Print
Close
Is the FBI politically motivated?
Published January 30, 2019
This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," January 30, 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.” It's pretty clear that both of the country's political parties are have changed radically over the past few years, and they are changing still. We cover that every night on the show.
Donald Trump, of course has transformed the GOP, you may have read about it. On the Democratic side, there have been profound changes, too. Ones that don't get as much quite as much attention. A party that for a hundred years stood with America's middle class now represents the nation's richest and its poorest.
And so not surprisingly, the party's position on policy have changed accordingly - a lot. So just about 20 years ago, Democrats championed free speech. They worried about illegal immigration - loudly. They criticized voluntary foreign wars and they argued that unrestricted trade hurt American workers. And by the way, quite a few of them, Democrats were pro- life, too.
Senator Harry Reid among them. And that's not surprising, if you think about it. Democrats said they cared most about the vulnerable in our society. Even Bill Clinton who vetoed two partial birth abortion bans, felt the need to say he wanted to keep abortion rare. He said that a lot.
Try that in today's Democratic Party - lots of luck. Modern Democratic activists celebrate abortion as a positive good. "Shout your abortion" they proclaim. They put it on T-shirts. Abortion isn't bad, we need more of it.
Earlier this month, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed a bill making that possible. It's called the Reproductive Health Act, and the law legalizes abortion right to the moment of birth for virtually any reason.
Now, to most people, aborting a child moments before delivery might seem uncomfortably like killing. A lot of pro-choice people feel that way. It's a concern. Well, Cuomo's law addresses that concern.
The law declares that children who have not been yet born are not in fact human, so don't worry about it. Cuomo illuminated the new World Trade Center in lower Manhattan with pink lights to celebrate the bill signing. He described it is a profound moral victory.
Now, the national press didn't spend a lot of time covering this. No matter how much you might like Roe v. Wade, maybe you love it, there's still something pretty ghoulish about celebrating third-term abortion.
Maybe that's why only tiny of percentage American voters support it, around 13%, a small percentage. Nobody really wants to hear the details about any of this, so nobody asks. And that's why the video we're about to show you - - which is not gory, don't worry -- but it is remarkable.
In it, a Virginia Democratic lawmaker called Kathy Tran explains in detail a bill she's introduced that will remove all restriction on late-term abortion. She was asked, "Well, what would that mean exactly?" And Tran tells the truth. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Where it's obvious that a woman is to give birth. She has physical sign that she is about to give birth. Would that still be a point at which she could request an abortion if she was so certified? She's dilating.
KATHY TRAN, D-VIRGINIA HOUSE OF DELEGATES: Mr. Chairman, that would be a decision that the doctor, the physician and the woman --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I understand that, I'm asking if your bill allows that.
TRAN: My bill would allow that, yes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: So, abortion at the point of dilation. If you're confused about what that means, ask everyone who has given birth. And then think about it for a second. There's a lot going on, obviously, but just think about that for one second. You maybe pro-choice, are you okay with that?
Virginia's Governor is okay with that. He's thought about it. Ralph Northam is his name. He has been in office a little over a year. He's often described; in fact, always described as moderate. And that's pretty amazing given his reaction to Kathy Tran's late-term abortion bill. This is from today. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. RALPH NORTHAM, D-VA: It's done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that is nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant will be resuscitated if that's what the mother and family desire, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: A discussion about killing the infant? The infant. He's direct enough to call the infant is what the infant is, but again, "The infant would be delivered and resuscitated if that's what the mother desires, "quote. In other words, the Governor of Virginia has just told us in public on camera that it's okay to kill a child after the child has been born. That used to be call infanticide, not rhetorically, but literally infanticide - taking the life of a child who is breathing.
The Governor seem to just say that. Did he misspeak? Well, you'd hope. But no, he didn't. Ralph Northam is a physician. He is a pediatric neurologist in fact. He is not some clueless layman who mangled a neural talking point. This is really what he thinks. This is what his party thinks. Though no one ever says it, but it's true. This is the new moderate pro-choice position. You should know that.
Lisa Boothe is a senior fellow at the Independent Women's Voice and she join us tonight.
LISA BOOTHE, SENIOR FELLOW, INDEPENDENT WOMEN'S FORUM: Hi, Tucker.
CARLSON: Lisa, thanks very much. So this is one of those trends that's kind of escaped notice. It's not just in the two states we highlighted -- Virginia and New York, there are also bills in Vermont and Rhode Island and probably a bunch of other states to allow this. Tell us what you found out about this legislation.
BOOTHE: Yes, I think it's pretty terrifying. Are you pointed out, gone are the days of President Clinton saying that abortion should be safe, legal and rare. And now you have people like Governor Ralph Northam who is supposed to be a moderate, openly advocating for infanticide.
And what we've seen with this trend is Democrats embracing abortion up until the moment of birth. And what I think is - so interesting about this is Democrats are now embracing this position that is wildly out of touch with the majority of Americans.
You look at Marist poll done in January and 75% of Americans only supported abortion for three months and below, including 61% of people who were pro- choice only supported that, and the reason being is because you look at abortions at the third trimester, it's barbaric.
You're talking about injecting a baby that is viable at this point outside of the mother's womb in the head, torso or heart and forcing with digoxin and forcing this child into a full lethal cardiac arrest. The mother is then going to carry this dead child in her womb for two to three days and then have a still-born baby.
So that is why you have the majority of Americans that oppose this kind of thing.
CARLSON: It's just so interesting that this is happening and it's coordinated by abortion providers who obviously are major donors to the Democratic Party. But it's happening in exactly the same moment that the party is working itself into frenzy of moral concern about people who are in our country illegally, about climate change.
The message is, this is a party that really cares, and yet here you have a sitting Democratic Governor saying, "Yes, you get to kill the kid - the child, if you want." Has anybody said anything about this on the Democratic side?
BOOTHE: I have not heard much from the left on this outside of endorsing it like Governor Andrew Cuomo, obviously, when he signed the Reproductive Health Act into law in New York City, but you're right, Tucker, the left tells us that a wall is immoral, but this is somehow moral?
And I really think that Democrats need to check themselves, Tucker, because they are so wildly out of sync with the American people. And remember, Hillary Clinton had even supported repealing the Hyde Act which is decades- old law that majority of Americans support as well, which would allow for the funding - for taxpayer funding of abortion.
So Democrats are now becoming way out of sync with Americans, and I think Republicans should raise the alarm on this, get loud and so should President Trump, because Democrats are out sync with Americans on this.
CARLSON: Yes, it seems that way. Lisa Boothe, thanks very much.
BOOTHE: Thank you, Tucker.
CARLSON: Great to see you. Monica Klein is a founding partner at Seneca Strategies, she joins us. Hi, Monica, thanks for coming on.
MONICA KLEIN, FOUNDING PARTNER, SENECA STRATEGIES: Yes.
CARLSON: I'm sure you describe yourself as pro-choice. I bet a lot of people watching right now think of themselves as pro-choice. So I'm not attacking you for that. But I wonder what you think of what Dr. Northam, the Governor of Virginia just said, that when a child -- he described the child as an infant -- is born, there's a point where the mother and the physician can decide whether to kill the infant or not. What do you think of that?
KLEIN: Look, Tucker, I understand that you want to go back to a time where Roe v. Wade was illegal, where women were having back-alley abortions --
CARLSON: Don't give me that -- I just -- come on.
KLEIN: -- and they were using coat hangers to have abortions, which is actually what is barbaric.
CARLSON: Look, come on, I'm giving you time to make a real argument. I'm not arguing for the repeal of Roe v. Wade. I am a very straightforward person.
KLEIN: That is what you're essentially saying.
CARLSON: Actually, no, that's not what I am arguing, and please don't be tiresome. The Governor of Virginia who's a rising star in the Democratic Party, just said this. There's pending legislation that mirrors it, and I'm asking you what you think of it. That's it. I am not here to debate Roe v. Wade.
KLEIN: I think that right now, reproductive healthcare is under attack by the Republican Party; 72% of Americans support right to choose, and yet, we have Trump and we have sexual predator, Kavanaugh trying to repeal Roe v. Wade --
CARLSON: Come on.
KLEIN: -- and trying to take away our control of our own bodies. This isn't about babies. This is about healthcare. This is about you attempting to control women's bodies.
CARLSON: Okay, please, don't be a robot, Monica. You're smarter than that. This is the Governor of Virginia just saying this. I just want to know what you think of it. Is that okay? Does that bother you? It's a sincere question that's just happened.
KLEIN: It bothers me - okay. It bothers me that you are attempting to control women's bodies.
CARLSON: I am attempting to control women's bodies.
KLEIN: That's what you're doing. You are.
CARLSON: You have the - look I'm wondering if you think --
KLEIN: The Republican Party right now is working overtime to repeal Roe v. Wade and to takeaway choice in every single stage.
CARLSON: I wonder if you think you're convincing anybody or if your unwillingness to address what just happened today on tape that we just played is a sign that you can't defend this.
And if you can't defend it, I wonder why that is? If you pause to ask yourself as an American, as a person, as a woman, what do I think of that?
KLEIN: As a woman, what do I think of it? Have you asked yourself why you spend so much time talking about this, rather than thinking about why your party is trying to repeal Roe v. Wade and control women's body?
CARLSON: Okay, okay.
KLEIN: Right now, there are seven states where there's only one abortion clinic, okay, there are four states with bigger bands or we would - if Roe v. Wade is repealed, women cannot get reproductive health care. This is about a woman's right to choose. And you as a man should not have a single say in that.
CARLSON: Wow. Do you think that you're making a case that most people agree with, that it's okay to abort a child in the third trimester for no - -
KLEIN: Tucker, you can keep trying to put words in my mouth and keep trying to say that the Democratic Party is hurting children.
CARLSON: Are you -- I have to say --
KLEIN: But your party is the one that is tearing families apart at the border and allowing children's to die in Federal custody.
CARLSON: No, I am not here on behalf of the Republican Party.
KLEIN: So whose party is actually harming children?
CARLSON: Wow, I just - let me just ask you one quick question. I mean, this is obviously a pointless conversation.
KLEIN: Go ahead, Tucker.
CARLSON: And I think less of you after, I have to say.
KLEIN: I already think less of you, so don't worry.
CARLSON: But it's an honest question, have you thought about it? Do you have a real answer to what the Governor of Virginia said? Or are you to throw yet another talking point at me? I mean, have you actually thought about it? Will you answer that question at all?
KLEIN: I have thought about it and I am telling you --
CARLSON: And what do you think?
KLEIN: -- that your party is attempting to change the conversation about Roe v. Wade and take control of the woman's body. I am sorry, that as a man what you're focused on is controlling women's bodies, but we will not allow you to do that.
CARLSON: This is a child who has been born. This is not a woman's body. This is an independent person that the --
KLEIN: It just confuses me why you pretend that you have concerns over children when you're completely fine with ICE tearing families apart and children dying in Federal custody.
CARLSON: All right, Monica, thank you. I appreciate it. Well, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo identifies as Catholic. We just described the law he signed and celebrated.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. ANDREW CUOMO, D-N.Y.: What they think you should do with your body, they want to dictate through the law.
If you said what issue was more important to you right now? Choice or taxes? Choice or economic development? I don't know what people would say.
We have an extreme conservative agenda in Washington.
Kavanaugh is going to reverse Roe v. Wade. I have no doubt.
This is still a democracy and New Yorkers want to protect a woman's right to choose.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: The pause really says - it really says it all. Father Jonathan Morris is a Catholic priest. He ministers to a parish in the Bronx in New York, and he joins us tonight.
Father Morris, thanks very much for coming on.
JONATHAN MORRIS, CATHOLIC PRIEST: I'm sad tonight, honestly.
CARLSON: So, yes, well, I am, too, actually. I think it's a complicated issue. And I certainly know a lot of people who disagree with me on it in general terms, but you'd think you'd live in a country where when a politician stands up and says, "When a child is born, you have the right to kill that child, if you so desire." That there will be a chorus of - a bipartisan chorus of people saying, "You know, actually, no, you don't. You don't have the right to kill people just because they are inconvenient."
But there isn't that chorus. No one is saying anything. I wonder why.
MORRIS: Well, your last guest, I think, gave us the most convincing explanation. They don't want to take on the issue, and you showed a video earlier about the Governor of Virginia and saying - and this is a pediatrician, right? Who says this is what's going to happen, right? If a woman is dilated and about to give birth, we will in this case, we will make sure and I don't think you brought this part out, but it was unbelievable to me, we're going to make sure first of all that -- he doesn't say the word "baby" -- is comfortable, right?
And then we will resuscitate the baby if the mother wants us to. Okay. But first we're going to make it comfortable. Then we will resuscitate it if the mother wants us to and then we will enter into discussion about what to do next.
I mean, it is absolutely -- and this is not a crazy activist group. This is the Governor of Virginia. And it's exactly what the Governor of New York thinks right now. That's what we're dealing with. The world has gone crazy.
CARLSON: So where's the Catholic Church? So I know the Catholic Church is an institution, I should just say, clearly, I'm not a Catholic, but the Catholic Church from my understanding is totally opposed to this and yet, it offers communion to politicians who support and abet it, who increase the incidence of it. Why is that?
MORRIS: Well, the Catholic Church would say anybody who would agree with this, including Governor Cuomo and anybody else, they should not receive communion themselves. They should say - the whole question has been about excommunication, for example, of Governor Cuomo, right? Excommunication.
Most evangelicals, most Christians, non-Catholic Christians would say, "What is even excommunication? Like ex-communal, right? It has to do with saying, "You're no longer part of the communion of the church."
Well, anyone with right reason would say, "If I believe in this crazy stuff that we just talked about, well, then I'm not in communion with the Catholic Church. I should not even be going to communion," right?
So the Catholic Church has to decide, well, are we going to, like publicly say, "You are now excommunicated." Okay. If that is going to be helpful for the soul of that person. Let's go for it.
CARLSON: Yes, I mean, I --
MORRIS: If it is going to be, does that make sense?
CARLSON: Yes, and it's certainly not my fight. But let me just ask - give it to me quickly. What's the case that you would make? A lot of people have kind of internalized the libertarian argument. It's your body, you can do what you want. It's an appealing argument for those of us who distrust government and socialist control. I understand the argument for sure.
MORRIS: Yes.
CARLSON: What's your response to that?
MORRIS: Okay, well, I am glad you brought that up because your previous guest just said, this has to do with a woman's body. Well, in the example that she had just been given, the baby had already been born.
CARLSON: Yes, I pointed that out.
MORRIS: The umbilical cord had already been cut. Is that still her body? Okay, so it doesn't make sense logically, okay, but I think it doesn't make sense even when the baby is inside the body. And any mother who has a baby who is kicking her in her stomach day in and day out and moving knows that's another human being.
You know, Tucker, I think one really important thing that nobody has been talking about in the New York State bill is that what they've also done is they've got rid of, in all other state laws, the idea that there's personhood of the unborn.
Okay, let me just say that again, they have said that we're going to get rid of the status of person of the unborn. So let's say a woman is beat up and she's eight months pregnant, up until now, that child -- that would have been murder of the child as well. And that's no longer the case according to this --
CARLSON: No, it's not. This is it. Let's just call it what is, this is a death cult, obviously.
MORRIS: Yes. I think Cardinal Dolan said "ghoulish," which has to do with a gulag, which has to do with the love of death. And that's exactly what this is.
CARLSON: Father Morris, thank you.
MORRIS: Thank you. I'm sorry I got upset.
CARLSON: I think people should know this. I do.
MORRIS: Yes.
CARLSON: Well, the new agenda on the left has an awful lot of free stuff, some of it for non-citizens. The free stuff for Americans most people are for, why are we giving it to people who aren't from here and don't hold citizenship? Good question after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Democratic Party supports expanding the American welfare state -- free healthcare, free college tuition, lots of other free things. The case they make is that this is a rich country and the welfare state is popular and they're right, it is popular, actually. Look at the polling on the subject. But there's been a change.
Traditionally, the welfare state was for a country's own citizens. Today's Democrats are fighting hard to expand it -- for those who are in this country illegally, for non-citizens who shouldn't even be here.
For example, in New York, lawmakers just passed a bill to provide taxpayer finance tuition to illegal immigrants.
Nicole Malliotakis is a New York State Assemblywoman and she joins us tonight. Nicole, thanks very much for coming on. So in a state like yours, where there's a lot of poverty and a lot of homelessness and a lot of broken infrastructure, your subways for example are appalling. No offense. How can lawmakers justify giving free things to people who don't even have a right to be here in the first place?
NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, R-NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLYWOMAN: It's absolutely outrageous. If you are a family with a household income of $81,000.00, you qualify for absolutely no tuition assistance. If you are a graduate student in the State of New York, you qualify for absolutely no assistance. Yet, this bill would allow individuals who are here illegally and actually residing in the State of New York for just 30 days and they take the GED. They then qualify for Tuition Assistance Program that so many middle class citizens and legal residents who are struggling to get by on average $40,000.00 in debt after college, they aren't receiving it.
CARLSON: So I mean, the message is really, really clear from lawmakers to the citizenry, to the population. We don't care about you. Your interests are irrelevant to us. Are people getting that message? Do they understand what their lawmakers are saying to them?
MALLIOTAKIS: Yes, it's a slap in the face, and I believe New Yorkers are learning real quick with the shift in the State Senate to the Democrats is starting to do and like New York City, for example, the property taxes have gone up 44% over the last five years. And we're seeing the Mayor gives free healthcare to individuals who are here illegally, 300,000 of them. While as you mentioned, we have 76,000 homeless here in the City of New York.
CARLSON: So I mean, has there been any backlash? As you know, France right now is almost paralyzed from a middle class backlash against policies like this. Are you seeing anybody in the State of New York say, "You know what? This is intolerable. We're fighting back." Or are they just all moving to Florida?
MALLIOTAKIS: Absolutely. I hear it all the time as a legislator, and it's very frustrating for me, because I love the debate against the DREAM Act, which is the tuition assistance bill that we just talked about for the last eight years, and now this year, we saw it passed because the Democrats took over the State Senate and I hear it all the time from my neighbors, from my family. People want to leave this state because they can't afford to live here. It's a high tech state.
And you know what, we're not benefiting from salt because of the city and state high taxation. I mean, that's the reality of it. So what do they do? They continue to tax us more. And to make matters worse, the middle class isn't even receiving the same benefits, and so I think, that's what's really frustrating for those that I represent and people across the State of New York.
CARLSON: Tax you more to pay for people who have no right to be here in the first place. It just couldn't be clearer what they're saying to you. Have fun in Florida. I hope you get there soon. Assemblywoman, thank you very much.
MALLIOTAKIS: Thank you.
CARLSON: Well, at his inauguration speech, California Governor Gavin Newsom pledged to be a defender of sanctuary laws. He spoke like a religious prophet while doing so. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM, D-CALIF.: Yes, they let us build a house stronger than the coming storms, yet open to the world. A house that provides shelter to all who need it and sanctuary to all who seek it.
We will not have one house for the rich and one for the poor or one for the native born and one for the rest. We will build one house for one California.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Maybe the fakest person in American politics, but his policies are real. He now wants to -- Newsom wants to use $20 million of taxpayer funds to create an Immigration Rapid Response Team that would aid migrants arriving at California's border.
Ethan Bearman lives in California. He hosts a popular radio show there and he joins us tonight to respond. Ethan, great to see you.
ETHAN BEARMAN, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST, CALIFORNIA: Thanks, Tucker. Good to be here.
CARLSON: So, I do think -- I will -- I don't know if you're going to say this, but I'll just say it before you even do. I think there's a huge level of public support for a deeper safety net. Maybe we can afford it, maybe we can't. But the public wants it and all the polling shows it. Why not respond to American citizens with the following bargain?
Yes, we're going to raise taxes in some people. Yes, we're going to give you more of what you want, but we're only going to give it to American citizens because that's our job, it is to represent American citizens. If you're not American citizen, you don't get any free stuff. We're not going to tax the middle class to pay for people who shouldn't be here in the first place. Why not make that the deal?
BEARMAN: Well, in this specific instance, Tucker --
CARLSON: In all instance.
BEARMAN: -- he actually is protecting -- well, but this $20 million that you're talking about, he is helping American citizens because what's happening is, we have a crisis at our border. It is affecting our border communities, and it's because of the failure in Washington, D.C. to ever get around to addressing the issue and implementing functioning work visa program, stuff that you and I have talked about.
This $20 million out of $140 billion dollar state budget, the fifth biggest economy in the world, is to help with a crisis on the ground of people in need. These are people who are desperate.
CARLSON: Okay, that's one way to describe it. But I would describe it a very different way. But let me just broaden the conversation and tell you what you already know, which is they're all kinds of programs in California that shovel taxpayer money into the pockets of non-citizens, some of them here illegally. Why not end all of that.
If you're not a U.S. citizen, you can't benefit from taxpayer dollars. The point of the U.S. government is look after its own citizens, of all nationalities, religions, races, whatever, but all American citizens and nobody else want to put that on the ballot, make that a proposition. What do you think that would pass by? Like a hundred percent in that range? Why not do that?
BEARMAN: Well, a long time ago, when this was a more Republican state, it did pass --
CARLSON: I know.
BEARMAN: -- and it was ruled unconstitutional by a Federal judge, so we can't do that. And furthermore, these are our members of the community.
CARLSON: You can't do that. Why?
BEARMAN: They work, they pay taxes, they are part --
CARLSON: Wait, just explain to me. I think we both agree that the point of the government - we elect the government, we give a portion of our salaries to the government so they can look out for us, American citizens. That is why I said citizenship is meaningful.
One judge didn't like it. Bring it to the Supreme Court, but make the case for it. What's the case against it? What's the case that you should take my money by force and give it to someone who's not even allowed to be here in the first place? What why is that justifiable?
BEARMAN: Because we're also taking their money. They're working in our economy. They're contributing to California's gigantic fifth biggest in the world economy. They're paying taxes. They're contributing to our economy --
CARLSON: Some are, some aren't.
BEARMAN: -- in many different forms.
CARLSON: No, but that's not true. They're working for --
BEARMAN: There is always a handful who are.
CARLSON: Hold on. Wait a second. They're working for Tyson's Chicken or whatever. They're working for some big employer that wants to pay people less, so they hire people from the third world to exploit them. I get it. I understand why they're doing it. They're not working for me. I'm not benefiting from Tyson's Chicken or Walmart or whatever, any these big creepy companies that don't like my values. They've got nothing to do with me.
I'm an American citizen. Why am I paying for somebody who shouldn't be here, who is violating my laws in my country? I don't get it
BEARMAN: But they are paying, so they pay the sales taxes, they're paying property taxes. They're renting facilities to reside in. They're buying food. They're working and when they're working, often, they're paying the employment taxes. They are contributing in every one of those aspects no matter which --
CARLSON: So I have an obligation to send them money? Well, look, so -- but, I thought they came here to work? Why do they need government --
BEARMAN: Who are sending money? Who are you sending money to, Tucker?
CARLSON: I am sending money to the state and Federal government which then rechannels it, not to the American middle class. They are not eligible for any of these assistance programs, as you well know.
BEARMAN: That's not true.
CARLSON: They go to people who shouldn't be here in the first place. You know, we just interviewed an Assemblywoman from New York State who said a family making $81,000.00 combined, which is not much in New York, is not eligible for tuition assistance. But an illegal alien is. So that kind of tells you everything, doesn't it?
BEARMAN: I can't speak to New York, but I sure can speak to California. California has very generous programs to help people in the middle class in this state to attend schools, and as a matter of fact, there was just a deal announced with our brand new Governor Newsom, who I think is doing a tremendous job so far, to actually hold tuition steady.
They're not going to raise tuition in this state for our in-state students.
CARLSON: But wouldn't it be a little more affordable if we just took care of our people, the citizens and we've balanced our budget, we have a surplus and no more debt, then maybe we can hand some out to other countries? But maybe we take care of our people first. Wouldn't that be a good place to start?
BEARMAN: Well, we've got to go back to 1986. These are our people now.
CARLSON: They're not.
BEARMAN: Some of them have resided here since the Reagan amnesty. Absolutely. I had a driver just the other week, I was talking to this guy. His family came right after the Reagan amnesty.
CARLSON: Well, have him get citizenship.
BEARMAN: He's contributed to our economy. His children are U.S. citizens.
CARLSON: Okay, then his kids are qualified. They are as equal as you and me. They're American citizens. I don't discriminate against them, but if you're not a U.S. citizen, why are you taking benefits that we're paying for?
BEARMAN: Again, contributing to our economy. They are part of - their entire family, the whole structure us part of our community. They are contributing. Now, if we have specific issues with cartels and gangs and stuff like that, you and I actually are probably in agreement. But people who are contributing --
CARLSON: We have specific issues with poverty and homelessness of our people that we are ignoring, so we can help people who shouldn't even be here. That's my opinion on that part.
BEARMAN: We are not ignoring that in California. We are actually taking really aggressive stances to address those issues right now, we are.
CARLSON: All right, well, I hope you'll come back and tell us how you're solving the worst homelessness crisis in the history of this country. Thank you very much. Ethan Bearman, good to see you.
BEARMAN: Thanks, Tucker.
CARLSON: Evidence continues to pile up, meanwhile of serious political bias at the Department of Justice, the FBI, the most powerful law enforcement agency in the world, Devin Nunes joins us after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Well, evidence continues to emerge that the FBI may have become overtly political in its investigation of the Trump campaign. In 2016, Senior FBI official Bruce Ohr met with Christopher Steele, the author, rather of the now infamous Trump dossier. Now more than two years after it would have been helpful to know this, it has come out that Ohr shared intel from the Steele dossier with colleagues at the FBI, colleagues who are now part of the Mueller investigation. It's all kind of amazing and unsettling.
Congressman Devin Nunes represents California, obviously on the Intelligence Committee, so he's been following this since the beginning. Congressman, thank you very much.
REP. DEVIN NUNES, R-CALIF.: Great to be with you.
CARLSON: So without getting - this is very complex and we have uncovered it every single night, but in the simplest terms, what does this tell us?
NUNES: It tells us that definitely, the FBI knew that the information was coming from the Clinton campaign -- the dirt, the Trump dossier as you said in the opening -- that was coming from the Clinton campaign. They lied to the FISA Court. I mean, we now know that for sure.
CARLSON: Now we would know a lot more if the spying authorization from the FISA Court, the application to the FISA Court were made public, the President pledged that he would do that.
NUNES: That's right.
CARLSON: He was stopped by his attorneys. Do you think at some point, he will override their judgment and release those documents?
NUNES: Yes, what I've recommended to my friends and colleagues and people over at the White House is they need some kind of transparency office because the government's gotten so big, you've got so many of these different agencies that there needs to be someone in the White House that or the President of the United States who is the boss --
CARLSON: Right.
NUNES: -- can make that decision and make it quickly because like you said, this is two years. We should have known about this at least a year ago, if not more.
CARLSON: So, we saw on Friday morning, Roger Stone, for the alleged crime of lying was surrounded by armed FBI agents with automatic rifles and arrested and it reminded all of us that lying to a Federal agent is a crime and lying under oath is a crime. There's been a lot of lying in Congress, as you well know.
In order for those liars to be prosecuted, they need to be referred to the DOJ by the Congress. Is that going to happen? Can you imagine Peter Strzok for example, being referred to DOJ? Or Jim Comey?
NUNES: Yes, so we're going to make several referrals and don't forget, one of the frustrating things is that Chuck Grassley - Senator Grassley actually made a referral on Christopher Steele, the British agent, who wrote - who worked for the Clinton campaign. He was referred, nothing is happening to him. So I think until there's a new AG that gets in there and starts to clean this place up, I think it's going to be tough for the American people to have confidence in what is happening.
CARLSON: I agree with that completely and very quickly, why? I mean, am I missing something? So Chuck Grassley, one of the senior senators in the Senate.
NUNES: He was the Chairman of the Judiciary in the last Congress. It's quite clear that Christopher Steele wasn't telling the truth.
CARLSON: Quite clear, and yet, it's just languishing at the Department of Justice somewhere, and not acted upon.
NUNES: We haven't heard anything that it is. So we're working -- so a lot of people think that just because Republicans are out of power that we're not conducting an investigation, we still are. Now, whether or not people are going to come in and interview with us, we don't have gavels, we don't have the subpoena power, but we will still be trying to interview people and we will still be making criminal referrals.
CARLSON: Congressman Devin Nunes from California, thank you very much.
NUNES: Great to be with you.
CARLSON: Great to see you. Well, a television actor was hospitalized in Chicago you may have read. He says he was the victim of a racist attack. I don't have all the evidence. We're agnostic on a lot of this. But some politicians wade in immediately describing it as a modern day lynching.
Police in Chicago are trying to find out more about what happened. Matt Finn is in Chicago and has been following this, too. He joins us tonight. Hey Matt.
MATT FINN, CORRESPONDENT: Tucker, this evening, Chicago police tell Fox News, they have pulled hundreds of hours of surveillance video from more than 12 different cameras in the area where this alleged attack happened. And so far, nothing shows the alleged assault and no assailants had been seen on video.
What Chicago Police do say is that tonight, they have identified two persons of interest on this surveillance video, and they plan on releasing photos of those persons sometime soon.
Chicago Police tonight also addressing media reports that Smollett, the actor suffered a fractured rib during this alleged assault. Police tell Fox News so far, they do not have documentation of the actor suffering a fractured rib. Police say the fractured rip could have happened, they just can't confirm the injury.
Police say what they do have confirmed so far is that based on the actor's digital footprint, he did apparently visit a Subway restaurant around 2:00 a.m. and when investigators interviewed Smollett in his residence, he did have a small white rope around his neck, which the actor claims he's attackers tied around him.
The alleged attack that could amount to a hate crime sparked a lot of support and response of entertainers and politicians. California senator and 2020 presidential hopeful Kamala Harris tweeted out in part quote, "This was an intended modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color their skin. We must confront this hate." New Jersey senator Cory Booker also called this alleged incident, a modern day lynching and tweeted in part quote, "To those in Congress who don't feel the urgency to pass our anti-lynching bill designating lynching as a Federal hate crime, I urge you to pay attention." And Democratic Congresswoman from Chicago, Bobby Rush released a statement writing in part quote, "This is a hate crime, plain and simple. I'm even more disturbed by the manner in which the crime was carried out, particularly at the media reports of the attempted lynching which harkens back to some of the darkest days in our history."
This actor is also a musician. He has a scheduled performance in West Hollywood this weekend, which he apparently is going to carry on with, Tucker.
CARLSON: Matt Finn, thank you for that. Appreciate it. Well up next, and exclusively on this program, the Border Patrol has made one of the largest drug busts in history, enough fentanyl to kill 50 million people. But there's no crisis on our border. Just remember that. We have the facts after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Well, the U.S. Border Patrol has made the biggest fentanyl bust in history, an enormous amount. Enough fentanyl to kill they estimate, 57 million people. That's more than the combined populations of the states of Illinois, New York and Pennsylvania. It's a lot. Fox correspondent Hillary Vaughn has the latest on the story -- Hillary.
HILLARY VAUGHN, CORRESPONDENT: Hey Tucker. Well, we got our hands on an internal memo from U.S. Customs and Border Patrol that details this bust, the biggest fentanyl seizer in U.S. history.
According to the memo, four days ago in Nogales, Arizona, at the port of entry, CBP officers stopped a tractor trailer crossing the U.S.-Mexico border into the U.S. with enough fentanyl to kill 57 million people. That's plenty - a fatal dose to wipe out the entire populations of Texas, Arizona and New York State combined. They found this under the floor of the trailer. They found 114 kilograms of fentanyl.
According to the DEA, just two milligrams is considered a lethal dose. They also grabbed 179 kilograms of methamphetamine and one kilogram of fentanyl in pill form. The street value for the fentanyl alone, over $102 million. The CBP officers arrested the smuggler, a Mexican national who attempted to drive the drugs across the border.
The suspect was a part of the DHS's trusted traveler program called FAST. That stands for Free and Secure Trade for Commercial vehicles. The program started after 9/11. It's kind of like TSA pre-check, but for truck drivers crossing the border. They complete background checks and meet other requirements to get expedited screening.
Now, the driver's FAST pass has been revoked and the CBP plans to announce all of this in a press conference tomorrow and we'll also have a photo op with the historic call -- Tucker.
CARLSON: Amazing story. Hillary Vaughn for us. Thank you very much for that report. Well, there's an awful lot of outrage in this country all of a sudden, and we like to keep track of it just because it's interesting and that tells you a lot about where we're going. People are outraged about virtually everything.
Sometimes they get pretty creative about getting outraged. Here's one interesting example. A restaurant patron in Phoenix, Arizona recently complained to management about a photograph that was hanging in the restaurant of coal miners drinking after work. The patron argued that because some people might think the coal miners who are covered in coal dust, you can see the picture on the screen - were posted in black face, it was offensive and it should be taken down.
What to make of this? Well, we decided to ask Robert Woodson. He is the President of the Woodson Center and he joins us now. Now, Mr. Woodson, thanks very much for coming on.
ROBERT WOODSON, PRESIDENT, WOODSON CENTER: Nice to be here.
CARLSON: So what does this story tell us?
WOODSON: It tell us tells us that race grievance is just triumphing throughout the country, that I'm upset as a Civil Rights person that we would spend so much time being concerned about a picture hanging a white man in coal dust, and somehow that's offensive. It deflects attention away from more critical issues facing black America.
CARLSON: Exactly.
WOODSON: We have more blacks killing other blacks in one year than we did in the 70 years of lynching. We have in other words, a 9/11 every six months of blacks killing blacks and you're going to tell me our problem is a picture hanging.
CARLSON: So is it possible that let's say you were in charge of the society or a big city and your policies weren't helping at all and people were still dying young and shooting each other for example, maybe you would encourage people to be mad about irrelevant things like coal dust pictures so they wouldn't be mad at you for mismanaging their lives.
WOODSON: That's true because many of those killings are occurring in cities run by black Democrats over the past 40 years, so if politics and race were the issue, the question is, why are not blacks succeeding?
If we look - in other words, at a time when whites were at their worst, blacks were at their best. Between 1920 and 1940, during segregation, the education gap in the South was three years. Five years for blacks, eight years for whites. Within 20 years, we closed that gap within six months because we established schools. Five thousand Rosenwald Schools, in fact, Rosenwald, the CEO of Sears, partnered with a Booker T. Washington. He invested $4 million. The black community matched that and build 5,000 Rosenwald Schools. And so that's why we did it.
There were five high schools in every major city -- Baltimore, New York and Atlanta -- where the class sizes were 50 and plus. We had tattered school books. The buildings were torn down, but the test scores of those blacks in those high schools exceeded all of the test scores of whites in those same cities even though we were spending less.
So the issue, Tucker, that we ought to be talking about is why -- we ought to be talking about black resilience and that is how did we achieve in the face of over oppression, legal segregation and why are we failing now post- Civil Rights in cities run - education systems run by their own people?
CARLSON: It's a great question. No one even seems to care about the schools anymore. Mr. Woodson, I know you do. Thank you for that. Super interesting.
WOODSON: Thank you.
CARLSON: Well, China is clearly the top cyber threat to this country. What can be done about that? First, acknowledging the problem, but Senator Marco Rubio of Florida says he has a plan after that. He joins us to explain.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Officials in Washington has spent more than two years in utter hysteria over the threat that Macedonian Facebook users might pose to American democracy. But take a deep breath, and ask yourself, is Macedonia really the top cyber threat to the United States? Is Russia? No, of course not. When actual experts on the subject testified, they always say the same thing. China is the top cyber threat to the United States.
The Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats, testified as much to Congress this week. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida was at that hearing and says he has a plan to combat Chinese spying on the United States. Senator Rubio joins us tonight. Senator, thanks a lot for coming on.
SEN. MARCO RUBIO, R-FLA.: Thank you, Tucker.
CARLSON: Summarize for our Summarize for our viewers, if you would, quickly what Director Coats said at this hearing.
RUBIO: Well, they all agreed that China is the most comprehensive intelligence threat the United States has ever faced and because it's a commercial threat, they steal our products and reverse engineer them and then sell them at lower prices, subsidized by their government so they can put our businesses out.
They steel our research from universities and they do that by either packing in and stealing it. Sometimes, they just hire the researcher and have them bring their research with them. Sometimes, they embed students in our system and these students become research assistants and they take that information and steal it back with them.
They steal of course, our military secrets and they also are in the supply chains, so they are embedded in commercial - and parts of our communication system, so for example, they may a router or a surveillance camera and can embed themselves into our systems that way. Especially things that have to do with defense, but even with commerce.
So they steal business and in defense and it's an enormous threat.
CARLSON: It's terrifying. What do we do about it?
RUBIO: Well, first of all, we have to admit it exists, and for a long time, China was kind of viewed as a benign threat, in essence, a country - the conventional wisdom of Washington was, "Don't worry about China. They are a developing country. Once they become like us - once they become as rich as we are, then they will become just like us." Well, it hasn't worked out that way.
So at least people have woken up. But you already see things happening. The Justice Department going after Huawei. The extradition of the leader of Huawei in Canada. So every day you see more and more of this happening and now you're starting to see other countries doing it. Poland, numerous countries who are now taking this threat seriously as well, because Huawei is an example is already embedded there, but there's just so much more to do.
We still struggle, for example, with academia. I can't tell you how many universities in Florida that I've talked to and said, You have these Confucius Institutes and they're used as agents of influence to shape the narrative and potentially to identify Americans who 20 years from now could be a mayor, could be a congressman, could be a leader of a major corporation and start to sort of recruit them to the Chinese view of things. And how many schools fought us on that.
Now, we've gotten them kicked out of almost every school, but one in Florida, and more universities are coming - waking up to that threat, but it is still an enormous challenge to convince academics that this is a threat.
CARLSON: Well, considering that these schools, almost every last one of them rely on tax dollars either through guaranteed student loans or directly through grants to operate, doesn't the Congress have some leverage on this question?
RUBIO: We do, and eventually it may get to that point, what we're hoping to do is through these defensive briefings, we and other members of the Intelligence Committee have been hosting these closed meetings with leaders of business, academia, even the press, and sort of walking them through the threat that China poses.
And I can tell you two or three years ago, it was a huge challenge because the business community, they just saw China as this huge market they wanted to sell things and make things cheap, and now I think people are starting to wake up to this threat, but we have a long ways to go.
CARLSON: Is it - and my last question, is it a partisan question? I mean, are there senators on the other side, Democrats who understand the threat and are willing to address it in the straightforward way that you are?
RUBIO: Yes, absolutely. So Mark Warner is the Vice Chairman of Intelligence and he's one of the leaders and I think this is not - we haven't turned this one into a partisan issue yet.
CARLSON: Good.
RUBIO: And that's a good thing. I think the challenge really becomes from the pro corporatists, pro-business -- I'm pro-business, but not to the expense of National Security and some idea that ultimately, open trade, more commerce and engagement is -- selling things over there or making things over there is more important than our national security. That's where I think the challenge is more embedded. That's changing a little bit, as I said, but we still have some challenges there.
CARLSON: Yes, well, thank you for this. Senator Rubio, appreciate it.
RUBIO: Thanks a lot.
CARLSON: Well, we are out of time. What a roller coaster of a show. It's pretty unbelievable, but it always is. We're in an unbelievable moment. Pay close attention and learn something, we are.
We will be back tomorrow, 8:00 p.m. The show that is the sworn enemy of lying pomposity, smugness and groupthink. Hopefully, cheerfully.
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.
https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/is-the-fbi-politically-motivated