This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," March 22, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: This is a Fox News Alert. For close to two years, American politics has been stuck in a state of suspended animation. For two years, this city, the city of Washington has been utterly consumed by the far-reaching investigation of special counsel Robert Mueller. The business of running the government and improving the lives of the people who live here - those have been a distant second for two years.
Tonight the Mueller era is ending. At 5:00 p.m. this afternoon, Robert Mueller delivered the report to the Attorney General of the United States, William Barr. Good evening, and welcome to “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”
The Mueller report has not been released yet, but there are some things we know about its contents. Since we wanted to start tonight, our special coverage with Mollie Hemingway who is a senior editor of "The Federalist" and is following every twist and turn of this story since the first day. Mollie, thanks a lot for coming on. What strikes you about what we know now?
MOLLIE HEMINGWAY, SENIOR EDITOR, THE FEDERALIST: Well, we really went know yet what is in the report. There are a lot of calls for people to be transparent about it. But one of the interesting things we found out today is that there are no new indictments that are coming from the Special Counsel.
And the reason why that is significant if you take a step back and you think about what brought us here, several years ago political operation that was secretly bought and paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and The Democratic National Committee to claim that Donald Trump was an agent of Russia. This was fed to the media, who largely took it uncritically and they accepted it and they pushed it right back out.
And then it was weaponized by some of the highest levels of our Federal government and was used to justify wiretaps against the Trump campaign affiliates, the placing of the human informants against the campaign, and all sorts of actions that were pretty extreme.
Eventually, it led to this Special Counsel, and for years we've had the slow drip of stories claiming that when it all came out, we'd find that that Donald Trump was definitely, the evidence showed, an agent of Russia.
Learning that there are no more indictments coming down, if that were true, if it were that he was an agent of Russia, you wouldn't just be seeing one indictment, you'd be seeing dozens, if not hundreds of indictments.
CARLSON: And justified indictments, by the way. If the President of the United States was an agent of a foreign power, yes.
HEMINGWAY: Yes, hopefully, we would be taking that very seriously.
CARLSON: Yes, we would be.
HEMINGWAY: And we had been promised this largely. We've been promised that there is evidence. You've had members -- high-ranking Member of Congress claiming that there was evidence and to find out that in fact, there no evidence to support such an indictment against anyone closely affiliated with the President.
We have had all sorts of other people caught up in this probe, but not for the treasonous collusion with Russia to steal the 2016 election. That is significant. No matter comes out of this now, and there should be people who are held accountable for having uncritically spread this theory without evidence.
CARLSON: I agree with you completely. Of the many threads in this, maybe the most significant is the fact, not the speculation, the fact that a presidential campaign was spied upon by the government of a rival party.
Barack Obama's administration spied on Donald Trump's presidential campaign, and the pretext was Russian collusion, but they did it. Why isn't the press more curious about this? Why has former President Obama not testified about why this was allowed? Why don't we know more?
HEMINGWAY: Well, part of the reason why I don't think we have had more answers from President Obama is because of that first issue. The press had been remarkably incurious about this. Normally, this would be the story that reporters would wait a lifetime for, finding out that the FBI was so politicized that they were actually running informants or spying on a presidential campaign that they had successfully secured a wiretap against an individual who -- it's worth noting, we've just found out today -- there are no further charges coming.
That means, that wiretap was run against the individual, and there might have actually been several wiretaps against individuals with no indictments coming. That means they were harassed by their Federal government and that they were not what the Federal government had claimed and I think that's important.
CARLSON: Well, wait, I mean, that is kind of it right there. So the proof is in the indictment and look thereof. If I violate your civil liberties, if I make it impossible for you to make a living. If I destroy your reputation, such that you can't have a job again -- and they have done it to a number of people. And then I don't indict you for the crimes everyone is accusing you of, doesn't that mean that I was wrong and you were right?
HEMINGWAY: Well, certainly the evidence does not suggest that they were right to have secured wiretaps against these people and they behaved poorly.
HEMINGWAY: It's also interesting because you hear people saying, "Oh, okay, well, I guess, Mueller is wrapping up, let's just move on from this." Good to know that President Trump is not an agent of Putin. As if there weren't real harm or damage caused by people weaponizing this information operation that was a Hillary Clinton campaign operation. As if the country weren't harmed by it, as if our Attorney General weren't completely kneecapped, as if they didn't have people having to pay a lot of money to defend themselves against this investigation and as if you didn't have people really undermining an administration for several years.
CARLSON: That's right.
HEMINGWAY: People need to be held accountable for what they did to spread this theory and that's true both inside the government and outside the government. And the media want to just quickly move on and quickly find a way to justify their behavior.
But I don't think people forget what they were subjected to for the last several years, and how people who were skeptical of this crazy collusion conspiracy theory were treated when now we see, no more indictments.
CARLSON: They injected poison into the bloodstream of the country, and by the way, you are absolutely right to note, the former Attorney General, Jeff Sessions whose reputation was completely destroyed.
HEMINGWAY: Because he was supposedly an agent of Putin. I think people have forgotten --
CARLSON: Right, and he was attacked by the President and he faithfully served because of this investigation.
HEMINGWAY: Well, he should have not recused himself.
CARLSON: I agree, but I mean, he was an honorable man and he has really been hurt by this. There are so many victims of this and I hope that we take time -- somebody takes time to apologize to each one of them and try to make it right. Mollie Hemingway, it's great to see you tonight. Thank you for starting off the show.
HEMINGWAY: Great to be here.
CARLSON: Well, as you just heard, the Mueller report has arrived with no further indictments according to a senior DOJ official. That is it. No one else will be indicted in this investigation for collusion or anything else, so to repeat, after all of these -- years of it -- not a single American citizen has been charged with anything related to Russian collusion. Not one person.
Not Michael Flynn, not Roger Stone, not George Papadopoulos, not Paul Manafort, not Carter Page and not Donald Trump. Many of these people have had lives ruined by the Mueller investigation. Some could die in prison. Not one of them colluded with Russia. The people on TV have been lying to you. They will deny it now. They will tell you it was always about Trump's taxes or some foreign real estate deal or hush money he paid to a girlfriend. That is a crock. This investigation was always from day one about collusion with Russia, about betraying this country. They told us that for years and we have the tape.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS MATTHEWS, ANCHOR, MSBNC: What makes you believe that he has more indictments?
JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: Because he hasn't addressed the issues related to criminal conspiracy as well as any individuals --
MATTHEWS: Criminal conspiracy involving the Russians?
BRENNAN: The Russians, yes. I think it was very -- in terms of the American person.
MATTHEWS: And that's an area --
BRENNAN: Any U.S. person.
MATTHEWS: That is an area you know something about. That investigation was developing while you were still on the job.
BRENNAN: Well, it was, in terms of looking at what was going on with the Russians and whether or not U.S. persons were actively collaborating, colluding, cooperating and involved in a conspiracy with them or not, but also if there is going to be any member of --
MATTHEWS: Did you see enough at that stage to believe that there would now -- that that would result in indictments once investigated?
BRENNAN: I thought at the time that there was going to be individuals who were going to have issues with the Department of Justice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: So that was the former CIA Director, one of countless retired intel officials you see parading across your screen every night. All of them paid by the MSNBC or CNN to tow the party line. All of them know better. They are lying -- it is a habit many of them picked up years ago.
Members of Congress did the same. To pick one among a thousand examples. Here is Tennessee Steve Cohen telling us most of the Trump family is bound for prison.
REP. STEVE COHEN, D-TENN.: Well, I think they are getting closer to knowing that the truth is going to come out and that there was activities with the Trump campaign and Russia and releasing the hacks and guiding them to the states and the localities where they came from. Some of that was Jared Kushner's responsibilities. Some of it was Donald, Jr. I think you're going to probably see indictments of both of those people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: That man is a sitting Member of Congress. He is wearing necktie. He is on television. People believed him and why wouldn't they? He is an authority figure in this country and he was lying.
So was Senator Richard Blumenthal who has spent years bringing shame to the state of Connecticut. He embarrassed himself further with his mock certainty on this and many, many other occasions.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, D-CONN.: There are indictments in this President's future. They're coming. Whether they are after his presidency or during it, obviously the Department of Justice said, they cannot indict a sitting President.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: And of course, there was Howard Dean, he is the former Governor of Vermont. Dean was also, if you can remember that far back to 2004, a presidential candidate. At one point, it looked like he was going to be the nominee of the Democratic Party. He went on to run the DNC. He is on television constantly. People have long whispered that Howard Dean is not all there. They say he yells so much because he can't think very well. They claim he is so slow it takes him hour and a half to watch "60 Minutes." You don't want to believe any of that is true, it sounds cruel, on the other hand, they might be right.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOWARD DEAN, FORMER DNC CHAIRMAN: We believe we may well have a criminal in the White House and the next step is going to be the Trump family itself. I expect that there is a good likelihood that Jared Kushner will be indicted for money laundering and then we are going to have to see how far the Russian involvement goes. This is serious business. These people are undermining our democracy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: It was never serious business. Another lie. It was ludicrous. It was always ludicrous. But no matter how much evidence you muster, you will never convince Congressman Eric Swalwell of that.
Swalwell is the original collusion truther. There is no element of the Russia conspiracy that Swallwell -- who has been on this show many times -- isn't eager to believe and magnify. He really ought to have an overnight show on AM radio, he'd be able to tell us how Putin seriously secretly runs Bilderberg.
CNN, of course, loves Eric Swalwell. For years, that channel has broadcast uncritically, virtually every lunatic claim Swalwell ever made. Here is one example.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ERIC SWALWELL, D-CALIF.: It's looking more and more, Wolf, that Donald Trump was a part of a criminal campaign, a criminal transition and now presides over a criminal presidency.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: A criminal presidency. What is criminal is what just happened. We have lived through three separate investigations in to Russia collusion; not just Mueller, but a Committee in the House and a Committee in the Senate, and they spent years looking in this. And in the end, they found nothing.
But during that time, this country, the country they are supposed to be running has become obviously and measurably worse. Suicide, drug ODs are up. Life expectancy is falling. The borders are a mess. We have no clue who lives in this country to the tune of millions of people. Maybe tens of millions. We have no idea.
The schools are a joke. You wouldn't send your kids to them if you had a choice. Infrastructure is crumbling. Hundreds of thousands of Americans sleep outside every night. So what do our leaders talking about? What do they spend their time obsessing over? What do they get TV bookings to rant about? Some irrelevant meeting with a minor Russian lawyer in Trump Tower three years ago.
The New York City Subway barely works. The largest city in the United States smells like garbage. People are fleeing it. What does Bill de Blasio, the mayor, talk about? He is ranting about Putin. This has been a disaster. How can we let people who are responsible for it continue as if it never happened? How can Eric Swalwell and Adam Schiff keep their seats in the House of Representatives? They should resign. How can Jeff Zucker remain at CNN after we now know much of what his network told us for two years is a total lie? And it is a total lie.
And what about the victims of this monstrosity? There are many. Roger Stone is facing life in prison. He was indicted by an investigation designed to find collusion -- indicted on minor charges. He was dragged from his own home in a morning FBI raid. They put an amphibious vehicle outside his house and pointed an automatic weapon in his -- all face to find collusion.
But there was no collusion. Stone is still looking at life in prison. Where is Roger Stone's pardon? His pardon from the President? Let's hope it comes very soon. The Mueller investigation is over as of tonight, but the wreckage remains.
For the sake of this country, let's clean it up quickly and move on. Chris Hahn is a radio host and former staffer to Senator Chuck Schumer and he joins us tonight. Chris, I want to congratulate you, you have been one of the people from the very beginning who said I'm very concerned that there was criminal collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, and I think that's a fair concern. Whenever our leaders sell us out to another country, we ought to be upset about it. Tonight, we know that's not true. No one was indicted for it, unequivocally, no one indicted, how are you celebrating this great news?
CHRIS HAHN, RADIO SHOW HOST: Look, I don't think anybody wanted to see the President indicted for colluding with a foreign power.
CARLSON: Of course not.
HAHN: And seeing that there are no more indictments coming -- seeing that there is no more indictments coming down, I think we ought to read the report and find out exactly what happened.
HAHN: I don't think anybody is owed an apology based on the Trump rule where you don't apologize for anything ever. So I disagree with your statements there.
CARLSON: No, I am not invoking the Trump rule. I'm invoking -- wait, I am invoking common sense, decency and logic. People alleged a crime. No crime was found unless you are accusing Mueller of somehow being in Trump's camp or not in the level, I don't think anyone thinks that.
HAHN: Well --
CARLSON: So no crime was found. In our country --
HAHN: No, I am not.
CARLSON: If there is a crime, and we can prove it, we indictment you. If we can't, we don't. So that is kind of pretty straightforward, right, you are an attorney, you know that. So we know now --
HAHN: Oh, absolutely.
CARLSON: Okay, so why aren't we celebrating this? I'm confused.
HAHN: I think that everybody wants to read the report before they celebrate anything. And I know I want to read the report.
CARLSON: Really? I want to read it, too. Of course, I agree.
HAHN: And I hope that the Attorney General releases the report forthwith. I mean, I think it's something that needs to be released immediately to public barring anything that needs to be redacted for national security reasons.
CARLSON: Totally, you'll find no disagreement here. I am always --
HAHN: And I'd like to see it, I know you'd like to see it, I think you will join me right now in saying that we should all see it at the same time.
CARLSON: Okay, but I'd like to see a lot of other documents, too, like the FISA warrant that allowed the Obama administration to spy on American citizens in a rival presidential campaign on the basis of what?
HAHN: Well, you know, there were 24 -- there were 20 ...
CARLSON: Wait, hold on, wait a second --
HAHN: ... Russians.
CARLSON: Why can't we see those?
HAHN: Hold on. There were 20 Russians that were indicted by the Special Counsel.
CARLSON: Good. I don't care. They're Russians. I am talking about Americans --
HAHN: For interference with our election. They may have -- that may have stemmed from the FISA warrants. Look, there is a FISA Court.
CARLSON: Hold on. Stop. Why don't we find out? Hold on. I don't care how the U.S. government treats foreign citizens. I don't care on the border and I don't care if they are Russian agents. I care about American citizens. The point of our government is to protect them. And American citizens have their civil liberties violated by the Obama administration on the basis of what? We don't know. So why can't I see the FISA requests?
HAHN: I think those requests might be part of this report. They definitely will be part of the underlying documentation of this report and I think we should see it. I think the President should declassify everything in this report today.
CARLSON: Good. I agree. I'm with you on that.
HAHN: He should go out -- he should go --
CARLSON: And those FISA warrants.
HAHN: And Mar-A-Lago and declassify everything. Release everything to the public right now so we can see the underlying documentation behind Mueller's report and --
CARLSON: Again, what we are doing is having a vigorous agreement here. Okay, so I want to get to --
CARLSON: And we only played at the tip of the cable news iceberg, the tape that we have of people predicting indictments of every member of the Trump family, calling Trump a criminal, calling him treasonous, betrayed his country. He is going to go to jail. All of those people were lying, wrong at best, should a Member of Congress ...
HAHN: Well, they were guessing because none of us knew.
CARLSON: ... who has alleged a crime, okay, then why would they allege it if they didn't know. They are guys that are sitting on freaking House Intelligence Committee who have access to any information they want, thousands of it. They oversee our intel community.
CARLSON: How can they get away with saying that? We learn it is not true and they keep their seats. How does that work exactly?
HAHN: Well, how did they do that when the Republicans were investigating Hillary over Benghazi and her e-mails and there were charges there, there was no crime done?
CARLSON: I don't know. Okay, The Republicans are bad. You're not going to get --
HAHN: I think it goes both ways. I don't remember -- I don't hear a lot of people calling for them to resign. I mean, some of them lost their seats, thanks God.
CARLSON: I didn't have this show then.
HAHN: But none of them over here has called for them to resign.
CARLSON: Okay, I am now asking you a simple question. I'm not here to defend the Republicans.
CARLSON: I attack them all the time. Trust me, and I mean it when I do. But I want to know how anybody of any party who stood up and alleged a crime, especially some with access to the highest level of classified information on the House Intel Committee proven wrong, proven a liar can hold his seat after that? I don't understand. How can you do that? You lied. You got caught.
HAHN: Well, Tucker, that is up to the people that put them -- that is up to the American people who put them in their seats and that will be something for their opponent to challenge them in their election. So I mean, that is what we live in. We live in a democracy where people get to vote for their leaders and if they don't like what somebody said, you vote them out.
CARLSON: Might be helpful -- okay, so, okay, no. Maybe there is a thing called honor and decency.
CARLSON: Oh, there is not. Okay, so what you are saying is the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee --
HAHN: No, I think there is.
CARLSON: The Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, one of the most powerful Members of Congress in Washington, one of the most powerful people in this country is a known liar, a reckless serial liar and we are okay with him running the House intelligence Committee?
CARLSON: Adam Schiff of Burbank, California can run that Committee still?
HAHN: I think that what Congressman Schiff said was there might be some counterintelligence issues that we need to look at, that may not have been criminal. We don't know what kind of the influence the President is under by the Russian due to his financial dealings. That might be outlined in this report, too. It might not be criminal, it might not rise to the level of indictment, but it might be something Americans should be concerned about and should understand before they vote for 2020.
CARLSON: Okay, but Adam Schiff --
HAHN: So that's why we need to see the entire report.
CARLSON: Adam Schiff accused of deeply reckless and deeply dishonest Member of Congress. Chairman Schiff accused the President ...
HAHN: I don't believe that.
CARLSON: ... and his kids, and me - and me on camera of working for the Russian government. Now we know that is not true. If you were doing that, you would be indicted. And none of us were. How can he have ...
HAHN: Well, hold on a minute.
CARLSON: ... that role as Chairman of the House Intel Committee? How can he have access to classified information after that? I'm serious.
HAHN: You are suggesting that everything he suggested was a criminal action that required an indictment. That is not necessarily what he said. There are a lot of things that need to be understood by the American people and that is what this report might show us.
CARLSON: I believe betraying your country with a foreign power is a crime.
HAHN: There might be more, but that has to be done outside of this report.
CARLSON: Okay. Well, we'll see. Thanks very much. Chris, good to see you.
CARLSON: Michael Tracey is an independent journalist who is already on the road covering the presidential race and he joins us tonight from an undisclosed location. So Michael Tracey, you are one of the very few people who has noted this weird nexus between news outlets and retired intelligence officials. It seems like a very unhealthy arrangement to me.
MICHAEL TRACEY, INDEPENDENT JOURNALIST: Yes.
CARLSON: Do you think it is?
TRACEY: I think it's unhealthy and I think it will contribute to a fundamental inability for the media to self-reflect on what it got so horrendously wrong throughout this episode. I mean, if John Brennan is a colleague of yours at a different network, then that might dis-incentivize you to do a thorough audit of the practices which led to such a false impression being conveyed across the airwaves is about what the story actually entailed.
You know, this past week, we marked the anniversary of the Iraq invasion. And since then, all the top media promoters of that invasion have ascended to high levels of power and influence. I could name a couple, many of whom, frankly, appear on this network on occasion.
CARLSON: True, no you're right. One of them is the National Security adviser of the United States right now. So yes, I am aware of that.
TRACEY: Exactly. If I could speak to President Trump, I would ask him why are you -- why did you appoint John Bolton? One of the main promoters of the Iraq War to be the National Security adviser when you've said multiple times that the Iraq War was a disaster? But that is a digression.
The point this is that this Trump-Russia story is a media failure of comparable magnitude. Less depth, thankfully, but just as much, just total factual indiscretion.
TRACEY: And I feel like something similar is going to happen where the people who were proven decisively wrong and have -- were proven to have deceived the American people for two plus years, now approaching three years actually, they are not going to pay any price. They are not going to face any consequence.
If you or I or normal people failed at their job miserably, they would probably, I don't know, get demoted, maybe even fired. They would suffer some kind of reputational consequence. But not so for the media elite who have been leading the charge of the story, who had a lot of influence on the security state officials like Andrew McCabe who launched one of the investigations in to Trump at the FBI.
You know, listen to Andrew McCabe on his recent book tour. It almost sounds like he is a devoted reader of David Frum at "The Atlantic," whose - - Frum, you know, he worked from George W. Bush. He helped coin the access of evil phrase. He was the leading advocate for the Iraq War. He is also a leading advocate of Russiagate. There is a lot of crossover there.
CARLSON: There is.
TRACEY: And you know -- but Andrew McCabe seemed like he was just scrolling through Twitter or like reading the "New York Times" or something. He didn't have privileged information that we know of that led him to launch these unprecedented investigations into the democratically- elected President.
CARLSON: So that's actually -- I want to finish out this segment with this question to you. And got right to it, so I think it was yesterday, the former FBI Director Jim Comey wrote an op-ed in which he basically predicted what we found out tonight. No indictments, no collusion.
So the obvious suggestion is that Jim Comey had some kind of inside source to the Mueller investigation. Shouldn't that shake the faith that all of us have in our institutions?
TRACEY: Well, I mean, knowing that Comey led that institution for so long has already shaken the faiths of many people ...
CARLSON: Well, such the point.
TRACEY: ... such that this calm, I don't think it is going to make a huge difference. But you know, let me just say one more thing, Tucker. I mean, I'm happy to disclose my location. It is in New Hampshire, where the presidential candidates are campaigning. And the Democratic presidential candidates have totally be-clowned themselves on this issue because they have in large part adopted the most maximalist interpretation of what the Trump-Russia conspiracy consisted of irrespective of skeptics saying let's exercise some caution here, let's not leap to conclusions.
The one exception and the candidate that I am covering this week is Tulsi Gabbard who just last week said something to the effect of, the people who have been calling Trump Russia's puppet have actually distracted from the reality that Trump has actually contradicted much of his campaign rhetoric and taken aggressive actions toward Russia. And that is what the Democrats should have been emphasizing this entire time rather than going down this global -- this conspiracy rabbit hole.
CARLSON: You're totally right, and for her to say that is an act of real bravery right now. Michael Tracey, thanks very much for joining us tonight. Good to see you.
CARLSON: Probably nobody has covered the story more closely than Kimberly Strassel of the "Wall Street Journal" and we are happy to have her on tonight to help make sense of what we know now. Kim, what do you think we know now? I mean, from the limited data we have at this point, what are you concluding?
KIMBERLY STRASSEL, EDITORIAL BOARD, WALL STREET JOURNAL: So a couple of things that the prior guests have pointed. One, the important thing is -- it is done -- two years on. And that matters for a couple of reasons because it is not just the fact that it removes this cloud hanging over Washington, but it also enables the President to do a lot of things that he has been constrained from doing, right? Because every time he would go and contemplate a certain action, they would say, you can't do that. You are obstructing the Mueller probe. That is now removed and that will change the dynamic in D.C.
So that is one. Two, no indictments. And obviously, Mollie Hemingway went through why that is important. Three, I think another thing that has been overlooked, you know, Attorney General, Bill Barr sent a letter to Congress and he pointed out as he required to do under the Special Counsel guidelines that he had no cause at any point to overrule any of Mueller's decisions in the end.
So that puts to paid the other vast conspiracy theory going around the last couple of years that somehow Mueller was never going to be able to complete the work, that obviously there would be political interference -- somebody --
Remember everyone was saying we needed to have the legislation in Congress to protect the Special Counsel? He was never in any risk of that. And basically the Barr transmission proves it. It also suggests reading the tea leaves that perhaps the Mueller report is pretty straight up if Bill Barr didn't feel that there was anything he had to intervene on.
CARLSON: How much of these -- I am just so struck that a huge number of these conspiracy theories seem to bubble up from the social media -- Twitter especially. And then emerge from the mouths of the elected officials, supposedly responsible people. I mean, how broke and complex is this conspiracy world that a lot of left lives in right now?
STRASSEL: Well, you make a great point. We should have been done with this. We should have finished all of this and had a conclusion more than a year ago when our Congressional committees after months and months of diligent work admitted that they could have find no evidence to support any of the claims that people have made on the other side.
And if you just step back from that -- and we also should have known from the work that Robert Mueller was doing himself. Look, court case after court case dealing with the central figures here. None of which in any of the filings, any of the court documents had any reference to any of the main collusion conspiracy theories that have been out there.
And if anyone had taken a deep breath, this would have all been very obvious some time ago. But there is an entire industry and you mention some Congressmen, you mention the media that have an interest in riling this up every day as the way to delegitimize this presidency and not just this presidency, but his agenda as well, too, which is a very clever way of doing it.
You say the guy at the very top is corrupt, and therefore everything he is doing is corrupt. So there is a political advantage for them having done this all these years.
CARLSON: Of course. They have pressed that advantage. Kimberly Strassel, thank you so much for that. Good to see you tonight.
STRASSEL: Thank you.
CARLSON: One of Roger Stone's associates, Jerome Corsi he released a statement to Fox News tonight about the end of the Mueller probe. Here it is. "I feel vindicated. They offered me a plea deal which I thought was fraudulent I did knowingly and willfully give them information I knew was false. The fact is I wasn't going the lie to keep myself out of prison. I did nothing wrong and it is clear I did nothing wrong or they would have prosecuted me."
Of course, he was threatened and pressured to sign a deal that would have sent him to prison. He refused. And in the end, he was never charged at all. What does out tell you about this investigation? That fact right there.
Fox News Alert for those of you who are just joining us tonight. The Mueller report has been delivered. The investigation is over. The report now sits with the Attorney General. There are no indictment for collusion or anything else coming next.
The Democrats are already pivoting though. Congressman Adam Schiff previously said collusion was a certain thing. He knew it. The evidence was hiding in plain sight, he said. That was a lie. Now he says it doesn't matter anymore. More investigations are coming no matter what.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.(via phone): One of the great many of the unanswered questions and if they are not answered, then we are going to answer them. We are going to have to find the truth.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
CARLSON: Oh, the truth. Three investigations, two years, not enough. So what is the new plan for the Democratic Party going forward? Chief national correspondent, Ed Henry joins us tonight with that. Hey, Ed.
ED HENRY, CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Tucker, good to see you. Look, this has been a situation where you had Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, you have mentioned them before. They have had visions of collusion, obstruction, maybe even sugar plums dancing in their heads for a couple of years now. And it hasn't been there.
They missed a key point, which is follow the facts. And maybe to his credit, we need to see the details of the report. Maybe Robert Mueller actually followed the facts, and this is an important point. You and I were on together in about mid-January, and remember the night that Robert Mueller to his great credit came forward and said the BuzzFeed story was wrong, that claimed that President Trump had directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress. That was critical because A. CNN and others ran with that BuzzFeed report and said if true, this could lead to impeachment.
Robert Mueller was saying it's not true. Secondly, I think it exposed, not just as you played that clip from Adam Schiff and other Democrats who got ahead of the facts. There are an awful lot of people in our business who got way ahead of the facts.
CARLSON: You have got to kind of wonder that is right and not for the first time, we had a guest a moment ago, Michael Tracey, who pointed out that there was similar support for the idea that there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
And I want to re-litigate it here, and by the way, for the record, I believed that there were, but there weren't. And so you have to wonder no one was ever really sidelined after that. Will there be re-assessments in news organizations after tonight?
HENRY: I think you know the answer to that, which it is highly unlikely even though there should be a lot of questions about all of this. But I think look, the President and his allies have been out there attacking Robert Mueller. And maybe now, they are going to do some soul searching to say okay, that worked for them politically, but Robert Mueller's report now essentially clears the President.
Again, if, if, if they are going to all of a sudden say, "Hey, we actually like Bob Mueller. We like this report. He followed the facts." I think all sides here have been jumping ahead of this, Tucker, when in fact maybe everybody should have taken a breath and you have been urging this for a long time that there was this hysteria about everything associated with Russia and were there contacts between Trump officials and Russia? Yes.
We have seen that whether it was Papadopoulos and others. But he ended up spending what? A week and a few days in jail? Nothing to be trifled with. But his life was essentially destroyed. Carter Page who had James Comey and all of these other people. When you talk about the weapons of mass destruction, what I think about is, how many people in the government did we trust, that they know, that there were weapons of mass destruction?
Well, how many people in this FBI and Justice Department did we all think we could trust that if they are going to get a FISA warrant and they are going to surveil an American citizen, boy, they are going to have the facts, Tucker.
CARLSON: So let me ask you this since you cover this, have you heard anything about pardons? Specifically of Roger Stone who looks like he could literally spend the rest of his life in prison for a process crime that wouldn't have arisen without this investigation which turned out to be pointless in the first place. Have you heard anybody in the White House talk about the President pardoning Roger Stone?
HENRY: No. I have heard people outside the White House tell me very clearly that the President has been advised to let this investigation plays out before he discusses pardons or does anything. I think based on the conversations I have had, I don't want to get ahead of it, it is entirely possible that you could see Manafort, Stone and others pardoned. I'm not saying they will be.
CARLSON: Right, I understand.
HENRY: And it has been discussed by some of the President's allies outside the White House. But what has been made clear to me in my reporting is that, and I think this was wise counsel to the President of the United States, if you start talking about the pardons and/or actually pardon people before Mueller is finished, it is obviously going to make it look like you are impeding that investigation.
CARLSON: Of course, no, no and that's --
HENRY: And he didn't get ahead of it. By the way, I want to make another important point. How many times did we hear Schiff and others say, we must pass this piece of legislation, the Protect Bob Mueller Act because President Trump is going to fire him. It will be the second version of the Saturday Night Massacre. None of that happened. Yes, did the President tweet, did he say it was a witch hunt? Did he get in there and fight back? Yes, he did. But he is entitled to do that. The First Amendment protects us and our business, and it protects the President.
CARLSON: That's a fair point.
HENRY: To be able to speak out. But the bottom line is, Robert Mueller, he didn't need a piece of legislation to, quote/unquote, "protect him." He was never fired. Rosenstein was never fired and now we have the report.
CARLSON: It's kind of an amazing day. Ed Henry, thank you very.
HENRY: Good to see you.
CARLSON: Good to see you. We are joined now by a former DOJ official, Francey Hakes. Francey, thanks very much for coming on. We just read a statement from Jerome Corsi who is a conservative writer around Washington, a book author who got for various and boring reasons sucked into this investigation. He was threatened with the indictment by the Mueller investigation and he refused to admit whatever crimes they claimed that he was committing and they never indicted him. So that seems fraudulent to me.
That didn't seem like a straightforward honest, honorable way to conduct an investigation. If you believe a man is guilty, indict him. And if he is not, don't threaten him. I don't understand what is going on there.
FRANCEY HAKES, FORMER DOJ OFFICIAL: I don't either, Tucker. I can promise you that when I was a prosecutor, if I had the evidence to indict someone, I was going to indict them. If I told them I was going to indict them, I would have indicted them.
CARLSON: Yes, exactly.
HAKES: It makes no sense to me and you're absolutely right that it does make it look fraudulent. Listen, this whole investigation has been like a sword of Damocles over the presidency and really, even over our nation.
There is a significant number of people in this country who believe the President is Russian asset. The irresponsible behavior by politicians, by former intelligence personnel in the investigation shocks the conscience, or it should.
CARLSON: Well, 67% of registered Democrats believe the Russian government changed vote totals in the 2016 election. This country has gone insane. The damage -- I'm not sure we can even calculate it right now, but to the extent we can, how do you estimate the damage to our social fabric to confidence in our institutions, to the institutions themselves from this investigation?
HAKES: You know, Tucker, it's actually really sad. I think the worst damage is to our law enforcement institutions, to the Department of Justice and the FBI. I love the Department of Justice. I'm proud of the time that I spent there, and I know there are many men and women there who are dedicated and who do the right thing, but this really begs the question, what is justice? And are there two separate systems of justice in this country? One for the elite and one for everybody else.
And it looks like there is two systems of justice and it is very distressing to me as someone who fought hard, alone most of the time, with very little resources for women and children and others who had been victimized to see that the justice system has been so misused. It's disheartening.
CARLSON: It's so third world, and what a powerful and a sad statement coming from you, a former DOJ official. Francey Hakes, thank you for your perspective. Sad as it was. Good to see you.
HAKES: Thanks, Tucker.
CARLSON: Well, as we have been telling you, the Mueller report is finally here. We are tracking every development in Washington and seeking out every piece of information that we can find. One of the first people we turn to always for information is Fox chief intelligence correspondent, Catherine Herridge and she joins us tonight -- Catherine.
CATHERINE HERRIDGE, CHIEF INTELLIGENCE CORRESPONDENT: Thank you, Tucker. As you've noted earlier in the show, the report was delivered to the Attorney General here at the Justice Department, and more specifically, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has indicated that he is recommending against further indictments in this case and that is effectively the end of the Russia prosecution.
What also has been happening here at the Justice Department has been parallel series of investigations run by the Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz and they have been looking at allegations that the surveillance warrant program with the courts was potentially abused during the 2016 election, also the leaking of classified information by the senior individuals including James Comey at the FBI and also allegations that senior FBI officials took gifts from reporters in violation of the ethics rules.
Finally, what I will say is that when we have the benefit of hindsight and additional information, many of it - much of it coming from court transcripts now and lawsuits is that in the fall of 2016, there was this fever pitch about Russia collusion in the media and it was really billed as an intelligence product.
But what I know now from my reporting is that it was not intelligence. It was a fact seated information that was opposition research that was given to more than a dozen reporters here in Washington, Tucker.
CARLSON: Ah, you really have been from the very first day, I think, the single most reliable source of information on this investigation.
HERRIDGE: I appreciate that.
CARLSON: And the picture that you are painting is really troubling. It really is. Catherine Herridge, thank you very much.
HERRIDGE: You're welcome.
CARLSON: For more on what this is means, we are joined tonight by Florida Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz. Congressman, thanks very much for coming on tonight. What jumps out at you from all of this?
REP. MATT GAETZ, R-FLA: Happy no collusion day, Tucker.
CARLSON: Happy no collusion day. That's a good point.
GAETZ: Six hundred and seventy five days. Yes, I mean, it's 675 days, deep tens of millions of dollars spent in a team of people who in large part were biased against the President and they could not produce evidence to even bring charges for indictment against people for the underlying allegation -- conspiracy with the Russian Federation.
But you have asked the operative question. What do we do now? My expectation is that we have to have a thorough review of how we got here? How we allowed political opposition research to fuel an investigation that was never found in any fact or reality. And then I think we need to seek apology from the Democrats in Congress who said there was stone cold evidence of collusion, that they had demonstrable proof that these things were happening, and if you look at all the work the President has tried to do around the world to end wars, resolve conflicts and reduce nuclear proliferation, a lot of that work has been hindered by the lies being told in this country that can be traced right back to the DNC and the Clinton campaign.
CARLSON: No, it's such a smart point. I can't believe that we are kind of alliding over just blowing past the fact that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign. If the Trump administration were using the Department of Justice to spy on the Kamala Harris for President Campaign that seems to me it would be a very serious breach and a very big news story. Why are we not finding out everything we can about what the Obama DOJ did to the Trump campaign?
GAETZ: It all goes back to the fact that we allow secret courts to operate in the absence of transparency and that invites an opportunity for corruption.
CARLSON: That's right.
GAETZ: And it allows people to politicize the highest level of our intelligence and community and our investigative community, so here we need to have more transparency within those court systems. We need Senate confirmation of FISA judges and then ultimately, we need to make the opinions published.
You know who filed that bill, Tucker? Adam Schiff. But now he won't cosponsor his own legislation to reform the FISA process because he doesn't want the same rules that applied to President Obama to apply to President Trump. It's a double standard. It's hypocrisy. And it doesn't allow us to move past this moment.
The country never wants to have to go through 22 months like this again where we are torn apart based on a lie, political dirt and then we have the blessing of our intelligence community and FISA courts over something that never should have begun.
CARLSON: Yes, well, I didn't think I could learn anything new about the story, but you just taught me something I didn't know and it's shocking. And why do we have secret courts in the first place? What country is this anyway? Those are great points, Congressman, and I'm grateful that you came on to tell us about that. Thank you.
GAETZ: Thank you, Tucker.
CARLSON: Well, our coverage of the Mueller report now in the hands of the Attorney General of the United States continues tonight. Laura Ingraham will join us after the break and many others as we try to sort through the wreckage of two years of a hoax. We'll be right back.
CARLSON: Well, the Mueller report is out. The one thing we know is that it did not find collusion, the collusion it was created to find and we know that because no one was indicted for it. But that doesn't mean it was harmless. Plenty of people had their careers and names destroyed by Federal investigators desperate to do the bidding of who knows who? But it happened. Trace Gallagher joins us to discuss the victims of the Mueller probe -- Trace.
TRACE GALLAGHER, CORRESPONDENT: And Tucker, it really is for context imperative to know exactly who got caught up in the special counsel net. There were 34 people and three companies that were either indicted or pled guilty including 26 Russian nationals, three Russian companies and six former Trump advisers.
Five of the six former advisers pleaded guilty. But as you say, not a single allegation related to collusion with Russia to impact the 2016 election. Former Trump campaign Foreign Policy adviser, George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty in October of 2017 of making false statements to the FBI. He was sentenced to 14 days in jail. Paul Manafort, Trump's former Campaign Chair was indicted on 25 counts of faking documents to obtain loans and financial crimes in connection to his work for Ukrainian politicians. Manafort will serve about six and a half years in prison. Former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates was named alongside Manafort accused of finance crimes.
Former National Security adviser, Michael Flynn pleaded guilty in December of 2017 to making false statements to the FBI. Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former lawyer pleaded guilty to tax and bank fraud and campaign finance violations related to the hush money payments to women who alleged affairs with Donald Trump, and finally Roger Stone, a long-time Trump adviser was indicted for obstruction making false statements and witness tampering.
Former Trump aide, Michael Caputo condemned the Russia probe for forcing his family out of their home and crushing his children with the immense legal costs associated with defending himself and themselves -- Tucker.
CARLSON: Trace Gallagher, thanks a lot for that.
CARLSON: Laura Ingraham of course hosts the "Ingraham Angle" right here. She is our friend and we are grateful to have her in our studio tonight. So, Laura, thanks a lot for coming.
LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: Absolutely.
CARLSON: As you're preparing for your show tonight, there's a big media angle to this. The press really drove a lot of this behavior and drove this investigation. At Fox, we are allowed to say, by our network, whatever we think is true and they support us completely in that and I'm grateful for it.
You watch the other coverage, and really, it is just they are reading every hour -- they are reading from the same -- Maddow clearly says what she wants to say, everybody else seems to be reading from some script that Jeff Zucker wrote. How implicated are these channels in the travesty that we just saw.
INGRAHAM: I think the collusion between the media apparatus, the dominant media apparatus other than Fox and the DNC, the deep state is profound, and the international elites who wanted this all to be true.
I mean, we have to remember, there is an international angle here, which you know, we are looking at the Ukraine angle and all. There is an international angle here because Donald Trump came along and he was the great disruptor on the scene.
INGRAHAM: He is like, "I don't buy into what you are doing at the E.U.," God bless you. "I don't buy into all your wine sellers and your confabs and your think tanks." This whole industry employs thousands and thousands of people, and Donald Trump said, "This is not working well for the United States." He was an existential threat to them.
They cheered this whole thing on. They shell out the money for all of these conferences for people like John Meacham, who is -- I mean, I like John Meacham, he is a really talented writer, but when someone like John Meacham got caught up in this at MSNBC, I was looking this. He said, this is the very definition basically of treason, what Donald Trump did. He is a historian. This guy is like a Pulitzer Prize winning writer.
When someone like that can get caught and ensnared in this frothy frenzy to get Trump, we have a big problem on our hands. And I am so glad. I watched every minute of your show tonight, Tucker, as I do every night, but what you said about the need for consequences and repercussions, it's just like things like Jussie Smollett or the UVAS rape case or what happened with the Kavanaugh leaks. There needs to be repercussions either the public needs to decide maybe we should watch something else or there needs to be a criminal investigation by Bill Barr into how this all went down. The FISA warrants, the leaks that happen -- all of this stuff has to be looked at. This cannot happen to another President of the United States.
CARLSON: Well, I agree. Democrat or a Republican.
INGRAHAM: Yes, I don't care who you are. The criminalization of politics brought down individuals who were caught up in the gears and the machinery of the prosecution complex in this country.
CARLSON: Yes, but that is literally true. So look, people call for my firing every day. I am not calling for anyone else's.
INGRAHAM: Oh, ditto. Ditto.
CARLSON: And yours, too. I know.
INGRAHAM: No, no. I don't want anybody fired. I am just saying, think more slowly about these issues before you pronounce --
CARLSON: I agree, but I just wonder -- and I am so grateful to work here, I am going to say that again. But I wonder how can Jeff Zucker continue to run that channel after what we just saw? So they brought in newly released people from the government who had run our agencies, who clearly were getting information about this investigation, and putting it on the air as propaganda. It turned out to be lies. How can you do that?
INGRAHAM: And all of that, you know, I think it's the Buddhist who said the fingers always pointed back at you. So everything they say at Trump, it was like state run TV, you're colluding. And the colluding and the state run TV, it's like, they are working for the deep state or the elite state or whatever you want to call it. So they are colluding and Trump is like, wait a second, I'm just a guy from New York. I came in and I actually want to make this country better. I'm like my own man and I know I'm going to tick you off, but I actually want America to thrive and be prosperous.
And really, well thought of people who are smart people are throwing the word "treason," "traitor." The guy should be in handcuffs. He should be let out of the Oval Office -- all these people tonight should look at themselves in the mirror and think, "Maybe I need to re-examine how I speak on these issues in the future." Not that we don't all make mistakes. We do. I do, you do. We all --
CARLSON: Yes, I made big mistakes.
INGRAHAM: As do I. But these were pronouncements that would destroy families, destroy presidencies and as you pointed out early -- and I'm so glad you did -- the lost opportunities that we might have actually worked with countries that could box out China on things. I mean, do we really not want to work with Russia on anything ever again? Because last time I checked, China has the biggest threat to the United States. Russia's economy is the size of France's.
CARLSON: Yes, Texas.
INGRAHAM: I mean, it's like come on.
CARLSON: They can't build a working escalator.
INGRAHAM: So now Russia and China are doing military exercises and we are on sideline going okay, we have to act really mean on everything with Russia because of this Mueller investigation. It had a profound policy effect I think on our government.
INGRAHAM: And that, we will never know really the effect on the American people, our geopolitical position. That must be examined.
CARLSON: And also on the social fabric. And I notice that here, like you, I am not from Washington but I spent most of my life here. I know you have, too. I have known you for most of that time. This city has become paranoid, distrustful, angry. I talk to people all the time. I can't text that to you. I don't trust text. What do you mean you don't trust your text? What country is this? I can't have this conversation, I'm too nervous?
People are afraid. Do you want to live in a place where people are afraid?
INGRAHAM: It is where the prosecution state becomes so big and so powerful, a mere accusation can turn your life upside down.
INGRAHAM: Now, Donald Trump has a lot of money. He can defend himself.
CARLSON: That's right.
INGRAHAM: He happened to be innocent of these charges. He knew it all along and everyone who said, oh he is -- why is he meeting behind closed doors with the Russians? Why did he Putin dash -- whatever the criticism. Maybe it's because he realized he had an obligation to the American people to look past Mueller as hard as it was and actually try to do the right thing in the moment for the country. They never gave him that benefit of the doubt and he deserved that benefit of the doubt, and he never got it from them.
CARLSON: What happens next?
INGRAHAM: I think the left is going to go into a deeper rage. I think they will learn nothing from this sadly. Maybe, some of the smarter folks like Meacham and others will. But I think now, it is going to turn to, "Oh, it's not transparent." "Barr was brought in to be the clean-up man here." "This isn't a serious review."
So I think again, like we are seeing on the socialism lurch, they are lurching towards socialism, slouching towards socialism. I think, in this case they are going to be in a very precarious position with the internal anger from the activist who thought, you know, we finally got the Road Runner. We finally caught Wile E. Coyote. It's like the Acme TNT. We finally go it and it's like, beep, beep. He is gone again.
So I think they are going to freak. I mean, I think they are going to freak and I don't think much is going to change, but it is going to mean they are going to move more radical on the policy front and try to whip up more enthusiasm that way. I don't see what else they do. I mean, to put all their hope in the Southern District? Are we going back to that now? Southern District of New York?
CARLSON: Which is grotesquely politicized.
CARLSON: So you are on in one hour and six minutes.
INGRAHAM: Yes, why don't you hang around, Tucker?
CARLSON: Who is on?
INGRAHAM: We have Joe DiGenova. We have Ken Starr. We have Robert Ray, both independent counsels of course, and we have Byron York. He is going to look in the media angle. We are going to have a great show. So we're looking forward to it. And Devin Nunes is going to join us.
CARLSON: Sitting in my living room with a Paria watching as I do every night. Laura, it's great to see you.
INGRAHAM: Tucker, it's always great to be on here.
CARLSON: Thank you very much.
CARLSON: Fox News Alert for you. For two years, Washington has been completely halted by the Mueller investigation. Now it's finally ending and both the Republicans and the Democrats are scrambling to respond to what we know so far.
Fox correspondent, Peter Doocy is tracking their reactions on the Hill tonight and he joins us now. Hey, Peter.
PETER DOOCY, CORRESPONDENT: Tucker, Democratic lawmakers are already saying that the DOJ needs to do more than just tell them what Mueller concluded. They want to eyeball the evidence themselves. And if that is not allowed, some Democratic lawmakers are now preparing to subpoena the Special Counsel Mueller.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
SCHIFF (via phone): I would first argue that the Department cannot adopt a double standard and should cooperate willingly. But if it doesn't, we will have to subpoena the evidence, we will have to subpoena Mueller or others to come before the Congress and answer questions.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
DOOCY: A different concern coming now from the top Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, he wants to make sure that the Trump-appointed Attorney General does not send Trump attorneys a copy of the report's finding before the Democrats can inspect it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCHUMER: Attorney General Barr must not give President Trump, his lawyers or his staff any sneak preview of Special Counsel Mueller's findings or evidence and the White House must not be allowed to interfere in decisions about what parts of those findings or evidence should be made public.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
DOOCY: Democrat, Mark Warner who helps lead a Senate investigation in to possible Russian collusion has this statement tonight. "The Special Counsel's report must be provided to Congress immediately and the Attorney General should swiftly prepare a declassified version of the report for the public. Nothing short of that will suffice."
Warner works on that investigation with Richard Burr, Intel Committee Chairman who says this. "I trust Special Counsel Mueller has conducted a fair and thorough investigation and I look forward to reviewing his report." So far, nobody in either party on Capitol Hill has seen this report. But some Republicans are already saying, "Told you so," like Steve Scalise, the Minority Whip in the House who says, "The reports that there will be no new indictments confirm what we have known all along that there was never any collusion with Russia." Then there's Republican Senator Lindsey Graham who says, "I have always believed it was important that Mr. Mueller be allowed to do his job without interference and that has been accomplished."
Lawmakers that I have spoken to on phone tonight do expect to get some kind of information about the findings this weekend, but one issue in terms of actually putting their hands on it, just about everybody is out of town -- Tucker.
CARLSON: Peter Doocy. Great to see you. Thanks very much. I want to wrap up this hour with calmness, perspective, decency and kindness and the person we go to for those qualities, of course, is Dana Perino. She hosts "The Daily Briefing" every day and co-hosts "The Five."
DANA PERINO, HOST: I have some good news actually.
CARLSON: What is it?
PERINO: I'll save it to the end. You ask me your question first.
CARLSON: My question is totally open-ended. You have watched all of this for over two years.
CARLSON: And tonight is not -- it's not the final moment, but it is the beginning of the final moment and what's your assessment?
PERINO: I think that if it's not the final moment, just reading even at low off air blog, right, they are saying like, you know, I don't know if it's over. Obviously, we want to see the report.
PERINO: People are not going to be satisfied until they see these underlying documents. As Laura and you were just talking about it, like does there need to be some repercussions for bad behavior at the DOJ et cetera? However, I would say this.
This investigation was actually shorter than the ones in the years past; although, it felt really long.
PERINO: But it was thorough. Mueller was never fired. He was allowed to do his work and the new Attorney General did not interfere, did not block anything. He is wrapping it up so the institutions hold, right, so there is not a constitutional crisis.
CARLSON: That's right.
PERINO: That everybody has to worry about. I am also -- I am very interested in finding out from the report about Russia's involvement in trying to interfere in our elections because what we know from our Intelligence community is that they are not stopping.
And as Kirstjen Nielsen said on our air earlier this week, cyber security is a huge problem for us. I will be interested to see what 2020 Democrat would be willing to pivot away from this and say, "Okay, we have always said that Bob Mueller should be allowed to do his work." He was allowed to do his work. Let's let the work stand. Let's now turn to how we could better govern the country. Like, which Democrat is going to do that?
Is there any of them that would do that? And if they can't do that? They are going to miss out on all of these people saying, "Wait, you just said that Mueller was supposed to finish his investigation." Now, he has. So let's wait, let's see what Bill Barr does.
I do think it could take some time, Tucker, they have to redact anything that is executive privilege, anything that is grand jury, anything that is classified or intelligence. It's not going to happen by Monday. Okay? We'll get the conclusions, but it's not going to happen by Monday.
Now, are you ready for my silver lining?
CARLSON: I am ready for the good news.
PERINO: And the good news. If it turns out that this is it, right, that Mueller did the report, that there is no collusion, that there is no more indictments, isn't that good news for America? There was no collusion.
PERINO: There were attempts by Russia to get people on the Trump campaign to help them and it didn't work or at least there is no evidence that Mueller and use to bring a case. That says that it worked, and I mean, I feel like America should be relieved.
CARLSON: I agree.
PERINO: That that is it.
CARLSON: I agree.
PERINO: So let's all then turn to the most important issues that we have to deal with that we would much rather talk about.
CARLSON: Things are better than we thought they were or that Adam Schiff claimed they were. I agree. I opened the show on that exact note and I was laughed at by a Democrat, but I agree with you a hundred percent.
PERINO: No, no laughing here.
CARLSON: No laughing here. The great Dana Perino. Thank you, Dana, very much.
PERINO: Okay, thank you.
CARLSON: Well, it's been quite an hour. We are out of time, but Fox's coverage of the Mueller report will be continuing throughout the night and in to the weekend and on until every detail is known. We will be back 8:00 p.m. on Monday, the show that is sworn enemy of the lying, pomposity, smugness and groupthink. Have a happy weekend with the ones you love in spite of everything. Good night from Washington. Sean Hannity is next.
Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.