This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," December 27, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARK STEYN, HOST: Good evening and welcome to “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” I'm Mark Steyn in for Tucker. He's sleeping off his Boxing Day Bacchanalia but he will join us later to discuss the ongoing collapse of men in America.

But first, yet another Liberal media meltdown. The mainstream media taking the opportunity to turn a presidential visit to American troops into an attack on Trump. Take a look at the hysteria as the talking heads accused the President of turning the post-Christmas visit into a political event.


SAMANTHA VINOGRAD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: From a national security perspective, for all the reasons that you just listed, the President should have stayed home.

JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS, RETIRED MAJOR GENERAL: The reason that he went now is that he couldn't go to Mar-a-Lago because the government was shut down.

DON LEMON, CNN TONIGHT HOST: It was like we kept saying "He's like the Grinch." Instead of - I'm being honest.

CHARLES JOSEPH SCARBOROUGH, MORNING JOE CO-HOST, MSNBC: We should also be concerned that Mr. Trump once again used a captive audience of American heroes to push his unpopular domestic agenda.

Even in doing something right, he figures out a way to sow chaos.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It took far too long, especially compared to President Obama who visited troops in Iraq in his first three months in office.


STEYN: Over at CNN, attacking the President wasn't enough. They decided to attack the troops as well.


BARBARA STARR, PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT, CNN: The pool reporters traveling said that the troops brought the hats with them, including one hat that said "Trump 2020." We will have to see if that actually proves to be the case.

The question is, if they - if they brought them or if the President brought them, what commander allowed that to really happen, because this is very much against military policy and regulation. Troops are not supposed to be involved in political activities. The U.S. Military is not a political force.

JOHN KIRBY, FORMER SPOKESPERSON FOR THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE: It's completely inappropriate for the troops to do this.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not supposed to--


STEYN: Of course, nobody cared back when presidential candidate Barack Obama signed memorabilia for the troops back in 2008. He had a D after his name though instead of an R. Thankfully, not everybody's lost their minds. Even some Liberals scolded the media for their hysteria.


DAVID AXELROD, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER TO OBAMA ADMINISTRATION: It's - it's good that he went to see the troops, important that he went to do it. He - he was criticized for it, obviously. They wanted to address that. And so, I should - we should give him credit where credit is due.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It just sends a - such a strong message that the - the Trumps love our military, support our military, and what a great time to do it.


STEYN: Well Joe Concha writes about Media for The Hill. He joins us now. Joe, is this a good look for the media? Why are serving soldiers in a war zone bringing particular hats to an event on base in a combat zone at Christmas?

JOE CONCHA, THE HILL MEDIA REPORTER: Well the optics around that, Mark, are horrific, right, because what you're doing here is it's - it's OK to go after the President in terms of policy or the things that he says.

Once you start attacking the people that voted for him or military people that are obviously serving overseas during Christmas, no less, then--


CONCHA: --then you got a problem. And you have to ask yourself this question, Mark.

Let's say, honestly, like you pointed out, as I did in my column today on The Hill, if President Obama, as he did in 2008, signed a Hope and Change t-shirts, do you really think any news organization would have gone ahead with that story? Of course, they wouldn't have.

STEYN: No. I - I couldn't care less. Well what soldiers in these, frankly, God-awful situations, because life in it - at a base in Iraq stinks. You - it's not like being in Ramstein, Germany where the President was today. You can't stroll down to town go to a local bar, meet one of the nice German girls, or one of the local guy (ph), you know, that's nothing like that.

You're stuck in that lousy fortress that you hope is a fortress. And the President comes to visit you. And the pre-occupation of the American media is whether hats the troops chose to take to that event are somehow some potential crime that they can be pulled up in front of a military court for. I mean that's bonkers--

CONCHA: Yes, Mark, and--

STEYN: --isn't it?

CONCHA: --it's bonkers, yes. And I think that pivot happened because the original narrative was, we - we'd all recall is that, President Trump was supposed to be the first President since 2002 to not visit the troops at Christmas.

And once that fell apart, when he literally landed in Iraq as the story was going up and it originally came from NBC, then social media goes nuts. And - and what happened was the pivot went from, "Oh yes, OK. Trump went, sure, but what was his motive exactly for going?"

STEYN: Yes, yes.

CONCHA: I - I give you The Washington Post, Mark, quoting, the President's visit follows months of public pressure for him to spend time with troops deployed to conflicts in the Middle East. Think about that again, follows months of public pressure.


CONCHA: In other words, we, the media, got the public riled up to force Trump to go to a war zone instead of him just going like every president has done for the past 17 years.

STEYN: Well - well according to Soledad O'Brien, who's a lovely lady, but she thought it was actually minutes of public pressure that Alyssa Milano who - who actually tweeted as the President was halfway across the ocean, why haven't you visited our troops, Soledad O - O'Brien actually gave Alyssa Milano credit for shaming the President into getting on the plane that he'd already gotten on.

CONCHA: Yes. And then what's forgotten in all this, of course, is if you want to go to Walter Reed, let's say the President was shamed, and he goes to Walter Reed, which is close to the White House, OK, then you could say it's a last-minute thing. When you go to Iraq, you kind of have to plan it in advance. You have to do it weeks in advance, obviously, for security.

Air Force One has to fly in with shades down and cellphones off and - and all of that. So, you think you'd see though however, at least from NBC and - and - and others, some remorse, some apology, some around, you know, "Hey, we went ahead with this story a little bit too early because we ran a story on Christmas saying that the President hadn't been to see the troops on Christmastime."

People don't mind that sort of transparency from the media. But yet, we never see those sort of concessions. Instead, we see the pivots that are negative like we always do in these situations. And that's why trust in media is this.

Axios, SurveyMonkey poll just last year, 93 percent of Republicans think that the media knowingly creates stories, makes them up, they're false. And you say all right (ph), that's Republicans. They've always hated the media.


CONCHA: They don't trust them. 79 percent of - of independents, Mark--

STEYN: Right.

CONCHA: 53 percent of Democrats, even a majority, that's the thing. I mean this is something that's going across the board--

STEYN: Sure (ph).

CONCHA: --in terms of all parties seeing exactly what's happening here, sir.

STEYN: Hey Joe, thanks. Don't worry about that though. As soon as the media call for a Special Counsel to investigate how those MAGA hats got to Iraq, everything will be fine.

CONCHA: There you go (ph).

STEYN: Rochelle Ritchie is a former Press Secretary for the House Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, and Rachel Campos-Duffy is a Fox contributor, and they both join us.

Rochelle, how - stepping back and looking at this a little more objectively than CNN & Co. have done, is it really a good law - the troops liked the guy. The guy got on with the troops. Is there really any political mileage to be had in going on about this?

ROCHELLE RITCHIE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: So, I had a little bit of a battle with myself about this. At first, I was saying, you know, no, these men and women in uniform, they shouldn't have, you know, gotten their hats signed. They shouldn't have been out there with Make America Great Again hats.

And, you know, when you look at the facts, yes, it is a - it is breaking a rule when it comes to the Department of Defense guidelines. But at the same time, these troops have not seen an American President since 2009. I believe Obama was the last one to - to go visit.

So, maybe they're not necessarily, you know, showing support for the President or getting his signature because they are Republican--

STEYN: Yes, no, come on, who--

RITCHIE: --maybe - no, listen, listen--

STEYN: --no--

RITCHIE: --no, see, how can you disagree? I haven't even finished.

The Commander - it's their Commander-in-Chief. So, maybe it's not because he's a Republican President. Maybe they're looking at it like he's the Commander-in-Chief. We're proud to fight for our country or fight - we're proud to stand behind our President--

STEYN: Let--

RITCHIE: --whether he has an R or a D behind his name. And, look, I could really care less if the guys do it. As long as they're continuing to protect our national security, have at it.

STEYN: Well Rochelle gave that theory rather more credit than I would think, Rachel. I mean who the--

RITCHIE: I'm very balanced.

STEYN: --who the hell - if you have the misfortune to be spending Christmas on one of those - those forts, cut off from life in the middle of the Iraqi desert--


STEYN: --who the hell cares what hat you take to a Christmas party basically.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Of course, they shouldn't care. But I think the more important question is why do - I mean - let's be honest. The reaction from the troops was very overwhelmingly positive. And it should be.

Listen, Barack Obama decimated our military. Barack Obama--


CAMPOS-DUFFY: --wait a minute. He did. He cut funding for our military. He put in rules of engagement that actually--

RITCHIE: But that's not even--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --caused - wait a minute that actually caused--

RITCHIE: But what does that have to do with--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --but let - let--

RITCHIE: --what we're talking about though with this Trump (ph)--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --let - it does. It does have to do.

RITCHIE: --how?

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Because the - Barack Obama did all in - enacted rules of engagement--

RITCHIE: I don't. It has nothing to do--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --Rochelle, let me finish. Rochelle--

RITCHIE: --OK. Go ahead, Rachel.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --let me finish. He enacted rules of engagement that actually put our military on the battlefield in danger--

STEYN: Well--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --causing more battles (ph) but wait - wait a minute, Mark. He did that.

RITCHIE: I'm sorry.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: And he went to the troops and they said he was a great Commander-in-Chief. Donald Trump goes--

STEYN: Let me--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --over and does all this to not for Alyssa Milano or the media - or the media. But he does it because he loves the troops. And they say that he's doing it for a photo op.


CAMPOS-DUFFY: This is a man who loves the military.

STEYN: No, how (ph)--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: It was his number one issue.


STEYN: OK. How about this as a non-Democrat, non-Republican thing? Democrats weren't in favor of the 21st Century Bush Wars, as they called them.



STEYN: But nor was Donald - nor was Donald Trump in 2016.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: That's right.

STEYN: In - in a sense, Donald Trump is at odds with both Democrat policy and Republican policy on the Middle East, Rochelle.

RITCHIE: Yes. He's definitely fighting both sides. And I think what - when you talked about the press, I think the reason why the press is sort of attacking on him, the - the Left-leaning press, I would say, is because of some of the - the misleading comments that he made when he talked about the pay raises for the military. We know that's not--

STEYN: Well they do - they did get the pay rises (ph).

RITCHIE: --necessarily true. They do get raises. But they're not getting a 10 percent raise. It's going to be, I think, 2.6 percent. So, I think there are ways that the media was looking at it and attacking him for his less- than-knowledgeable education, I guess you could say, on what's really happening--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: But (ph)--

RITCHIE: --there. But I don't I - I think that him visiting was a good idea. I think there was an article by The Washington Post where it said that he was actually scared to go over there for some time. So, I'm glad--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Ridiculous.

RITCHIE: --he got over that.

STEYN: That's a--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: He was not scared. And - and what would the media, you know, betting MAGAs hats (ph) what would they have had him do? Say, "Oh, I'm sorry. I'm not going to sign your hat because of the Hatch Act," and then they--

STEYN: Yes, yes.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --would have criticized him and said--


CAMPOS-DUFFY: --"Hey, what a jerk. He wouldn't sign a hat."

STEYN: By the way there's too much--

RITCHIE: I just - I just said I thought that was perfectly fine.

STEYN: --there's too much of that. The minute you--


STEYN: --if you're seriously talking about soldiers doing something wrong because they asked their Commander-in-Chief to sign a hat, then - then you've flown the coop. That's not a land of law and things (ph)--

RITCHIE: I want to know (ph)--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: It's - it's a bad look for the press. It's - the reason why the American people hate the press and, by the way, the troops loved the President because--

RITCHIE: Wait, wait, what is this? This is (ph) press--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --the troops love the President because he did sign a bill that he took a lot of flack from the - from the Right for signing a big bill that was--

RITCHIE: I think - I think--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --for funding the military.

RITCHIE: --I think that Trump's whole purpose--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: They love him.

RITCHIE: --of being there and - and this is - is - this is part of it, I think that he also has a lot, I think, there was a - a part in this segment right before you came to us about--


RITCHIE: --this being public pressure. I think it's more political pressure because of him, you know, General Kelly, then General Mattis, and so I think that he's really trying to show that he has some sort of control of what's happening right now in the middle in - in--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Right. Why didn't - why didn't the--

STEYN: No, no, no, no--

RITCHIE: --Iraq. But then - but--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: --why doesn't that criticism come to Barack Obama? He goes to visit the troop, no one questions his motives.

RITCHIE: Well Obama is living his best life somewhere (ph).

STEYN: No, but it's a - that - you can't do--

RITCHIE: Can we leave him out of it?

STEYN: --those--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: But - but there is a double standard. And that is what people are talking about, Rochelle.

STEYN: We got to - we got to go, ladies.


STEYN: Iraq's a crazy place. You can't just plan those things with no notice.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Absolutely, I agree (ph).

RITCHIE: No, you can't.

STEYN: Rochelle and Rachel will carry--

CAMPOS-DUFFY: It was Alyssa Milano.

STEYN: --this - this ones (ph) and they're going to take this to the green room - where now - this is worse than the Sunni Triangle, the violence that's like (ph) percolating it.

We're now on day six of the government shutdown triggered by Congress' refusal to fund a wall on the U.S.-Mexican border.

Today, the President tweeted, "Have the Democrats finally realized that we desperately need border security and a wall on the Southern border? We need to stop drugs, human trafficking, gang members, and criminals from coming into our country. And do the Dems realize that most of the people not getting paid are Democrats?"

Fox Washington Correspondent, Rich Edson, joins us with more on the situation in D.C. It's all yours.


Congress officially and briefly gaveled in this afternoon though there is no sign of this shutdown ending anytime soon as Democrats in (ph) the White House are a few billion dollars apart on funding for a wall on the Southern border. President Trump has returned to the White House after visiting U.S. forces yesterday in Iraq.

He's just tweeted, "This isn't about the wall. Everybody knows that a wall will work perfectly. In Israel, the wall works 99.9 percent. This is only about the Dems not letting Donald Trump and the Republicans have a win. They may have the 10 Senate votes. But we have the issue, border security. 2020."

In a statement, White House Press Secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders says, "The President and his team in Washington over Christmas hoping to negotiate a deal that would stop the dangerous crisis on the border, protect American communities, and re-open the government, the Democrats decided to go home."

She also says the Administration offered Democrats what she calls a reasonable common-sense solution five days ago, though a spokesperson for House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi, says, "Democrats have offered Republicans three options to re-open the government that all include funding for strong, sensible, and effective border security, but not the President's immoral, ineffective and expensive wall."

While in Iraq, President Trump stressed the funding bill must include money for a border wall.


PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP: The folks are saying, "Can we have some drones? Can we have technology?" Technology is bells and whistles. You have to have a wall. You have to have protection.

When you say, "How long is it going to take?" "When are they going to say that we need border security?"


EDSON: Pelosi's office says Democrats will pass their bill to open the government after they take control of the House next week. Though to end this shutdown, the House, the Senate, and the White House must all agree on the same funding bill.

On Capitol Hill, House Freedom Caucus Chairman, Mark Meadows, says the needle has moved towards a very long shutdown, as Democrats and Republicans appear to talk past one another.


STEYN: Thanks a lot, Rich.

This is a Fox News Alert. Police in California are on the hunt for an unnamed illegal immigrant, suspected of murdering a police officer. Corporal Ronil Singh, an immigrant from Fiji, was gunned down Wednesday morning during a traffic stop. Police have released surveillance footage of the suspect, and say they believe he is still in the area. We will continue to monitor this breaking story.

And coming up, Tucker will be back with us to discuss the crisis of American manhood. Plus, President Trump insists the government won't re- open until he has money for his wall. But if he gets it, will that wall work? That's next on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”


STEYN: El Paso, Texas is turning into Exhibit A of America's broken immigration system. ICE has been overwhelmed by asylum requests and shackled by court rulings, and it's now releasing hundreds of migrants onto the streets of El Paso.

The message to future migrants, of course, is that America is powerless to stop them from settling here. Fox's Jonathan Hunt is here with more. Jonathan?


Homeland Security Secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, says the immigration system is at breaking point. Border Patrol agents say they're overwhelmed. Around 1,000 immigrants have been released onto the streets of El Paso, Texas this week alone.

And two young immigrant children have died after being taken into custody by Customs and Border Protection agents, the first deaths of children in CBP custody for a decade.

In El Paso, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials say they have little choice but to release those hundreds of immigrants because of, quote, decades of inaction by Congress that they say has limited their ability to remove families who are in the U.S. illegally, and has set limits on how long they can hold those families.

So, they're being dropped off at a bus station in El Paso, where aid groups are offering support. More, by the way, are expected to be released today.


DYLAN CORBETT, DIRECTOR, HOPE BORDER INSTITUTE (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): They have spent eight to 10 days in cells. Now they've been released. What we've been doing as a community is to support them, giving them food, a place for them to stay at night.


HUNT: President Trump has repeatedly said the era of so-called catch and release has ended. But frankly, that is exactly what is happening in Texas right now. And it all comes against the backdrop of the government shutdown over President Trump's demand for a Border wall that he says could stem the flow of illegal immigration.

The wall and, of course, the deaths of those two immigrant children will no doubt top the agenda when Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen visits the Border area in El Paso, Texas, Friday, and Yuma, Arizona, Saturday.


STEYN: Just - just to be clear on that, Jonathan, ICE can hold these people if that chap is right for - for 10 days or whatever. And then meanwhile they're given a two-year court date. So, in the gap between the 10 days and the two years, they just get to hang out in America? That's - that's the idea of it (ph)?

HUNT: Right. Well what - what ICE is saying is that under the current laws, they have no choice but to release these immigrants after that time frame. And, therefore, they take them to the bus station and then, yes, essentially they are free to go where they wish to do as they please, Mark.

STEYN: Well that seems a bit of a design flaw, Jonathan.

While - while migrants continue to pour into the United States, critics of the President maintain that nothing can be done because a wall's useless. CNN's Brian Karem recently ranted about the futility of mankind's oldest defensive mechanism.


BRIAN KAREM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: This whole issue is a crock from start to finish. He picked it up on the campaign trail as something to appease the masses and play to his base.

It's not going to stop terrorism. It's not going to be 2,000 miles long, as originally planned. It's not going to be see-through. It's not going to be eco- friendly. It's not going to be slats or heads on pikes or a beaded curtain or anything else. You can't wall that border.


STEYN: Jimmy Kimmel, meanwhile, has been ridiculing, Americans were so desperate for a secure border they've been willing to donate to a GoFundMe campaign for it.


JIMMY KIMMEL, HOST, JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE!: This - this Trump supporter, guy named Brian Kolfage, started a GoFundMe campaign to raise a billion dollars for the wall. He launched it on Sunday. It's already up to almost $9 million. People - this is what people do with their disposable income when they don't have loans from college to pay off.


KIMMEL: Donating money for a wall that will never exist. It - it's like starting a college fund for Harry Potter.


KIMMEL: It's a - it's a - a more useful thing to do with your money would be to go outside and feed it to a bird. But--


KIMMEL: --you do have to admire the sacrifice they're making. I mean lot of these people are dipping into their meth money for this.


STEYN: Got it. Meth heads for national security. Thank you, Jimmy. So, would a wall work or not?

Jason Piccolo is a former Special Agent and Supervisor with the Department of Homeland Security, and he joins us now.

Everybody's mocking this. We've had Nancy Pelosi doing her beaded curtain line. At this stage, I would welcome a 2,000 mile beaded curtain along the Southern border. It would show a certain kind of resolve. But are these critics right that this thing doesn't work, doesn't make any difference, complete waste of time?

JASON PICCOLO, FORMER ICE SUPERVISOR: No, it'll work. Now the border is 2,000 miles long. And you won't be able to actually wall the whole border. But that'll create chokepoints or - or points where we could actually apprehend the immigrants coming in.

STEYN: Yes, well--

PICCOLO: So, yes, a wall would work.

STEYN: --yes. What's interesting to me is that if you look at up on the Northern border, where there's far fewer people coming across, there's not caravans massing on the 49th parallel, and yet, the United States government has actually put physical barricades in a lot of cross border towns on the Canadian border, presumably because it works there.

So, why would it not work on the Mexican border?

PICCOLO: Walls work. They do. Now, when I worked on a border, the border was simply a strand of fence in some areas like a strand of wire. Now, you have narco-traffickers coming across that same area. You have economic migrants, it's just it's open. The whole border is pretty much open except for, you know, few miles here and there.

STEYN: When - when you say it's open, because most - most people who cross international frontiers legitimately will do so at big border posts.

But you're saying that even though we talk about this incessantly, there are actually 100-mile stretches where people can actually just walk into the United States, a country that's supposedly been on Orange Alert for 17 years.

PICCOLO: Yes, definitely. Now, I was on the DHS' human smuggling cell back in 2015. And we tracked human smuggling corridors coming up from South America.

Now, you do have Special Interest Aliens transiting into South America, into Brazil, and traveling up those same routes that the economic migrants and the narco-traffickers are using. So there--


PICCOLO: --anybody can come and go through that border.

STEYN: So you mean - you mean, when you say Special Interest Aliens, you - you mean that potential jihadists have figured out. They - they look at what's on their TV screens on the Rio Grande, and figure that instead of trying to fly to JFK, you might as well just go to Latin America and walk into the country.

PICCOLO: You can. The border's open. Now, I detailed out in Ajo, Arizona at one time back in the early 2000s. And it was literally one strand of barbed wire. So, yes, you could - anybody could walk across that border when the various (ph) intent are with coming here for economic migration.

STEYN: A strand of barbed wire. That seems even more useless than the beaded curtain. Jason, thank you for that. And thank you for the eyewitness testimony on that Southern border. I'm not sure people actually visualize it quite the way you know it.

Coming up, Tucker's going to be here to discuss the declining fortunes of American men. And Paris is still coping with riots after the government tried to levy a carbon tax. So, why do lawmakers want a carbon tax here? That's next.


STEYN: It was another chaotic day on Wall Street today. Yesterday, the Dow Jones average had its largest single-day gain in history. Today, the average went on another downward streak falling by 600 points.

But in the afternoon, the market rallied surging almost 900 points to finish the day up by 258 points. The market is still down about 2,500 points this month in what's been a very tumultuous end to the year. It's like these algorithms just fell face-down in the eggnog.

The French have been rioting for more than a month now after Emmanuel Macron's government tried to impose an anti-global warming gas tax upon them. Nevertheless, a lot of Americans, including the outgoing Senator Jeff Flake, think it's time for America to have its own carbon tax. Is that wise?

Mark Reynolds is Executive Director of the Citizens Climate Lobby, and he joins us. Mark, when you see what's happening in France, that's a more extreme version of what happens when carbon taxes are actually put into place elsewhere. People don't seem to like it, don't seem to care for it.

MARK REYNOLDS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CITIZENS CLIMATE LOBBY: First of all, thank you so much for having me on the show. The nice thing about the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act is that it actually puts money in people's pockets. So, I think that there's people who are suffering both here and in other countries.

And I think that the reason that there's so much Republicans' support - support on both the House and the Senate version of this bill is it actually sends, allocates money back to households, so that they are prepared to deal with whatever they have to.

And again--

STEYN: Well--

REYNOLDS: --it doesn't tell them what to do with that money, just lets them make a choice about whatever they want to do with it.

STEYN: Well let me tell - this is the bill that's being proposed in - the carbon tax is being proposed in the United States, which under the proposal supposedly then gives money back to households. But here's one big problem with it, Mark.

Basically, the automatic increases kick in, I think, starting around 2022, and they basically go all the way up until mid-century. So, and it's beyond the control of other congresses. It just becomes like an entitlement program that gets automatic increases every year and is beyond the control.

You can't go to a polling station if you don't like it, if the facts change, if the circumstances change. It essentially puts the carbon tax beyond democratic - democratic accountability, doesn't it?

REYNOLDS: Well Representative Francis Rooney, who's the lead Republican sponsor from Florida says that he likes this bill because it's market- based. It actually lets the market determine how we get to the new energy economy.

I think that's a lot of what Mr. Fitzpatrick, one of the Republicans on the bill also said is, is, you know, you put a fee on carbon-based emissions, you give the money back to households so that the government doesn't pick what to do with it. You don't pick winners and losers. It'll be up for you to--

STEYN: What about--

REYNOLDS: --to you and I to determine what we do with a dividend. But it'll be actually a free-market bill--

STEYN: Well--

REYNOLDS: --and that's what the Republicans on the bill said they like about it so much.

STEYN: What do you make of the CEI, the Competitive Enterprise Institute's objection to it that it will actually kill America's new energy independence, which is a phenomenon in the last few years, what we see with fracking and so forth, and means we're no longer dependent on malign Saudi sheiks who use their oil riches to spread their Wahhabist ideology around the world.

The CEI's view is that the carbon tax is going to kill American energy independence.

REYNOLDS: Yes. So, I think there's something really interesting happening right now. There's actually a race to the new energy economy. And it's probably going to be either us or China. China is making a huge investment in renewable energy. And I heard - certainly hope it's us.

So, what I think that this bill does is creates enough incentive throughout the entire--

STEYN: Well--

REYNOLDS: --economic system to create all the type of--

STEYN: --wait, wait.

REYNOLDS: --innovation that we know we need.

STEYN: But there's no carbon tax in China. The Yangtze is like the most polluted river in the world the - with the - with what's coming down that stream every day. It's nothing you'd want any of your kids to be gambling and frolicking in.

So, they won't wait - what - what the French - the - the French protesters object to is that this is their lives. It's not a theory. It's not a macroeconomic theory. If it's a choice between sea levels in Tuvalu in the 22nd Century or how they have to live their lives in the century they're actually living in, they'll prioritize the reality of their lives over speculation a century hence.

REYNOLDS: Yes. I think that that's why so many Republicans like this bill in both the House and Senate is because money's actually returned. You get a monthly check and then it's your choice what you do with it.

I'm not going to tell you what to do with the money. The government's not going to tell you what to - what to do with the money. It's going to be up to American households to determine what to do.

STEYN: And - and you believe - and you believe that's good at - because everything you - they always say that and then it goes into the General Fund. The gas - gasoline taxes, they were supposed to be about it and they all go into it (ph). Well we'll - we'll see how it works out. I don't see the public appetite for it.

But, Mark, thank you for - thank you for talking with us today. And happy post--

REYNOLDS: Yes. And thank you for - thank you for having me on. And let me just say to the people who are watching, there is one of our chapters in every community out there from Boise, Idaho, to Birmingham, Alabama. If you want to work with people on solutions, we have a big tent, and we would love to see you in your neighborhood.

STEYN: OK. Big tents we like. And we won't heat them with conventional energy sources.


STEYN: Thank you for that, Mark. Happy post-Boxing Day to you.

It's time for Tucker's Final Exam. Have you been following the news over the Christmas period? Find out if you can remember it better than the big- time professionals here at Fox. That's up next.





STEYN: Oh, you know what that music means. It's time for Tucker's Final Exam where the news professionals are interrogated, see if they can actually remember the events they cover every day.

This week's Final Exam is a New York Special. We have Kennedy, the last non-guest host in the building. And also - and also with us, from FOX News Headlines 24/7, Carley Shimkus.

And actually, speaking of guest hosting, Carley will actually be in this slot on Monday night. But for some reason we're going to stick her outside- -


STEYN: --for the duration of the show. And then Kennedy will follow Carley. So, this is the Fox New Year's Eve team. You'll--


STEYN: --you'll get a heads-up on ahead. Stay ahead of (ph)--

CARLEY SHIMKUS, REPORTER: We're going to have lot of fun.

STEYN: --tuning in. OK, contestants, hands on buzzers. I'm going to ask the questions. And the first one to buzz in gets to answer. But you must wait until I finish asking.

You can answer once and I shall acknowledge you, according to rules set by the International Quiz Show Committee in Geneva, by saying your name. Correct answer's worth one point. Get it wrong, you lose a point. Best of five wins.

Let's get started. Question one, an outgoing Democrat Senator just blasted newcomer Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calling her a shiny new object with cheap rhetoric. Which lawmaker made those remarks?



STEYN: And it's Kennedy.

MONTGOMERY: Claire McCaskill.

STEYN: Claire McCaskill. Let's roll that tape.


SEN. CLAIRE MCCASKILL, D-MO.: I don't know her. I'm - I'm a little confused why she's the thing. But it's a good example of what I'm talking about, a bright and shiny new object.

The rhetoric is cheap. Getting results is a lot harder.


STEYN: Meow. Saucer of--



STEYN: --milk for Senator McCaskill.

MONTGOMERY: Don't let the door hit you where the Lord split you, Senator McCaskill.

STEYN: So, that's first blood to Kennedy. One-Zip as we head into question two.


STEYN: This is critical for Carley. Otherwise she - she'll be losing that New Year's Eve gig. Question--

SHIMKUS: Oh, no.

STEYN: --question two. Former First Lady, Michelle Obama, is now the most admired woman in all of America. That's according to a new Gallup poll. But to get them, Michelle Obama had to bump another woman who'd held on to the top spot for 17 years.


STEYN: Who was the other woman?

SHIMKUS: I know it (ph).


SHIMKUS: Oh, no.

STEYN: Oh. And it's Kennedy again.

SHIMKUS: It was just a guess from me anyway.

MONTGOMERY: Hillary Clinton.

STEYN: Oh, come on. Hillary Clinton, the most admired woman in America? The 17 - are you kidding me? Let's roll that tape.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Michelle Obama has overtaken Hillary Clinton as the most admired woman in the country.


SHIMKUS: Good job. Oh, man. I'm getting cleaned (ph).


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Clinton held that top spot on that list for 17 years. What does that say about Hillary now?


STEYN: Me too (ph).

SHIMKUS: You know what? I thought it - I - I wanted to say Oprah because--

STEYN: Right.

SHIMKUS: --I thought - I feel like that - were truly is one of the most admired women in America. But I think Hillary is now third and--

STEYN: No, yes.

SHIMKUS: --Molly (ph) is in second or something like that.

STEYN: Oprah - Oprah is number two. But it's a tragedy--


STEYN: --for Hillary. She was once the most admired--

SHIMKUS: She lost again.

STEYN: --woman in America and--

MONTGOMERY: I blame the Latvian bot farm and misogyny.

STEYN: Yes, yes.

MONTGOMERY: Even though there are other women on the list, so--


SHIMKUS: Of course.

MONTGOMERY: --very misogynistic that she got the heave-ho.

STEYN: Yes, absolutely.

SHIMKUS: We are clearly on that list as well, four and five.

STEYN: Yes. Macedonian content farmers fixed that thing right (ph). It's Two-Zip to Kennedy. This is--

SHIMKUS: Oh, no.

STEYN: --come on, come on Carley.

SHIMKUS: I just want one point.

STEYN: Come on, you don't want to be outside on New Year's Eve.

SHIMKUS: I don't.

STEYN: This - we'll give you - we'll give you a studio if you can turn this thing around.


STEYN: Question three. We recently told you about a popular calendar in Russia, which features various images of a shirtless Vladimir Putin. That same calendar is now a monster hit in another country and is outselling ones featuring puny homegrown celebrities. Which country is it?

SHIMKUS: I don't know.


SHIMKUS: I don't know.

STEYN: No, no. No. And this is (ph) - Kennedy.

MONTGOMERY: United States.

STEYN: Chest-less (ph) Putin in the United States?

SHIMKUS: Let's see.

STEYN: Doesn't sound likely.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm blushing. They're flying off the shelves in Japan--




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: --of all places.





UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A chain of Lifestyle stores indicates that the calendars are their--


SHIMKUS: I'll take a win by a loss.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: --top-seller.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The Russian President featured dipping into a hot tub and posing with a fish.


MONTGOMERY: Fell came there (ph)--



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's (ph) like 60 years old. Not looking too bad.





UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And here he is cuddling a leopard, a very docile leopard. The popularity of the calendars is reportedly fueled by a surge in self-proclaimed Putin fans. Get them while they're hot, ladies. Putin--


SHIMKUS: While they're hot.

STEYN: Yes. There's nothing a Japanese lady likes than--

MONTGOMERY: Putin and a fish (ph).

STEYN: --being in a hot tub with a KGB torturer. Kennedy, disastrous move there. She's lost one point.

SHIMKUS: It's all right.

STEYN: So there's still everything to play for. It's Two-Zero.

Question four, multiple choice.

SHIMKUS: One-zero.

MONTGOMERY: Isn't it two-ones?

STEYN: Oh, no, one - one-zero.



STEYN: One-zero. Yes, Carley--

MONTGOMERY: Oh, I lost a point?


STEYN: Yes, yes--

MONTGOMERY: I thought - I thought I kept it and then--

STEYN: No, no, you - you lost it.

MONTGOMERY: --I thought I kept the other two (ph)--

SHIMKUS: Oh, the two points (ph)--

STEYN: You're in huge trouble now.


STEYN: Question four. This is a multiple choice question. There's a crisis on the International Space Station. Something mysterious was found by astronauts inside a capsule that recently docked there. And Russian officials say it's the result of a major breach. What was it they found?

SHIMKUS: I would--

STEYN: A, a sharp knife, B, a tiny hole, or C, a jar of pickles.


STEYN: And it's the trigger-happy Kennedy yet again. What do you say, Kennedy?

MONTGOMERY: Jar of pickles.

STEYN: Jar of pickles

SHIMKUS: I was going to go with A. But let's--

STEYN: Let's roll that tape.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Matter of life and death. A tiny hole discovered in a Russian capsule--


SHIMKUS: We were both - we would have both been wrong.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: --that docks to the International Space Station.

At first, scientists suspected the hole was caused by a meteorite strike.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And a good unobstructed view now of that black spot. That's the hole on the external hull.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A Russian cosmonaut who examined the hole--




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: --believes it was drilled from inside the capsule.


SHIMKUS: Good to know. I'm learning a lot on this show, by the way--

STEYN: Yes. If you're a-

SHIMKUS: --for the very first time.

STEYN: --if you're a Russian cosmonaut, just plug that hole with the picture of Vladimir Putin chestless in the hot tub, that'll - that'll take care of it.


STEYN: OK. So, as a result, Kennedy's lost another point. It's now zero- zero.

SHIMKUS: The final load (ph).

STEYN: So, this is Sudden Death.




STEYN: Sudden Death.

SHIMKUS: This is the lowest scoring game--

STEYN: The Final - this is the lowest scoring game in the history of this show. Final question.

MONTGOMERY: Maybe we've been dipping into the New Year's champagne early--




STEYN: Too much Wassail and Figgy pudding. Final question. Another multiple choice, listen carefully.


STEYN: There is a viral video of a Colorado woman chasing down a thief who had stolen her Christmas packages from her front door. Now, there's a special name given to people who steal in this way. Is it A, a porch pirate, B, a parcel poacher, or C, a package snatcher?


STEYN: And--


STEYN: --Carley. Oh, can we have a round of applause for this? Carley succeeded in actually hitting the buzzer.

SHIMKUS: I didn't (ph).

STEYN: We didn't even know hers worked but maybe (ph)--

SHIMKUS: If I win this way (ph), it is a win I do not deserve.

STEYN: Oh, OK. Let's - let's see what--

SHIMKUS: I am going with A, porch pirate.

STEYN: Porch pirate. Roll tape.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The scourge of the holiday season. Those pesky porch pirates intent on ruining Christmas. But one woman in Lakewood, Colorado--




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: --has decided to take matters into her own hands.

RENEE ABEYTA, COLORADO HOMEOWNER: I looked at my Ring videos and I saw what happened.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Renee Abeyta confronting the brazen pirate--


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: --who made her way through the neighborhood with her stolen booty.


I thought no way is this happening to me.

Give it. I'm going to (BEEP) call the police.


SHIMKUS: Oh, yes.


ABEYTA: I got you on camera (BEEP). Give me (BEEP) thing now.


MONTGOMERY: Wow. What assault (ph) the pirate herself?




ABEYTA: I'm - I'm chasing you.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Leave me alone, lady. I didn't take anything.

ABEYTA: Yes, you did. I saw you. Throw it down.


MONTGOMERY: All right (ph).


ABEYTA: And I would have ran for as many miles as I had to, to get my package.


SHIMKUS: Good for her.

STEYN: Yes. Keira Knightley didn't talk like that in Porch Pirates of the Caribbean.



STEYN: That is and we have an amazing - this is a humiliation for Kennedy.

MONTGOMERY: Wise turnaround (ph).

SHIMKUS: This is - this, this I don't deserve it.

MONTGOMERY: I feel like--

SHIMKUS: I don't.

MONTGOMERY: --Hillary Clinton on Election Night.

STEYN: Yes, yes.

MONTGOMERY: My victory was a sure thing, Mark.

STEYN: Right.

SHIMKUS: Kennedy did all the heavy-lifting. And I just--

MONTGOMERY: I won the popular vote here. Everyone knows it.

STEYN: No, you won - you won at your (ph) hand, it's hitting that buzzer. Carley just hit it - hits it once and takes the trophy.

SHIMKUS: Can I - can I say? Thank you so much.


SHIMKUS: I believe that mug really should go to Kennedy.

STEYN: No, come on. I can't stand this good sportsmanship. Here you - here you go. There is your Tucker Carlson mug (ph)--

MONTGOMERY: Right, so (ph).

STEYN: --the mug.

SHIMKUS: We'll share.

STEYN: You'll see these ladies in this time on Monday. That's all for this week's Final Exam. Pay attention to the news each week and tune in on Thursdays to see if you can do better than one-buzz Carley.

Tucker will be here next, right after the break.

SHIMKUS: No, I didn't--

STEYN: Like (ph)--


STEYN: Tucker recently sat down to interview the Author of a new book on the crisis afflicting American men. Here's what happened.





TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: If you look at the numbers, you quickly conclude that men are in crisis in America. Compared to women, they are far more likely to drop out of school, fail to graduate, go to jail, not hold a job, commit suicide, die of a drug overdose.

And yet, the establishment, and particularly, Democratic establishment seems uninterested in all of this. And they think - they appear to think that men are still too successful and need to be held back.

Andrew Yarrow is a former New York Times reporter, a Senior Fellow with the Progressive Policy Institute. He just wrote an important new book called, Man Out: Men on the Sidelines of American Life. He joins us tonight in studio.

Mr. Yarrow - Yarrow, thank you very much for coming on.


CARLSON: So, I should, perhaps if I'm (ph) saying--

YARROW: --yes.

CARLSON: --I don't think you're a conservative activist, and that I'm also grateful that someone is saying this because the numbers support that it's true.

YARROW: It is true. And, as you say, the problem has really largely been ignored. I mean Democrats and a lot of people in the country don't see men as having problems. But there are a lot of men who are struggling, struggling with work, struggling in families, struggling with health, lot of areas I touch on in my book.

CARLSON: Well, to such a great extent that it would seem a crisis that affects everybody because, of course, men and women need each other to reproduce on the most basic level, but also every - everybody has a father or brother, sons--

YARROW: Right.

CARLSON: --why do you think it's been ignored?

YARROW: Well, there's been a lot of political correctness in this country that's kind of made the main narrative be that, you know, women are the oppressed ones. And they have been historically--


YARROW: --oppressed. But, you know, that doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of men struggling. I mean you don't - it's not a zero-sum game.

CARLSON: You're right.


CARLSON: But it's been presented as one that one sex succeeds only when another moves backward. Where'd that assumption come from?

YARROW: Well, I think a lot of politics looks at things that way. And I think it's - it's pretty unfortunate. But I think, you know, men have not been, in many ways, good at advocating for themselves.


YARROW: I mean it's been interesting in the last few elections. A lot of the political activists have been women. I mean you hear more from women these days. I mean men aren't good at forming groups--


YARROW: --anymore.

CARLSON: So, you work at - at the Progressive Policy Institute. You're a Fellow there. That's not the Heritage Foundation.

YARROW: Right.

CARLSON: I think it's fair to say you probably work in a mostly Liberal world.


CARLSON: What kind of reaction did your piece get among people you know?

YARROW: Well, it's interesting. Conservative media have tended to like it more. It's, you know, it's kind of troubling that this should be a bipartisan issue.

I mean all Americans should be doing well or should have the opportunity to do well. And they should also have justice behind them. I mean men are being accused wrongly. I mean there are a lot of awful things that men do. Don't get me wrong but--

CARLSON: Well sure.

YARROW: --but, you know, the lack of due process in some of these sexual assault allegations, it's, you know, it's pretty troubling.

CARLSON: It's just interesting because the most progressive President the country's ever had, FDR, four terms, the first thing he did after getting elected in 1932, the very first piece through the Congress was the CCC, the Civilian Conservation Corps, which was--

YARROW: Right.

CARLSON: --aimed at young men, just men between--

YARROW: Right.

CARLSON: --18 and 25 or something like that--


CARLSON: --getting them back to work and restoring their vitality through work. What would happen if a Democrat in the modern era suggested something like that?

YARROW: Well, you think it would play well. You know, while the unemployment statistics look good, there are a lot of men who've either been pushed out of the labor force or dropped out. I mean they're about 17 - 18 percent of 25 to 64 year old men, who aren't working.

And, you know, there are a lot of men - younger men, who are neither in school or working. So, you know, why is that? And, you know, why can't we create better jobs for them? And yes, I mean you'd think a Democrat would pitch some kind of jobs program.

CARLSON: I think I mean this is a longer conversation but I think the answer is toxic masculinity.

YARROW: Yes, I mean the--

CARLSON: Whatever that means.

YARROW: Well, yes. I mean that's become the phrase du jour, I guess. I mean there are clearly issues with masculinity. You know, I interviewed a lot of men and some women around the country, about 200. And a lot of men told me, a lot of, you know, even Liberal men said, "Well feminism's done a lot for women. But what's it done for me?"

CARLSON: Well that's a - that's a fair question. And you ask it in this book. Thank you for doing that.

YARROW: Thank you.

CARLSON: Great to talk to you.

YARROW: Good to talk to you.





STEYN: That's one of the biggest stories of our time, so is this one.

Big tech has become the greatest threat to Americans' privacy and personal freedoms. But now, Americans seem to be wising up to that. A new survey finds that Americans trust Facebook less than any other company. Also, a growing number of Americans seeking treatment for tech addiction as they find themselves unable to look away from social media, their smartphones or video games.

Tom Kersting is a family therapist and the Author of Disconnected: How to Reconnect Our Digitally Distracted Kids. I've read that book, and so should you. And he joins us now.

Just to go with the Tucker, the big story of our time thing, when you look at this so-called tech addiction, and you follow where that leads, you - you do worry that in some ways these rinky-dinky little things that started as cat video sites somehow basically re-wiring humanity.

TOM KERSTING, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: They are. I mean if we looked out the back window right now and - and counted how many people were walking by staring at their phones, you'd probably have 70 percent of them doing that.

And when it comes to addiction which, obviously, I've studied in my background, basically if anything, whether it's gambling, alcohol, drugs, anything that's considered addictive its - if it's affecting one of the following four, you could be diagnosed as - as an addict.

And the four things are, is it affecting your family, is it affecting your health, is it affecting your job or your occupation, and is it affecting have you had any legal issues?

STEYN: Right.

KERSTING: And when we look at technology, we could check off each one of those for many, many people. So, therefore, this whole addictive whether it's a debate or not, I'm all about, I believe in a 100 percent.

STEYN: The - the difference being though that it's actually being kind of organized on a global scale with--


STEYN: --billions and billions of people. And when you look at children, like middle-schoolers--

KERSTING: Yes, yes.

STEYN: --who've never known anything but this world, their behavior does seem to be not where middle-schoolers were--


STEYN: --20, 50, 70 years ago.

KERSTING: --it's actually unbelievable. I tell people I - I - I get more middle-school age kids with major anxiety disorders per year now--


KERSTING: --in my private practice than I did the previous 17 years combined.


KERSTING: And, you know, and you could - all the research that's done to put - start to show that, starting to point to, you know, that the absorption of social media, the lack of - of self, the lack of a sense of self and so forth and how that's affecting the self-esteem and causing, you know, issues with anxiety, depression, and other - other mental health - health things.

STEYN: People do actually seem to prefer it though. You have a scene in your book where you talk about when you were a young guy, just sitting at a bar, you'd never know who's on the barstool next.


STEYN: I can relate to that. Sometimes--


STEYN: --you find yourself on the other side of the wall, you're sitting next to an Australian, a Hungarian--


STEYN: --you - you meet different people with different views. Now everyone in the bar is just like--


STEYN: --scrolling the phone.

KERSTING: When you go into the - the airport, if you travel, which, you know--


KERSTING: --you do, I do. They have the screens in front of every barstool.


KERSTING: So, like, you and I--


KERSTING: --instead of hanging out, talking with one another and--


KERSTING: --and kicking it off, now everybody's distracted by these devices.

STEYN: Right. Sometimes--

KERSTING: So the--

STEYN: --you want to go where only Facebook knows--

KERSTING: --so - so it's like a - it's like--

STEYN: --you're in that area (ph).

KERSTING: --right. It's like bottles of wine dangling around if you're an alcoholic--

STEYN: Yes, yes.

KERSTING: --24 hours a day, seven days a week, you can't escape from it.

STEYN: Yes. That's - that's a - that's a - a worrying thing. As I said, I think this is one of the biggest stories of time, Tom. I dread (ph) to think--


STEYN: --where we're going to be if - if we're - if we don't change it. But how do we change it?

KERSTING: Well we have - it's - it's not something that's going to happen overnight. We just have to keep creating awareness, having conversations like you and I are having right now, so that people could see this. They can understand the ramifications of these things. I'm one of the guys out there, you know, that's lecturing--


KERSTING: --that's writing about it and that's out there trying to get other people to do the same. And it's - it's going to be a slow process but I think we're going to have to get there.

STEYN: OK. Well we will - we will hold you to that Tom because something - these companies are bigger than countries now.

That is about it for us tonight. You can tune in each night at 8:00 to the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. And don't forget to DVR the show. That's less harmful, less addictive than if you just go on Facebook and look at it. Don't bother with that. Just DVR the show, if you haven't set that up already.

Now, this is exciting moment in the evening. We are going to lift Nancy Pelosi's beaded curtain and find out who is guest-hosting for Sean Hannity tonight. Oh, who is it going to be? They've lifted the beaded curtain. I think I can see--


STEYN: --Jason Kennedy filling in for Sean. Hey Jason--

Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 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.