to say, he is a part of the billionaire class. That's the way it's going to go. But I think that the only thing Deval Patrick has going for him is that he's going to claim that he is a friend, the best friend or the good friend of Barack Obama.
But you know, I can't imagine that Barack Obama is going to officially endorse him, and how much is Barack Obama's endorsement worth anyway?
CARR: It didn't help Hillary, did it?
CARLSON: No, it really didn't. His Vice President is running and it looks like he is losing. So yes, I agree completely. Howie Carr. Great to see you tonight. Thank you for that.
CARR: Thanks, Tucker.
CARLSON: Well, as we monitor the President's speech in Louisiana, it's time for "Final Exam." Impeachment is dominating your television set. But if you're able to remember other stories from this week, you could win tonight. Find out what happened. Look at Katie Pavlich versus Jesse Watters.
Of course if the President says anything newsworthy, you'll see in here first. We'll be right back.
CARLSON: We've got a Fox News Alert for you. The President speaking outside Shreveport, talking about Adam Schiff and Impeachment. We want to dip into this. Here it is.
CARLSON: We'll get back to the President live, but first a quick reaction from Mark Steyn who is still standing by. Mark, what -- what do you think?
STEYN: Well, I think you've got to be pretty resilient to stand there and do impeachment shtick. And he is doing that because he knows this is going down for the Democrats.
You know, he said the Republicans are sticking together. I hope that's true because I could see situation if this thing ever went to the Senate where some virtue-signaling nincompoop like Mitt Romney would actually vote to convict and remove him.
But the President actually, in this circumstance is standing there and saying, go on, bring it on, even if you did that, I'd still run this next November and I'd win next November.
And actually, he is inspirational to a faint-hearted Republican Party. This is the way to do it. This is why people voted for him, because the base wants a candidate who pushes back.
CARLSON: I'm starting to think he's going to win. I've gone back and forth, but it is starting to start out that way, I think.
CARLSON: Mark Steyn, thank you so much.
STEYN: They're not going to win because of Adam Schiff. That's the Democrats won't win with Adam Schiff, Tucker.
CARLSON: That is totally true. Mark Steyn, thank you. By the way, we had to slide "Final Exam" to tomorrow, Jesse Watters and Katie Pavlich, worth watching.
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.