Feminist: I'm the most hated lesbian in Baltimore due to my views on trans debate

This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," February 12, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Good evening, welcome to “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” We have news for you, breaking news, that for whatever reason is being downplayed or ignored by other media outlets, but we think you want to know about it. Five simple words describe it, there was no Russian collusion. There is no evidence whatsoever that the Trump campaign conspired in any way with the government of Vladimir Putin during the last presidential election, period.

That is apparently the conclusion of the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee. That Committee spent two years investigating this question. Of course, hundreds of interviews, reams of classified documents, untold millions in taxpayer dollars. No collusion at all. That is what we are hearing tonight they have found.

Now, if you've been following the story at all, and of course you have been, you will not be surprised by this. Nor Russian collusion is a lot like moon landing actually happened or abominable snowman was probably a long-haired mountain goat. You knew that already because you are not an idiot, but if so, compare your mental acuity to that of prominent political figures here in Washington.

The next time you feel dumb, watch this tape.


REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: I think there is plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight.

REP. MAXINE WATERS, D-CALIF.: Trump has the Kremlin clan surrounding him. There is more to be learned about it. I believe there has been collusion.

JOHN PODESTA, FORMER WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: It is starting to smell more and more like collusion.

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: We saw cold, hard evidence of the Trump campaign and, indeed, the Trump family eagerly intending to collude, possibly with Russia.


CARLSON: "Smells like collusion." "Plenty of evidence of collusion." Hard evidence of collusion. In the end, it was all fake. And they knew that, they knew it wasn't real. They were lying from the very first day. Only their remarkable aggression, their willingness to say literally anything no matter how outrageous or slanderous or vile, kept the rest of us from catching on to what they were doing.

If the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is willing to call someone a traitor to this country, there has to be some truth to it, right? Actually, no, there wasn't. It was always a hoax.

Adam Schiff is an unscrupulous charlatan -- that is the real lesson here. Don't expect people like Schiff to apologize though or correct the record, much less repair the lives of the people they have destroyed. Carter Page still can't find a job. Roger Stone is still facing life in prison. Meanwhile, Schiff's PR team on the other channel continues like none of this ever happened.

Here is Malcolm Nance of MSNBC explaining the results of a two-year Senate investigation that mean nothing. People are guilty because we say they are guilty, we must punish them.


MALCOLM NANCE, MEDIA COMMENTATOR: Let me just say one thing. When Benedict Arnold gave the plans to West Point to Major Andre and they captured Major Andre, they do not have any real information linking those plans to Benedict Arnold, other than the fact that it was in his presence at one point during that day. But everyone knew it was treason when they caught the man, and they hung him.

So at some point, there is going to be a breach of data here that is going to be unassailable.


CARLSON: No one had any evidence, but everyone knew it was treason when they caught the man and they hung him. That says it all. Let's repeat that, once again, slowly so you can write down those words and put them on your fridge as a memento of the terrifying mass hysteria we have all just lived through, quote, "Everyone knew it was treason when they caught the man, and they hung him."

That is our country now. That is what the Russia insanity has done to us, the real government shutdown has lasted for nearly two and a half years. That's one percent of this country's entire existence. We no longer have meaningful policy dates in Washington, we have investigations, instead. Nobody can think clearly, everybody is afraid.

The country's core problems don't even rate as interesting anymore, either to legislators or to TV pundits who comment on legislators. The suicide rate has hit a 50-year high, did you know that? We are in the middle of the worst drug epidemic in the history of America, including the one after the Civil War and the heroin epidemic of the '70s and the crack epidemic of the '80s, this is way worse, and it's one of the reason the life expectancy in many part of the country is dropping.

This is starting to look like Boris Yeltsin's Russia, and yet nobody in Washington even notices. All Adam Schiff and the rest of the wild-eyed morons can think about is "Vladimir Putin," "Collusion," "our hacked democracy." and all the other mindless slogans they have repeated long enough to have believed.

We've spent two years perpetuating a fraud, and they are still doing it. What is this? It is negligence on a stunning scale. It has nothing to do with Trump, it has everything to do with running this country, and they are not.

Historians will look back on this moment in amazement and in sadness -- who put these crock-pots in charge and with them break things? Why didn't any responsible person in the media say anything about it? Why did they collude in the charade? What the hell happened to America?

History will judge us for this moment. Adam Schiff's grandkids will be ashamed of what he did.

Mollie Hemingway is the senior editor at "The Federalist," she joins us tonight. Sorry to get all huffy there. It's just -- you just have to think that if a story breaks that the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee which has spent two years looking into this says, "There is no evidence of collusion." That's got to be front page news, and that has got to spur some sort of soul searching on the part of everyone who has been repeating the lie, but no.

MOLLIE HEMINGWAY, SENIOR EDITOR, THE FEDERALIST: Right, every day or every couple of days for two years, we have had this Russia collusion conspiracy spread and pushed by compliant people in the media. No matter how small an item was, it was pushed as evidence of some grand conspiracy.

Then you have the Senate Intel Committee coming out and saying what the House Intel Committee already said. There is no evidence of collusion. There is no evidence of this thing that sidelined an incoming administration that completely took the Attorney General out of commission until he was finally let go. You know, you had just all of this hysteria, and we're not even going to cover it? We're not going to mention it after pushing the story for several years?

It is one thing for Democrats to push this. It is entirely another for people in the media to be so much going along with. It is also something where we still aren't dealing with the fact that the Intel Community completely took in this information operation that was bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee, and they used this information to spy on a presidential campaign, to punish people for the crime of having not wanted Hillary Clinton elected President or to put people in prison because they had the wrong political alliances. This is so deeply un-American. We are not supposed to do things this way.

CARLSON: No, we're not supposed to accuse people on the basis of no evidence. And by the way, just to be clear, I'm not talking about Trump. I think there's a higher bar for the President. People say all kinds of reckless things about the President. It is the weaker people who got crushed in this, people like Carter Page.

I personally was called a Russian agent by the now Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee because I asked a question he didn't like. My question is, because we knew pretty quickly that this was fraudulent, that there really wasn't any evidence at the basis of it, and that people had no interest in finding out the truth, why did so many Republicans play along?

HEMINGWAY: That is another thing. It is one things, like I said, for Democrats to do something like this. What have Republicans been saying for the last couple of years other than, "Oh, we just have to wait and wait and wait and wait," while the business of government doesn't happen, because of this investigation that is going on?

CARLSON: Yes, the one thing we can't do is fire Robert Mueller.


CARLSON: Because actually our constitutional system doesn't acknowledge democracy, we can have someone who literally can't be fired in the middle of a Democratic Republic, how does that work? Republicans pushed that.

HEMINGWAY: Someone who is literally unaccountable, who nothing can be done to, who has all of the powers of the CIA and all the powers of the FBI, and Republicans sat there and said, "There is nothing we can do about this."

CARLSON: So why would anyone vote for people like that. I mean, seriously, right? So if you have one side that is perpetuating what is a transparent fraud and causing the wheels of government to grind to a halt, and things like a rising suicide rate to go unacknowledged because no one has the disk space left to think about anything but Russia, if you're playing along with that, why would Republican voters vote for you?

HEMINGWAY: Right, I think it is one of the sad things about the current moment that many people who are in positions of powers, who are Republican, fear the media or they fear their peer group more than they care about upholding the rule of law or they care about having a functioning republic.

CARLSON: Yes, their minds are not free. They spend all day trying to avoid being criticized by people who hate them for reasons that are not even related. That is literally -- they are ruled by their enemies. Their enemies live in their heads and control all of their behavior.

HEMINGWAY: But they have a responsibility to Americans.

CARLSON: You think?

HEMINGWAY: They serve in these positions of power because we expect them to take their leadership and their role very seriously. It doesn't sound like they take this seriously, and to not have -- I mean, asking the important questions about this, as things just went crazy for year after year, and then to pretend now, when everyone is doing is pretending like they didn't do it. They are all trying to pretending like they didn't push this Russia conspiracy theory as it starts to fall apart.

CARLSON: It's -- I think, yes, I agree. Thank you. Mollie, great to see you. Julian Epstein is a former chief counsel of the White House Judiciary Committee and he joins us tonight.

Julian, in addition to everything I've just been ranting about, and I try not to rant. I am not a ranter by temperament, but it's been -- I spent the first three months trying to take this seriously, okay? And it is not serious, clearly. But we have just completely changed our relationship as a nation with Russia, declared them an enemy, and moved to a war with them on the basis of a story that is fraudulent.

JULIAN EPSTEIN, FORMER CHIEF COUNSEL OF THE WHITE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: I think that is overstating it, but I am sympathetic to the notion that the problem with our politics is that both sides and the media align with both sides tends to get out in front of the facts here.


EPSTEIN: Now, I think collusion is a bad word because collusion is not a legal word. I mean, you and I sitting here were colluding for a television show, it doesn't mean anything.

CARLSON: Exactly.

EPSTEIN: The question is conspiracy to violate the criminal laws. There is no question in anybody's mind that the Russians violated criminal laws on election interference -- the computer hacks and the illegal foreign expenditures -- there is no question that those were criminal violations.

The question has always been whether Trump or those around him conspired with the Russians on those two criminal actions. And I've said on this program before, I've said all year that there is no evidence of that.

CARLSON: But then -- this is what is hard for me. Look, they're always going to be fringes there are on both parties, you pointed that out and I agree with you. So I'm one of the few people -- I'm not always jumping on Maxine Waters, because I don't think she is a serious person, actually, she is an outlier.

I think the Chairman of the House Intel Committee is, I think the Speaker of the House is -- those are serious leaders of the Democratic Party and both of them, you just saw the tape we played, accused the President and those around his family of collusion, a non-crime. How irresponsible is that?

EPSTEIN: So there is a political rush hour test that's going on here right now. Both sides see it very differently and what the Republicans see, and I understand why they see it this way, is what I just said, there is no evidence that Trump or anyone close around him conspired with the Russians to either hack computers or accept illegal foreign expenditures in the election interference in 2016. That is true.

On the other hand, the Democratic point of view is, "Well, there were over 100 contacts with Russians during the campaign. Everyone that has been asked about it has repeatedly lied about those contacts. There were discussions about policy changes to favor the Republicans during the campaign. There was a request from Donald Trump, Jr. and others to get dirt on the Clintons. There was a direction from the campaign to find out what the dump was going to be from WikiLeaks," so there is kind of a lot of circumstantial stuff on the other side.


EPSTEIN: And I think --

CARLSON: Okay, and Oswald was in Mexico City before the assassination, does that mean the Mexicans did it?

EPSTEIN: It's where we ought to be, if we want to find common ground, it's where we ought to be, and I think "The Washington Post" had a poll on this today is that, Mueller, is I think going to do a far more extensive investigation than the House Intelligence --

CARLSON: But simple question --

EPSTEIN: Let's have that report be public.

CARLSON: Okay, whatever, whatever -- at this point --

EPSTEIN: No, no. It is not whatever. That's the facts.

CARLSON: No. This is a prosecutor's allegation, these are not the facts. A prosecutor comes up with a case, which is not proven. It is a case, like the kind that I make every night on this show. It is not the facts, it is a position.

I'm just wondering if we can have an apology from the Speaker of the House and the Chairman of the House Intel Committee for saying things that were not true and that divided the country and made people afraid and paranoid on the basis of no evidence.

EPSTEIN: Well, you have to ask them how they want to respond to that. I think they would probably tell you that I am not certain that the Democrats and Republicans are going to agree on the Senate Intelligence report, I think there will be dissenting view on the Senate Intelligence report for starters.

But secondly, I think they will also tell you that Mueller will go far beyond what the Senate Intelligence Committee will find in terms of his investigative ability to subpoena authorities, and his ability to go overseas. So I think the Mueller report is going to be a more completely - -

CARLSON: Last question --

EPSTEIN: And the public, Tucker, wants the report to be public and we can judge what are facts, what's evidence, what's not.

CARLSON: I could literally - at this point, you know, two and a half years in, should Roger Stone spend the rest of his life in prison if we find out there was no Russian collusion -- like what is the point of all of this? Of sending Roger Stone for the rest of his life to prison, honestly?

EPSTEIN: So I think the question on Stone is not just the question of collusion, I think the question is whether he was honest with prosecutors when asked the questions.


EPSTEIN: But Tucker, you railed against the Clintons for obstruction of justice repeatedly because they weren't --

CARLSON: I certainly did -- I certainly did. I did and not only --

EPSTEIN: Because of what you thought, they were obfuscating with prosecutors, so you should be consistent here.

CARLSON: Not only did I do that, I supported Ken Starr's independent counsel investigation, and I'm ashamed that I supported that because it was totally wrong. This independent counsel thing is nondemocratic, I should never have supported that because I've tried --

EPSTEIN: Well, at least, you tried to be consistent.

CARLSON: Well, I am trying to be honest. Julian, thank you. Congress may finally have a deal to end the debate over a border wall, what is in it? Is it enough to satisfy the President? One of the members of Congress who has negotiated it joins us after the break.


CARLSON: The past two months of arguing about a border wall have not made the country any safer, but they have exposed the nature of the debate. On the left, the mask is off. Progressives no longer pretend that they want a secure border. Nothing is more American, they tell us, than having no control over who lives in America.

"Walls are not just expensive, they are evil. Walls are not who we are," they constantly remind us without explaining what that means.

Last night, while the President spoke to an event in El Paso, an unemployed, semi-coherent, life-ravaged Beto O'Rourke interrupted his one- man road trip to hold a counter rally nearby in between tugs on what may or may not have been a 40-ounce scuba tank of malt liquor. O'Rourke raved that walls are more than just immoral, they are deadly. Walls may look harmless, even charming, but like Ted Bundy, they kill people.


BETO O'ROURKE, D-TX., FORMER REPRESENTATIVE: Here in one of the safest cities in the United States of America, not because of walls, but in spite of walls.

(Cheering and Applause)

O'ROURKE: We know that walls do not save lives. Walls end lives.


CARLSON: Beto O'Rourke, next time your church has a warm coat drive, give one for Beto. Well, "Walls end lives," that is what he said. They are murderers. You think that would be the final word on walls, once you accuse a wall of being a homicidal maniac, what else is there to say? Can you be worse than a murderer? It turns out you can.

Not only do walls kill, the media told us this week, but they are hardened racists, as well. Every wall is like a cinder block Bull Connor. Watch the mouth breather's of cable television explain.


CHRIS CUOMO, ANCHOR, CNN: It is not about some flood of killers and gangsters, the brown menace, as I call what the President is pandering.

DON LEMON, ANCHOR, CNN: To blatantly attempt to stir up fear of people of color, of brown people. As my colleague, Chris calls it, the brown menace that he is trying to scare you with.

MIKE BARNICLE, SOCIAL AND POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: The wall is kind of a metaphor for Donald Trump's presidency. The foundation of the wall is hate. It is fear and it becomes fear of the other, and then it becomes fear of brown people, and it becomes fear of caravans, and fear of invasion.

CARLSON: We need an IQ test in cable TV. You can't just give these jobs to anybody. Is there like some kind of lottery for these jobs? Anyway, deadly, bigoted, terrifying, that is what the left says and thinks of border walls, and yet amazingly, as of tonight, Democrats in Congress have agreed to pay for one, sort of a version of one, really.

Congressional negotiators say they are willing to give the President $1.3 billion for a border barrier. That is a quarter of what he asked for. It's certainly less than what the Democrats offered back in December before the government shutdown.

The money could only be used on existing fence concepts along about 50 miles of border -- that is not much admittedly -- but given the rhetoric, it is more than you might have expected. What is not in the deal so far? Well, there is no universal e-verify that would prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrant labor. There is nothing to deter sanctuary cities or otherwise enhance enforcement of our immigration laws.

On the other hand, there is also no amnesty for DACA recipients or anyone else. Democrats are trying to restrict funding for I.C.E. detention beds, but I.C.E. will still exist if this deal is signed. The President said he is disappointed in the terms, but at this point, he seems unlikely to veto it.

This is not the end of the debate over border security, as long as the Democratic Party says it believes that locking your door at night is an expression of hate and fear, this will continue.

Congresswoman Kay Granger will likely be at the center of it. She is a Republican representing Fort Worth, Texas. She helped negotiate this deal. We are glad that she is here tonight to tell us what is in it. Congresswomen, thank you very much. Are you happy with how this turned out?

REP. KAY GRANGER, R-TX: I'm pleased. I wish we had gotten more, but I'm glad we are going to help the President build a wall. It's going to be a good wall, and we went to see that. I just got back from the border about an hour before his State of the Union, and I was so happy to see that he showed that wall and what is going to happen there. We were there for three days, went all the way from McAllen, Texas, you know where that was, and El Paso, San Diego, California, to see what is happening and where it is safe and where it's not safe.

CARLSON: So Democrats are saying this is not a wall and will only cover about 55 miles of a border that is thousands of miles long.

GRANGER: Well, they are wrong. It is a wall. In fact, it was a wall -- it was 20 years in the making because they tried different ways to make some sort of barrier, and most of them were poorly made, not enough funding, fell down, that sort of thing, but this wall, is we went right by what the border security needs. You can see through it so they can see are there five people over or are there 500? Do they have guns or rocks or what is happening there?

It can't be driven through, you can't cut through it. It is steel filled with concrete. It is a good wall and it is going to go to all of those places that are so unsafe right now because people can come across so easily.

CARLSON: If the President determines and this is enough funding for the wall that he envisions and promised during his campaign and elects to use a state of emergency in order to fund the rest of it, would you support that?

GRANGER: I would. I would support -- one of the reasons I went up into the border many, many times in 2014 and 2015 with the unaccompanied children camp, John Boehner asked me to go and see what was happening and report and make suggestions on what we should do.

I went back to see how much it had changed, and the President is right, it is a crisis. The number of people that are coming over, the conditions they are in, it's just -- we have to take a very strong stance, so this wasn't so much money as we wanted, but it is a good down payment. There is a lot of wall already and we will add to that.

CARLSON: Why wouldn't former Speaker Paul Ryan, since this was the core promise of the President's presidential campaign have made this a priority during the two years Republicans held the House?

GRANGER: I don't know. I can't answer for him. I can answer for me, and part of it is we had to understand that it was a crisis that it is, and make it a priority. And so we started this process and passed six bills to help secure our country and our border and what we are going through right now to pass the bill that we have written, bipartisan, to keep our borders secure, we also have things that Defense can do, that Energy and Water can do. It covers --

CARLSON: Why not many people note that you could reduce the inflow of people here illegally very quickly if you prevented employers from hiring them? So why not make e-verify universal? Why not punish employers for undercutting American workers with foreign labor?

GRANGER: Well, I guess part of it is some of the workers, they may have come here illegally, but they are good workers. When I came to congress 20 years ago --

CARLSON: So does that mean it is okay that they stay?

GRANGER: No, but it says why should you keep them? What we should really do, and we tried to do this 20 years ago, said if people want to come into our country and work, they want to say how can you make it where we can come in legally and work, not move here, not have amnesty. But come here and work. We have jobs that no one is filling and we should have done that early on. It would have made a big difference because they make money, they take it back to their families in the countries they come from.

CARLSON: Congressman Kay Granger from Texas, thank you very much.

GRANGER: Thank you.

CARLSON: Democratic lawmakers are opposing deportation even for dangerous criminals. We have astonishing sound from a sitting Democratic Senator. That is after the break.


CARLSON: Well, the geniuses on TV used to tell you that no illegal immigrant was actually illegal because no people are illegal. "People can't be illegal. None of them are criminals." Well, it turns out actually, there are some criminals, so there is a new approach.

Criminals who do cross the border illegally, it's a real, but we shouldn't punish them once they commit crimes here because that would be immoral.

Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey just said that basically out loud. He lamented that the Trump administration wants to treat alien drunk drivers like they have done something wrong.


SEN. BOB MENENDEZ, D-N.J.: The president's zero- tolerance policy that has turned everyone, regardless of their record, into a criminal. For example, if you cross the border undocumented, he has now made you a criminal. If a person has a driving while under the influence violation, he is now making that saying that that is a criminal.


CARLSON: Coming from a guy who just somehow beat an indictment, I'd love to know how that happened. Yes. You try a DUI arrest and see if you keep your job. But then, you are not an illegal alien, so you're out of luck, it looks like.

Meanwhile, Menendez's colleague and 2020 hopeful, Cory Booker says that "meat eating is bad." It's like you can't make this up. They are trying to get Trump elected and then went on to say that veganism basically should be compulsory, it is necessary, to protect the environment. This is unbelievable.

Lisa Boothe is a senior fellow at Independent Women's Voice and she joins us tonight. Lisa --


CARLSON: I mean, just two months ago, Republicans -- let's not lie about it -- got creamed in the elections. Democrats were ascendant and then they started talking, and from what I could tell, Trump's numbers just went going up. I mean, am I missing this? That's what happened, right?

BOOTHE: I mean, I don't know if they are in cahoots with the President, because it seems like Democrats are doing everything they can to try to help President Trump get reelected, but look, listen to what Senator Bob Menendez said. I guess, now he is saying that President Trump is trying to turn crossing the border illegally into a crime.

The last time I checked, that was a crime. He's also saying that if an illegal immigrant gets a DUI, President Trump is trying to turn that into a crime. The last time I checked, getting a DUI rather as an American or an illegal immigrant is also a crime. So I guess, the Democratic orthodoxy now is if you get into the country illegally, as long as you don't commit a violent offense, it is fine. I'm not really sure that's -- I'm sorry?

CARLSON: But they are not extending these courtesies to American citizens.

BOOTHE: Right.

CARLSON: So you misspeak in front of a Congressional Committee and they send 25 armed marshals to your house with automatic weapons and you face life in prison. I mean, why are the only liberalizing law enforcement for people from other countries?

BOOTHE: Well, I think that is a good question for voters to ask Democrats, right, and I would also remind Senator Bob Menendez that the illegal immigrant that killed the legal immigrant, Ronald Singh -- Corporal Ronald Singh had two prior DUI arrests and had to come into this country illegally, obviously.

Which obviously, not everybody that gets a DUI arrest is going to go on and commit some sort of heinous act, the point being is that he had illegal activity in his past and prior offenses here, and Tucker, this whole conversation with Senator Bob Menendez and Wolf comes down to the debate that recently happened over detention beds.

Democrats wanted to cap the number of I.C.E. detention beds, and you've got people like Deputy I.C.E. Director, Matt Albence saying, "Look, this is not a good idea because if we are capping the number of --"

CARLSON: But they don't care.

BOOTHE: Right, they don't care.

CARLSON: Unfortunately, Lisa Boothe, we are being told we are out of time, and we didn't get to Cory Booker and his groovy veganism, but you're going to have to come back and fill us in.

BOOTHE: All right, lots to talk about.

CARLSON: Great to see you.

BOOTHE: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: In her brief time in the political limelight, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has said a lot of interesting stuff. Here is one thing she said.


REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, D-N.Y.: An agency like I.C.E., which repeatedly and systematically violates human rights does not deserve a dime.


OCASIO-CORTEZ: The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change. This is the war -- this is our World War II.

I think that there are a lot of people more concerned about being precisely factually, and semantically correct, than about being morally right.


CARLSON: So not only dumb and totally ignorant of everything, but utterly self-assured. If there were a clinical exam for self-esteem, she would be in the 100th percentile. How do people get like that? Is it our education system? Is it high schools? Is at colleges?

We wanted to talk to someone on the front lines of this, who might know the answer. Nicholas Giordano is a Professor of Political Science at Suffolk Community College, and he joins us tonight.

Professor, thanks very much for coming on.


CARLSON: So there is a certain recognizable syndrome here where the people who know the least are the most self-confident. Where does that come from?

GIORDANO: Well, it is the lack of critical thinking that exists, it's the superficial arguments they make that are completely unrealistic. If you look at the Green New Deal, it is incomprehensible and when you are looking at it, she said the world is going to end in 12 years.

So if we go with this plan and have to rebuild every building, it took us 13 years just to build the Freedom Tower for instance. Six years to build the Tappan Zee Bridge. Imagine having to do every single building in the United States up to new codes. It is just not going to work.

They don't ask deep questions. The arguments are it sounds good, people will support it because it is government giving us stuff, and so it is okay. But there are real consequences when you actually talk like this, because there are people that are going to take it seriously.

You have a number of presidential candidates that have agreed with her plan and when you are looking the plan itself, you can't understand anything in it. It would lead to millions of people being underemployed or unemployed, maybe they could learn code, who knows. It would lead to unconstitutional state violations because state and local governments are in charge of building codes.

And so question to her would be, has she read the Constitution? Knows about the Tenth Amendment and state rights?

CARLSON: No, no, but you heard -- but I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding. You heard her say what matters is that she is a really good person and you are not. And so, I'm thinking as I'm watching this, remember that whole fad where we were supposed to give our kids self-esteem and that was the panacea? Did we create people like this when we did that?

GIORDANO: Well, we did. Two things, the motto of "The customer is always right" created an entitlement culture, and then our children are precious also created the entitlement culture where everyone gets the trophy. When you are looking at it and you are trying to challenge the minds of the youth, they try and push back because they don't want to critically analyze the information to see if it really works.

Page 10 of her New Deal talks about creating public ownership and receiving a percentage of compensation for the public ownership. Well, that is socialism. That's the very definition of socialism and nobody has called her out on it in this sense, and it didn't work out so well from Venezuela, so is it really going to want going well for us?

CARLSON: No. No, I mean, I don't know, it has been great for, I guess, weight loss in Venezuela, they are starving.

GIORDANO: They are.

CARLSON: Even eating zoo animals.

GIORDANO: And that is part of her problem. There is no critical thinking. And not only do you have that part, you have even more concerning, it talks about persons of the United States. It doesn't say U.S. citizens or U.S. persons, which of the definition of a citizen and legal residents. So that raises the question. Is it anyone?

CARLSON: Anyone who shows up gets to take your stuff. You can see where this is going. Professor, we are out of time, unfortunately. I commend you for having the patience patience to try and train a more impressive next generation of critical thinkers. Thank you for that.

GIORDANO: No problem. Enjoy the night.

CARLSON: We have more on what is going on in the Commonwealth of Virginia, which has completely melted down as you know, politically. The top three Democrats all embroiled in scandals of their own making. Fox has now obtained Facebook posts from a second accuser against the Lieutenant Governor, Justin Fairfax. We'll have those details after the break.


CARLSON: Well, the top three elected Democrats in Virginia are still surrounded by scandal. Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax is refusing to step down in the face of multiple sexual assault allegations.

Now, newly revealed Facebook messages obtained by Fox News show that his accuser, Meredith Watson, told friends about the alleged assault as early as March of 2017, and considered whether or not to come forward during the election of that year.

In those same messages, Watson said she had not reported the attack back in 2000 when both were at Duke because she said the university mishandled a previous rape allegation that she had made. Tammy Bruce is a radio host and President of Independent Women's Voice and joins us tonight to help us assess the state of play in Virginia tonight. Tammy, thanks very much for coming on.


CARLSON: What do you make of this where we are now?

BRUCE: Well, it's kind of a sign of what the Democrats have brought, not just to Virginia, but to the country. You have a black man who is not getting due process, even though, for me, the accuser seem very credible, I'm not the arbiter of due process ...

CARLSON: Right. That's true.

BRUCE: ... and of guilt and innocence and yet, and for the south, it should be a sensitive issue. The hounding of a black man because of accusations, out of his job, he has been put on leave for the law firm he works with, and he is part-time as Lieutenant Governor making, I think about $36,000.00 a year, so who knows how long that will be a tenable situation for him.

And then you have two women who have grown up in a supposed feminist environment, the Democrats controlling to some degree our social framework, who haven't felt comfortable still being able to report being assaulted.

Now, women don't report for a variety of reasons, because this is a complicated issue, but now we see the end result, what happens when you have a system that doesn't necessarily take women seriously still, which is what we have always argued for and then later on in life, finding out the impact of what happens when we don't confront these issues. This is the result of what Democrats have said they are the champions off and they are representatives of, and obviously, no one is winning in this situation.

CARLSON: That is for sure. So we have got a minute left. I just would be interested, since you have seen a lot of stories like this and thought a lot about this subject, how do you think this specific story ends with Justin Fairfax?

BRUCE: Well, I think the environment is so toxic, he also has had, I think, four staffers leave, two at his pack and two in his office over this. I don't think it is going to be tenable. And I hope that there is some investigation, that one way or the other, we have some information here, but I think that Virginia has got a lot to answer for.

By the way, the state today apologized for lynching. They apologized for the lynching that have occurred in their state since the Civil War. So I think, as a nation, we have a lot to have to contemplate, but the answer is not sacrificing people into a volcano simply because of accusations and I want women to have an environment where they feel safe in reporting when these events do occur.

CARLSON: I agree with that and that is a nonpartisan, American point to make and I am glad that you did.

BRUCE: I think we all agree. Thank you, Tucker.

CARLSON: Tammy, thank you.

BRUCE: Thanks.

CARLSON: Really interesting story after the break. A feminist activist shutdown by the left, of which presumably, she is a part, for something called misgendering, in this case misgendering a rapist. That woman will join us after the break to explain what this means and what it means for women in this country, stay tuned.


CARLSON: An activist in Baltimore says she was kicked off the city's Gay Rights Commission for using the wrong pronoun to describe a rapist. Trace Gallagher has more on this story which we should clarify is real -- Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Tucker. Julia Beck was offered the chance to join Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh's LGBTQ Commission. Beck thought it was a prime opportunity for her to voice the concerns of the underrepresented, but as the only lesbian on the Commission, Beck claimed she immediately felt excluded. She even wrote an article titled "How I became the most hated lesbian in Baltimore." Beck writes that she committed the unforgivable saying, "She believes that even if a male identifies as a female, he is still a male," and she cited the case of convicted rapist, Karen White who is legally a man, admitted to raping several women and was then sent to a women's prison in the U.K., where he proceeded to rape two other female inmates.

And after all of that, it remains unclear if Karen White, who was David Thompson, is actually in the process of transitioning to a woman. But according to Julia Beck, questioning White's gender was the final straw, and she was kicked off the commission writing quote, "After a month's long witch hunt, I was found guilty of violence. My crime? Using male pronouns to talk about a convicted male rapist who identifies as transgender and prefers to female pronouns. It is far more criminal for me to call a male rapist "he" than it is for him to rape."

We contacted the Baltimore Mayor's office, it had no comment -- Tucker.

CARLSON: Trace Gallagher, thank you very much for that. Julia Beck joins us now on the set. Julia, thanks very much for coming on.


CARLSON: So you said something that I think many people in their hearts think is obvious, but very few people are willing to say out loud, you said it knowing you would likely be punished for saying it, but you said it anyway. Why did you do that?

BECK: I believe in the truth. I believe that people should have these conversations and say things that matter without fear of punishment.

CARLSON: You are old-fashioned. Why do you think -- I couldn't agree with you more, and I'm grateful you have that attitude -- but why do you think it was important to say this, specifically?

BECK: Well, when we get down to it, women and girls all share a biological reality. We are all female. But if any man, if any male person can call himself a woman, or legally identify as female, then predatory men will do so in order to gain access to women's single-sex spaces, and this puts every woman and girl at risk.

CARLSON: From the beginning, I don't weigh in on this often because sexual politics is a morass and it's not worth it to be totally honest with you, but I have enough daughters that I care and my instinct has always been this change in our society, which we never debated, the terms have never been clarified, is not going to be good for girls in the long run. Do you share that concern?

BECK: I definitely do agree. Like, I said this puts every woman and girl at risk of male violence, and this is already happening in many states. In many states, men can legally identify themselves as female and gain access to women's single-sex spaces, and sports is just one institution where men are taking titles, scholarships, and this is a problem.

CARLSON: So it seems like a real problem. Why wouldn't women's groups, who exist to carry the banner for women, raise the alarm about this?

BECK: Women have been speaking out about this for decades, but we have been effectively silenced. Many women, like myself, have been pushed out of spaces that we built, spaces that are intended to include us, simply because we acknowledge biological reality.

CARLSON: Do you think -- I mean, you are a lesbian. You are in the same acronym as a bunch of other groups including people who are transgendered, do you think that makes it more difficult for you to make this argument? I mean, it seems like this has been so politicized that you are expected to have a certain set of views that maybe you don't have.

BECK: I see where you're coming from. I would like to make a distinction here. The letters in the acronym share not much. The L, G and B, are based on sexuality. They are based on sex, biological realities, but the T is based on gender identity, which is not based in biological reality. In fact, I would argue that it is opposed to biological reality. The LGB is very different from the T, and I don't think it is fair to lump us all into the same acronym.

CARLSON: Do you find it astounding that it is considered an act of bravery to defend biology?

BECK: I wouldn't say so myself, but I guess that is where we are right now, and I hope more women stand up.

CARLSON: Last question because I care about this, what did they say to you? You were thrown off this Commission. You were punished for saying this out loud. What was the rationale for it?

BECK: Frankly, there was no case made. My accuser said that they didn't have to make a case. One of the members of my Committee argued that sex was a thing of the past. He said, frankly, science had progressed so far that sex was unimportant. I argued the opposite.

CARLSON: Julia Beck, at a time like this, everyone thinks -- I would say what I really think, but most people are afraid to and you're not, and I am definitely understanding in admiration of that. Thank you for that.

BECK: Thank you for having me.

CARLSON: The Green New Deal promises high-speed rail. California has made a big decision about a high-speed rail. We'll tell you what it is after the break.


CARLSON: The Green New Deal all of a sudden defines the modern Democratic Party, almost 70 members of Congress and the very hippest (ph) presidential candidates have signed onto it. High-speed rail is the centerpiece of the plan. So how do you get high-speed rail?

Well, first, you must be an incredibly good person and with a long, unblemished record of caring, and scrupulously vetted yearbook pages. Then you have to wish really hard, like, super hard, with your eyes closed, squinting like you did in fifth grade when he wanted a pony and then, high- speed rail appears.

But wait, California just tried this, and actually, it didn't work. It turns out high-speed rail costs a ton of money. Today, the Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, canceled the planned rail line -- high-speed rail -- from San Francisco to L.A. because the cost had risen to $77 billion -- imagine the whole country doing that. That's is a lot of ponies. Keep wishing. That's it for us. Back tomorrow night, the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. Good night from Washington.

Sean Hannity right now from New York.

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.