This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," October 15, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Good evening and welcome to "Tucker Carlson Tonight." We've got some creepy porn lawyer news to lead the show. In an amazing twist tonight, Stormy Daniels' lawyer may have to cut a check to President Trump, a check that we suspect would bounce. We'll have details for you in just a minute.
But first, Fauxcahontas is on the warpath this evening. For decades, as you know, the Senator from Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren, has claimed to be an American Indian. Now, she did this to advance her career and it worked.
Harvard Law School once boasted that Warren was the first woman of color to ever serve on their faculty. Woman of color. But Warren also used her fake Indian heritage to frame herself as somebody affected by America's sad history of racial discrimination. Warren posed as a victim because on the Left, victimhood is power. Watch her do it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, D-MASS.: My father's parents said, "Absolutely not. You can't marry her because she's part Cherokee and she's part Delaware." And after fighting it as long as they could, my parents went off, they eloped.
So, what I know about my parents is I know that in that little town they grew up in that my father's parents knew enough about my mother and her family.
JAMES SPENCER BRAUDE, BOSTON RADIO AND TELEVISION PERSONALITY: Assuming that's the fact that you're 132nd --
WARREN: No, that doesn't tell you. Don't do that. What is--
BRAUDE: But why - why shouldn't I do that? But that is the fact, is it not?
WARREN: Because no - no, it is not.
BRAUDE: Why not?
WARREN: It's not about the number--
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Her own Trail of Tears. Well as it turned out old Lia-watha couldn't come up with a single, not one American Indian in her family tree. The rest of the country laughed at her, and rightly so.
And then this morning, Warren hit back at the rest of us. Out of nowhere, she produced a private DNA test that she claims confirms her story. Along with it, of course, she released a video that doubles as an ad for her presidential campaign. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WARREN: Now, the President likes to call my mom a liar. What do the facts say?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The facts suggest that you absolutely have a Native American ancestor in your pedigree.
WARREN: I'm not enrolled in a tribe and only tribes determine tribal citizenship. I understand and respect that distinction. But my family history is my family history.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Well, so the Senator concedes that she's not "Enrolled in a tribe." You may have guessed that. That fact is settled in any case. But what do the test results that she's produced actually say?
Well, according to Warren, she may have had one unnamed and still unidentified Indian ancestor, not necessarily from North America by the way, eight or so generations ago potentially. Now, that could make her less than 1/1000th American Indian, that's about roughly as American Indian as virtually every White person you've ever met, which is to say not American Indian at all.
So, don't count on running into Elizabeth Warren at the next meeting of the tribes. But do count on her to keep pretending that she's somehow the spokeswoman for indigenous peoples everywhere. Warren has appointed herself head of the #MeSoo movement.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WARREN: Native communities have faced discrimination, neglect and violence for generations. And Trump can say whatever he wants about me, but mocking Native Americans or any group in order to try to get at me? That's not what America stands for.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Now wait hold on a minute. Who's mocking Native Americans? Well if anyone's doing that, it's Elizabeth Warren. She's the one who's stolen their identity and leveraged their suffering to climb the greasy pole of our fake meritocracy.
No High Plains whiskey trader ever acted with more ruthless cynicism than she has, and actual Indians are disgusted by it.
The Cherokee Nation just this afternoon released a statement. They called Warren's claims inappropriate and wrong. "It makes a mockery out of DNA test and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens." In other words, it's bad for Indians so, looks like that backfired.
But DNA tests aren't really the point. And we should remember that. It doesn't matter if Fake-ajawea is 1 percent Indian or 90 percent Indian. DNA should never matter except if physicians treating inherited illnesses. Your bloodline should not dictate who you vote for, what job you get, where your kids go to school, whether you get promoted or anything else.
A ruling class sends the opposite message. They believe in a racial spoil system. They tell you that your immutable traits, the ones that you had absolutely nothing to do with, are the most important thing about you. That is the very definition of racism. It's also a dangerous course for a country to take, especially right now.
Increasingly, researchers know much more about DNA and the role that it plays in human life. It's not hard at all to imagine a society that degenerates into pure genetic determinism with factions squabbling for entitlements based on their genes.
It's already happening in Brazil where race tribunals measure people's skull shapes to see if they qualify for affirmative action. Other countries throughout history, as you may have read, have done similar and horrifying things.
Do you want to live in a place like that? No, thanks.
Better to stick to our ideals where we do our best, not always successfully, but we try to treat people as individuals and judge them by their behavior, what they do, and not their ancestry.
Under that system, Fraud-azuma never would have bothered to make up a fake family tree. It would have been pointless. Harvard likely would have hired someone impressive in her place. Multiply that by every institution in America, and you'd have a better country.
Now, Elizabeth Warren's video today included ample footage of news personalities ridiculing her claims about her heritage. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GREG GUTFELD, FOX NEWS: What does Warren translate into Cherokee, you ask? Spreading Bull?
HOWIE CARR, 'THE HOWIE CARR SHOW' HOST: You know Elizabeth Warren, right?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Most people --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Radio host Howie Carr was making war whoops in that clip, and he joins us tonight to make more.
Howie, it's great to see you. So what do you make - I mean you must feel little chastened now that it turns out she's one - potentially 1/1000th American Indian. Are you retracting your mockery?
CARR: No. No, Tucker, if - if The - The Boston Globe was a legitimate news organization--
CARLSON: Yes.
CARR: --the headline on the story would be something like DNA test prove White woman White woman or, you know, DNA test confirms Senator Warren is still a fake Indian. I mean this is ridiculous. The - the - all my life, Tucker, The - The Globe has been running a story every sixth year saying Senator Kennedy is turning his life around.
Well Senator Kennedy's gone. So now, Elizabeth Warren is turning her life around, you know, and they're--
CARLSON: Yes.
CARR: --they're trying to promote her. Last month they - last month they had a - an amazing story about how her ethnic fraud claiming they've been American Indian did not affect her meteoric rise in academia after she started checking the box, that didn't work.
So now - so now, they're back with this, this today. And by the way, Tucker--
CARLSON: Now let me just ask you - let me - as - as the only person really outside New England who ever looks at The Boston Globe, I always wonder are they taking payment directly from her or is it just a kind of moral payment that they get ? Why - why are they carrying water for a U.S. Senator over there?
CARR: Well I think it's, you know, she's - she's part of the resistance. And the - the - what was interesting to me is this morning when the story came out, it said well she's - she's somewhere between 132nd and 1512th, which is not that great, but that was all wrong. They, you know, they used to fake news. But this time, it was fake math. And it was really only- -
CARLSON: I know.
CARR: --164th or up to 1,024. As soon as I leave here tonight, I'm playing the lottery. My number is 1024 tonight.
But, you know, the thing is all the Moonbats who love her, they've all posted the story saying she's 132nd and this proves it. They didn't run the corrections. They had to run two corrections on the story. It was so the fuzzy math until mid-afternoon so--
CARLSON: But has--
CARR: --still they they carried water for her.
CARLSON: --has anyone ever asked the obvious question, which is who cares? I mean if she has one genetic makeup, does that make her a better person than if she has another genetic makeup? I mean do we live in that country where you're judged by your DNA?
CARR: Tucker, I've been asking her - I've been offering to pay for her DNA test for a many moons, you know? I offered to come up with my own wampum to pay for it, but she - she refuses.
I mean I think - I think it's, you know, kind of - some kind of - she's playing on the White guilt. And - and, you know, I just wanted to mention this too, Tucker, you know, another fraud that she's involved in, Pow Wow Chow, you're familiar with this cookbook.
CARLSON: Yes, we do --
CARR: This is the one that she--
CARLSON: Yes.
CARR: --this is the cookbook that she contributed to all Indian recipes. And I think a chef prepared some for you. One of them is cold crab omelets with, you know, very popular on the - on the Trail of Tears back in the 19th Century, cold crab. It was actually--
CARLSON: Well actually it's from --
CARR: --it was lifted from a New York Times cookbook by a French chef.
CARLSON: We're actually recreating that recipe later on this show. Howie Carr, really the best thing about New England joining us tonight. Thank you, Howie, great to see you.
CARR: Thank you, Tucker.
CARLSON: Bill Jacobson has followed this story more closely and for longer than maybe anyone else. He's a professor at Cornell Law School. He blogs at Legal Insurrection, which you should read and he joins us tonight.
Bill, does this settle the story that you've been covering lo these many years?
WILLIAM JACOBSON, CORNELL LAW SCHOOL PROFESSOR: No, it doesn't settle anything at all. In fact, it raises more questions. I mean your viewers need to understand how deceptive Elizabeth Warren was in claiming Native American heritage, Native American ancestry.
She did not claim it when she was a child. She didn't claim it for college. She didn't claim it for law school. She only claimed it when she was in her late 30s and beginning to climb the law school ladder, the law professor ladder from the University of Texas to Harvard. That's the only time she's ever claimed it.
She never affiliated with Native Americans. She never helped Native Americans. She was never a faculty advisor for Native Americans. She got herself listed as Native American so she could be declared a minority law professor, and she did that when she was climbing the ladder.
And we know why she did that. She can say whatever she wants, but everybody understands. This is a woman who built her political narrative claiming that other people are rigging the system. She tried to rig her career by--
CARLSON: Yes.
JACOBSON: --claiming a status to which she's not entitled.
CARLSON: But wait a second. The Boston Globe told me a little while back that claiming to be the first non-White female Harvard Law School professor had no effect at all on her ascent within Harvard Law School. She didn't get any benefit from that. Is that true?
JACOBSON: Well we don't know that because Harvard has never released her complete hiring file. What The Boston Globe had--
CARLSON: Oh.
JACOBSON: --were let - were documents Elizabeth Warren provided to her, documents a few other people provided to - to them. But to my knowledge, and I specifically asked their reporter this question and never got an answer, her complete hiring file was never released.
So yes, there's - there may be nothing there. But does it really matter whether she benefited? She tried to benefit. She tried to get an advantage over other people by claiming a status to which she's not entitled. It's the worst form of cultural appropriation or misappropriation, which is a very hot topic in progressive circles.
She tried to misappropriate the identity of one of the most victimized people in - in history or, at least, in recent history, which is Native Americans--
CARLSON: It's a great point.
JACOBSON: --and progressives seem not to care.
CARLSON: And yet, without conclusive evidence, her lackeys in the press declared her innocent. Amazing. Professor, thank you very much for that. I appreciate it.
JACOBSON: Thank you.
CARLSON: Thanks for following that story.
Up next, we have some major breaking creepy porn lawyer news. It almost pains us to bring it to you. But this time, it's worth it. Stay tuned for that
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Well normally we'd call this a Fox News Alert. But tonight, we want to be a little more direct. It's really a creepy porn lawyer alert. A federal judge has dismissed a defamation lawsuit that Stormy Daniels filed against President Trump.
Not only that, the judge says that Trump is entitled to receive attorney's fees. That means, of course, that the creepy porn lawyer may have to cut the President, his self-described nemesis, a check. But don't get your hopes up too far, the check would probably bounce.
The creepy porn lawyer may realize that too. He is vowing to appeal the ruling. We'll continue to follow this case because, honestly, we can't help ourselves. We can't look away.
Democrats forecasting a Blue Wave of voters in November, we'll see. Some of them overtly say that illegal aliens are part of that wave. In the State of Georgia, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams says the Blue Wave will include all segments of society, including "Those who are documented and undocumented".
Illegal immigrants, of course, are not allowed to vote in federal elections. But Democrats increasingly are pushing back against that assumption.
Will Jawando is the Democratic nominee for Montgomery County City Council in the State of Maryland, and he joins us tonight. Will, thanks a lot for coming on.
WILL JAWANDO, DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY CITY COUNCIL: Good to be here.
CARLSON: So, this seems like a bright red line that you would never want a foreign citizen voting in your election. Would you?
JAWANDO: Yes. And they're not allowed to. And that's - and that's - next - not actually what Stacey was saying. I think it's a distraction to talk about that. Her point was the larger point that there's a lot of ways to be civically involved.
I often say voting's the end of the civic process. Before that, you ask your Congressman for or your City Councilman for a sign on your street, you organize, you protest. The DREAMers are a perfect example, not citizens, but they've had tremendous political impact on both sides of the aisle.
CARLSON: But why would she want someone who's here illegally, who's not supposed to be here? You didn't welcome the person living here in violation of your laws--
JAWANDO: Right.
CARLSON: --taking services illegally, using a fake federal ID, which a 100 percent of them are, why would you want that person influencing your political process?
JAWANDO: Well DREAMers have influenced it greatly.
CARLSON: No, not DREAMers - there are 22 million illegals--
JAWANDO: But they're the same types of people--
CARLSON: No, not - not the same.
JAWANDO: --you're talking about here.
CARLSON: There's a special legal designation for DREAMers, fair or not being upheld by a federal judge now. But the overwhelming majority are not DREAMers. There are 22 million illegals. That's the federal term for them. Why would you want them influencing anything about your country?
JAWANDO: Well if you live here - well, first of all, undocumented, I'd like to call them undocumented individuals, they pay over $20 billion in federal taxes but receive no benefit--
CARLSON: Well that's of course not - that's - that's not - not true at all- -
JAWANDO: --no social security, no Medicare, no and they --
CARLSON: --and actually they - they receive billions in - in Medicare - they're - in Medicaid. And, of course, the overwhelming majority of the bursts that they have in this country are paid for by you and me, legal citizens. So, they take a lot. We educate their kids. They use our infrastructure. But the question is more a theoretical one.
Why if someone is breaking your law, would that person have a right to influence, is a citizen of a foreign country, like the Russian hackers who hacked our - no, I'm serious. It's a foreigner who's not allowed to be here, why would that person--
JAWANDO: Everyone arrived--
CARLSON: --avail those benefits ?
JAWANDO: --here at some point, even your ancestors, right?
CARLSON: We --
JAWANDO: And when they got here they got engaged in the - in the civic life of their community. They went down and figured out how to figure out how to have their community to be safe, how to get a driver's license, how to apply for a school--
CARLSON: But it was illegally for sure--
JAWANDO: Yes.
CARLSON: I'm not making an argument against immigration--
JAWANDO: Yes.
CARLSON: --at all. I'm just saying--
JAWANDO: But and again, they're not voting. She wasn't saying that--
CARLSON: But is there a dis - no, but you're saying that--
JAWANDO: --they should vote.
CARLSON: --they should have an influence on our election--
JAWANDO: They already do. It's a fact.
CARLSON: But why would - why would we want that--
JAWANDO: Because anyone who lives here in the county that's--
CARLSON: --why - well I'd be horrified about this.
JAWANDO: --contributing to - in the country that's contributing to our democracy has a right--
CARLSON: So what - so citizenship--
JAWANDO: --to be heard.
CARLSON: --so what does citizenship do ?
JAWANDO: That gives you right to vote. They don't have the right to vote--
CARLSON: But should - but they have every other right --
JAWANDO: --but they can participate in the civic process --
CARLSON: --short of that. Even if they're here --
JAWANDO: --well they're human beings.
CARLSON: --even if they're here illegally?
JAWANDO: Even if they're here undocumented illegally, yes, people could participate--
CARLSON: They have the right ?
JAWANDO: --in the civic process.
CARLSON: So, do I have --
JAWANDO: President Trump said that--
CARLSON: --wait--
JAWANDO: --DREAMers can participate in a civic process.
CARLSON: The DREAMers are a tiny--
JAWANDO: No, they're the same thing.
CARLSON: --no, no, they're not at all the same thing. They are not here --
JAWANDO: Are they not undocumented and illegal ?
CARLSON: --they're not here illegally because the--
JAWANDO: Yes, they are.
CARLSON: --President Obama made them legal temporarily, as you know.
JAWANDO: Right, right.
CARLSON: But the 22 million are here illegally--
JAWANDO: But before that they - they advocated to beget that status.
CARLSON: And they shouldn't have--
JAWANDO: They did not have that status.
CARLSON: --they shouldn't have gotten it. And for political reasons, the former President caved to their demands. My question is do I have this right to go to a foreign country and demand that they change their - the way they - they govern themselves?
JAWANDO: Oh, people do it all the time.
CARLSON: Do I--
JAWANDO: Americans are overseas advocating for all sorts of changes in--
CARLSON: Really? So--
JAWANDO: --in repressive countries and nations across the world.
CARLSON: And you think that's OK? If I show up in a country illegally, I just walk into Mexico and I say "I demand that you make accommodations for me," do you think there's - that's a little weird or no?
JAWANDO: Not accommodations. What I'm saying is that--
CARLSON: Well that--
JAWANDO: --we're having an immigration debate in this country that's been going on for a long time. If you go back to President Reagan, he made a lot of people legal--
CARLSON: No OK but --
JAWANDO: --all that stuff is happening.
CARLSON: --he - he - he made a lot of people legal. And it was a huge mistake, I think. I'm not here to fight for Republicans--
JAWANDO: Well--
CARLSON: --I'm here to determine what the truth is. And if I go to a foreign country and they say, "You're not allowed to be here," and I say "Shut up racist, you have to listen to me. I demand you allow me to stay." Would you say--
JAWANDO: But no one said that here.
CARLSON: --what do you mean no one said ?
JAWANDO: You're saying it. No one has said that.
CARLSON: Are you joking?
JAWANDO: No, no one's said that.
CARLSON: We - we run tapes of illegal aliens all the time burning U.S. flags, carrying Mexican flags, calling anyone who opposes Americans --
JAWANDO: There's plenty of Americans that burn U.S. flags too.
CARLSON: I - I agree. And I'm against it but they're citizens--
JAWANDO: Right. Me too.
CARLSON: --it's their country. And it's not--
JAWANDO: So, do you want to load everyone up and just ship them out to --
CARLSON: Yes, well most of them, I think--
JAWANDO: --South Africa or --
CARLSON: --I mean if they're here illegally--
JAWANDO: --the DREAMers too or who--
CARLSON: Well, no, I guess they have a right to stay.
JAWANDO: --who are but - what's your criteria?
CARLSON: Well the President said that these people have a right to stay. OK. And a federal judge has upheld that. I disagree. But that's the law.
JAWANDO: Right.
CARLSON: The other law is that people who are not here legally have to leave. There are 22 million--
JAWANDO: So, if we passed a pathway to citizenship like President Bush wanted to do, and we got--
CARLSON: I would oppose that but if it were the law, see I believe--
JAWANDO: --we have it close you'd go along with it --
CARLSON: --in the law. You guys don't.
JAWANDO: I - I believe in the law as well.
CARLSON: Then why wouldn't we deport everyone here illegally?
JAWANDO: This - the - the lead-in to this story with Stacey Abrams as that saying that illegal immigrants should vote. She didn't say that. And that's what I'm talking about --
CARLSON: Well no she --
JAWANDO: --no one's saying that.
CARLSON: --that I think she was saying that but you're saying that illegal aliens have a right to influence our political process, and I'm saying we should be horrified by that prospect. Why wouldn't we be?
JAWANDO: No, no, no, no, everyone started here as an illegal immigrant or immigrant of some or--
CARLSON: No, no, that's not true.
JAWANDO: --of some--
CARLSON: Really?
JAWANDO: --some point.
CARLSON: I'm looking at my stage manager who grew up in another country and came here legally.
JAWANDO: Well so did my dad. They came - he came over here--
CARLSON: Exactly. Exactly.
JAWANDO: --even - even if you have people coming to this country when the Irish came off the boats, they weren't necessarily legal, you know, so people were not - that's the way this country was formed.
CARLSON: So we have no right to defend our borders because the Irish came?
JAWANDO: No. Of course, we can defend them.
CARLSON: Oh, OK.
JAWANDO: Of course we can defend them.
CARLSON: Thank you for that. I mean I wish we had more time. I think it's an interesting topic.
JAWANDO: We'll come back.
CARLSON: And I appreciate taking time out of your schedule to join us.
JAWANDO: Only citizens should vote though.
CARLSON: Amen.
Hillary Clinton out again defending her husband after posing as a champion of women. How does that work? We'll find out from Camille Paglia.
She was, by the way, Hillary, the leader of our incompetent ruling class, one of the reasons Trump got elected, one of the reasons she's on the cover of new book called Ship of Fools. You can get a copy almost anywhere. Stay tuned.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Well just recently, Hillary Clinton said that Brett Kavanaugh could not be allowed on the Supreme Court. We had to believe his accuser, she said, even without evidence.
But Clinton turns out to be one of the most self-aware politicians in this country, that's a high bar, so it wasn't too surprising that on Sunday she backtracked from this position. She told CBS that her own husband had no obligation to resign over the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Some today have said he should have stepped down.
TONY DOKOUPIL, CBS NEWS: In retrospect, do you think Bill should have resigned in the wake of the Monica Lewinsky scandal?
HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES: Absolutely not.
DOKOUPIL: It wasn't an abuse of power?
CLINTON: No, no.
DOKOUPIL: There are people who look at the incidents of the 90s and they say, "A president of the United States cannot have a consensual relationship with an intern. The power imbalance is too great."
CLINTON: Who was an adult, but let me ask you this, where is the investigation of the current incumbent?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Well even the ladies of "The View" are not buying this line of argument. Instead, they ripped Hillary Clinton, believe it or not, for her evasive interview tactics. Here's a selection.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOY BEHAR, "THE VIEW": What she just did is exactly what the Republicans do.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right.
BEHAR: They change the subject so that's why we never get anywhere in the discourse.
ABBY HUNTSMAN, "THE VIEW": You know, you know you have a bad argument when your immediate response is, "Well, they were worse."
Call it out for being wrong and for being bad for all those years. I just don't think she can have it bit - both ways.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.
MEGHAN MCCAIN, "THE VIEW": Juanita Broaddrick claims that--
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.
MCCAIN: --Hillary tried to intimidate her into silence. Kathleen Willey claims that Clintons tried to intimidate her into not telling the truth. She called Mona - Monica Lewinsky a narcissistic looney toon, Gennifer Flowers, some failed cabaret singer--
Democrats have got to move on from the Clintons.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Camille Paglia is an author, one of the country's best-known cultural critic. She has written extensively about Hillary Clinton for more than 20 years, among many other topics. Her latest book is titled Provocations, and Camille Paglia joins us tonight. We're honored to have you. Thank you very much for coming on. So--
CAMILLE PAGLIA, CULTURAL CRITIC: Thank you, Tucker.
CARLSON: --yes, Hillary Clinton is mentioned actually quite a bit in this book.
PAGLIA: Yes.
CARLSON: But before I ask you broader questions about what's happening in this country, what's your reaction to her role in the - the kind of MeToo movement of right now?
PAGLIA: Well it's very ambiguous. I - I don't - I think that her - her history has been hypocritical. I was the only Democrat feminist to call for Bill Clinton's resignation, and I had voted for him twice and - and don't regret it.
But it was a scandal that the - the squalor that he introduced into the people's house even this - all this was happening, the servicing of him by - by an intern in the White House offices.
CARLSON: Yes. No. It's a - it's a very good point and a good reminder. So what, as you, as someone who's written about sex and gender roles in our society for so long, for many decades, what do you make of the convulsion we're going through, particularly, of the MeToo movement?
PAGLIA: Well it's - it's great that attention is being paid to the women being - women being abused. I - in 1986, I was lobbying for moderate sexual harassment guidelines at my university in Philadelphia. But I think we've gone a bit too far here.
I think that, you know, fundamental civil rights involving the presumption of - of innocence or they have to be considered, so what I'm - I - what I espouse as a feminist is that women themselves must take charge of their own interactions today with men.
They must signal at the time that something is unacceptable. This waiting 10 years, 20 years, 30 years is - this is not a - not only not American, it's Stalinist.
CARLSON: But women were told again and again by people who claim to empower women are themselves powerless and can't, they can't say anything because they're so--
PAGLIA: Absolute nonsense.
CARLSON: --lacking in power. OK.
PAGLIA: Nonsense.
CARLSON: OK.
PAGLIA: No. Working class women, yes, may be so dependent upon a job that they cannot protest. But there, as I have written, there's no excuse for well-educated, upper middle-class professional women to let offenses to their dignity go by. You must draw the line when it happens.
It's absurd that you feel too powerless, you can't complain. These people that - women who - who say that are simply putting the career advantage over the larger question of - of feminist issues and the protection of women.
CARLSON: You - you've written so much about, I mean just be blunt, about sex for all these years, what do you make of seeing your, I guess, former allies on the Left strike an almost evangelical or Puritan position on these questions, a kind of bluenose outrage at sensual pleasure, at personal happiness telling you that, you know, you're not allowed to do this or do that, I mean what do you make of this?
PAGLIA: Well there has been a split within feminism since second-wave feminism was born in the late 1960s. The media has - have been extremely lazy and not pursuing this.
CARLSON: Yes, right.
PAGLIA: I belong to the pro-sex, pro-pop culture wing of feminism. I - I favor the legalization of prostitution. I have defended pornography. I admire strip clubs etcetera, etcetera, so there's - there has been this argument for a very long time.
My - my branch one in the 90s, thanks to Madonna suddenly bursting on the scene, but then Madonna has faded and lost all sense of her own trajectory, and I am astonished after the victory of the pro-sex wing that we're back to feminist Puritanism again of the Andrea Dworkin kind.
We're talking about mental imbalance. We're talking about hysteria that has nothing whatever to do with women's rights. These are neurotics, OK, who are - who are talking about hatred of men, who are poisoning the culture, making it more difficult--
CARLSON: Yes.
PAGLIA: --for young women to reconcile with young men.
CARLSON: You may not agree with Camille - Camille Paglia if you're watching the show. But trust me, one of the more interesting people out there and an engaging writer, and this is her new book, Provocations, and they do indeed provoke.
Camille Paglia, it's great to see you tonight. Thank you for that.
PAGLIA: Thank you, Tucker.
CARLSON: Party leaders won't admit it. But Democrats are laying the groundwork for impeaching the President should they take the majority in the House next month. Is that wise? That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Well leaders of the Democratic Party are trying very hard not to talk about it in public, but Democrats are, as a factual matter, on track to impeach the President if they retake the Congress in November. They retake the House which looks likely, to be honest, and they have no choice in that.
The Democratic base is so amped up, hating Trump is the one thing that holds them together, that the vast majority of them think the President should be impeached. For what? Doesn't matter, being a bad guy.
In November, if they take the House, they probably will have no choice but to go for impeachment whether they have a good reason for it or not. Everybody knows this.
Richard Goodstein is an attorney, a former adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton and he joins us tonight. Now Richard, let me just say, I'm pretty sure you're against impeachment, OK, because you - you were here for the whole Clinton impeachment, you saw how it hurt the Republicans.
You don't like Trump but you also know there's no actual high crime or misdemeanor for which you could impeach him. It's insane. But you also know your base and you know that they're - they are insane. So how is the Democratic Party going to keep from being driven by its own lunatic voters if they take the House?
RICHARD GOODSTEIN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well just for the record, I actually think it's not just high crimes and misdemeanors, it's treason, bribery, high crime, I - I actually think that the - the--
CARLSON: Oh.
GOODSTEIN: --universe of things that we can go after but let's abstract for another day --
CARLSON: So having a press conference with Vladimir Putin could get you impeached?
GOODSTEIN: I - I think if he knew about the fact that close family members were co - were consorting with the Russians to run the campaign, yes--
CARLSON: Consorting with the Russians--
GOODSTEIN: --that is but again, that's for - that's another discussion.
CARLSON: --OK.
GOODSTEIN: The fact of the matter is the Democrats - the Democratic leaders are pushing off discussion of impeachment because they're going to win on healthcare, and on the issue of "Do you contain Trump or do - do you enable him?"
And I think most people want to contain him. Look, the fact is in 2014, most Republicans wanted to impeach Obama and that didn't cause the Republican leaders to go after impeaching him then--
CARLSON: Oh, I remember that. That's when they were surrounding Democratic lawmakers in restaurants and pounding on the front doors of the Supreme Court and screaming like wild animals and shooting people with bear spray in the streets of Portland where the Republicans were do I'm - yes, it's all coming back to me.
I mean come on, there's no comparison between the lunacy on display on the Left, it's a threat to you, as you know, and what the Republicans are up to like they can't control those people. They're not controlling them now.
GOODSTEIN: Yes. I - I would say there's no comparison to locking up babies in cages with anything that Barack Obama did. That's what infuriating - -
CARLSON: Babies in cages?
GOODSTEIN: --people to surround people in restaurants. Look, here's what the Democrats are going to do if you--
CARLSON: What are you talking about?
GOODSTEIN: --really want to know.
CARLSON: Babies are being put in cages?
GOODSTEIN: On the Mexican border but again, another discussion. I think what's going to happen is there are going to be public hearings--
CARLSON: I missed that part, OK.
GOODSTEIN: --public hearings like Watergate on the Russian attack, on the emoluments, on obstruction of justice, on tax fraud, money laundering, bank fraud, oh and a series of things, I don't think they're going to be going after impeachment because I think politically they realize it couldn't clear the Senate, and they, frankly, rather have a weakened Trump to run against than--
CARLSON: Wait. So can I just ask you a sincere--
GOODSTEIN: --a mighty one --
CARLSON: --question? Do you really think after two years of talking about Russia, when Russia poses no actual threat to us, the threat is China and Google, I mean they're real threats, Russia's not in the running, you really think they're going to have hearings on Russia? You think that helps them to talk more about Russia and Vladimir Putin and treason? I mean, honestly, you think they would do that? That's so nuts.
GOODSTEIN: I - I think Trump appointed officials at the top of our intelligence community, you've heard about this Pompeo fellow. Remember, he was - used to be Head of the CIA. He said that the Russians attacked the United States and pose a threat to us as did they--
CARLSON: I don't care what Pompeo says. Do you really think that we need more hearings on Russia? Russia, honestly--
GOODSTEIN: I absolutely think, I think with --
CARLSON: --that a lot of voters would want that?
GOODSTEIN: --all these people that - I think all these people that testified behind closed doors in the House and even the Senate should like the Watergate hearings brought that's what's the public is going to know, what really happened.
And I think the Mueller report, frankly, will lack that. It will lack kind of the face and the immediacy of what the public hearings would do. So yes, I do think --
CARLSON: So you're saying the Mueller, an independent investigation that extends beyond two years is not enough. We need more hearings about Russia. You really--
GOODSTEIN: Well--
CARLSON: --and you think the public's going to say, "Thank heaven. We elected the Democrats. I want to hear more about Russia?"
GOODSTEIN: I--
CARLSON: You really think so?
GOODSTEIN: I would be more sensitive to that charge - I would be more sensitive to the charge about how long Mueller's going on. If there was a single Republican that complained when Ken Starr went beyond year two, three, four, etcetera, so yes, I actually think the public is deserve - is owed a hearing--
CARLSON: Yes.
GOODSTEIN: --a public hearing and should know about --
CARLSON: More Russia.
GOODSTEIN: --what happened. I don't think they're - they're not got - they haven't gotten that yet.
CARLSON: I know out there throughout the Fruited Plains, people are grateful that we're going to keep talking about Russia--
GOODSTEIN: You got it. OK.
CARLSON: --into - into the next millennium. Richard, thank you very much.
GOODSTEIN: Let's - let's talk the day after the Mueller report comes out. How's that?
CARLSON: Russia.
Well in other foreign news, Saudi Arabia's government is accused of murdering a journalist and critic. Now, they may say it was an accident. Mark Steyn weighs in on that next.
Also, Washington permanent class needs to impeach Trump because they can't acknowledge that he was legitimately elected. If they did, then it would expose how badly they have run the country for the past three decades. It is detailed in a new book that you can buy wherever books are sold. It's on the screen.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Well, as of right now, the Government of Saudi Arabia is denying any involvement in the disappearance and the likely murder of the Washington Post columnist, who disappeared after entering a Saudi consulate in Turkey to get a document. "We don't know what happened to him," they're saying.
But tonight, the Saudis reportedly are considering admitting that the journalist was, in fact, killed.
Trace Gallagher has more on this developing story. Hey, Trace.
TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS: Hey, Tucker. In fact, there are now multiple reports that Saudi government is putting together an explanation to acknowledge that Jamal Khashoggi was killed during an interrogation that went wrong, and that the real intent was to abduct Khashoggi and bring him back to Saudi Arabia.
The goal for this new narrative is to absolve Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman of responsibility by giving him plausible deniability. In other words, saying the Crown Prince didn't order the killing.
But analysts point out, for the past two weeks, Saudi Arabia has denied having anything to do with Khashoggi's disappearance even when there was video of Khashoggi entering the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul but then never leaving.
Turkish authorities also reportedly have audio and video evidence that Khashoggi was killed inside the Consulate, though that information has not been released.
And then there's the matter of two Saudi planes arriving in Turkey the day Khashoggi disappeared carrying 15 members of what many have described as a hit team. Those men were waiting at the Consulate for Khashoggi's arrival. And Turkish investigators believe they killed him, dismembered him, and took his body away.
President Trump said a short time ago he is aware of reports that Saudi Arabia may claim Khashoggi's death was unintended though Mr. Trump could not confirm that statement. Tucker.
CARLSON: Trace Gallagher, thanks for that update.
GALLAGHER: Yes.
CARLSON: Here to bring us more is Mark Steyn. So Mark, it's hard, call me naive, but it's hard for me to believe that a primitive desert theocracy that beheads its critics in public squares would hurt one of its critics who works at the Washington Post. Were you shocked by the story?
MARK STEYN, STEYNONLINE.COM: Well I think you may be doing them a bit of a disservice there, Tucker.
I mean according to the Turks, they actually flew in an expert in bone sawing just before this man entered the Consulate and, as the Saudis are now preparing to say, was accidentally questioned to death, awfully so it could happen to anybody.
You could wander into the Swedish consulate, it might happen to you. I mean that's - that's just the way it is. The--
CARLSON: Yes.
STEYN: --the only - the only mystery here is why if the Turks who - who claim to have basically seen all this stuff going on in the hours beforehand, why they haven't actually released it? And there is actually a kind of Turkish Saudi feud that this particular reporter was very much on the Turkish side of.
But other than that, you know, you're right. This is one of the most bloodthirsty regimes on earth. It's basically ISIS with diplomatic recognition. The only entertainment in Riyadh on a Friday is the beheadings in Chop Chop Square. And regardless of liberalization and all the rest of it, this is how they deal with their perceived enemy.
CARLSON: So I'm confused though about the media coverage of this. And, by the way, I - I think American journalists have a right to be upset that a guy who wrote for the Post was apparently dismembered in a Turk - in a Saudi Consulate.
But the Saudis also may have had, and there's evidence they did, advanced knowledge of 9/11, and they funded madrasahs across the Islamic world that have dramatically increased the incidents of terrorism. No one ever says that but they're very upset about this.
STEYN: No.
CARLSON: Are we missing the larger story here, maybe?
STEYN: Yes, I - I think so. This particular reporter, in fact, before he became - before he arrived in America, he was very close to Prince Turki, who was the--
CARLSON: Right.
STEYN: --Saudi Intelligence Chief and, later, the Ambassador in London and Washington. My connection to Prince Turki is that he once said, "The arrogance of Mark Steyn knows no bounds," which I liked so much, I - I had it put as the endorsement on the front cover of my next book.
But you mentioned 9/11. Prince Turki stepped down as Saudi Intelligence Chief 10 days before 9/11. This guy, Khashoggi, who's the nephew of the biggest and most celebrated Saudi arms dealer--
CARLSON: Of course.
STEYN: --of his generation, this guy Khashoggi, before he fell out with the Saudi Royal Family was Prince Turki's biggest buddy. There - this is one of those, you know, there were no real - he doesn't deserve--
CARLSON: Oh exactly.
STEYN: --to be chopped up in a consulate but there are no good guys in this story.
CARLSON: That is such a good point. So quickly, with all the news today about Elizabeth Warren and her American Indian heritage, which rounds out to about 0 percent, we want to recall the time that we prepared one of the traditional recipes that Warren submitted to the cookbook--
STEYN: Right.
CARLSON: --Pow Wow Chow, very quickly, from our archives.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: This is not a DNA test. There's no 23 in here. We're not getting to the - to the--
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And it's a cold omelet--
CARLSON: --to the truth of this necessarily.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: --which is, again, very interesting--
CARLSON: But is it redolent of--
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: --idea.
CARLSON: --Native American culture? And I'm about to tell you--
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sure.
CARLSON: And I can eat this?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, yes, go ahead--
CARLSON: OK. I'm going to do that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: --everything is good to go. Yes, definitely. You know, you let me know. I mean I don't, you know, I don't dabble too much with Native American cooking but I wouldn't - this is not would - what would come to mind immediately. But again, I'm not an expert.
CARLSON: Good.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But it's good?
CARLSON: If this is traditional Cherokee food, sign me, I can see why Elizabeth Warren would pretend to be a member of this tribe--
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, really --
CARLSON: --definitely I liked that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: The full Fauxcahontas cooking experience with recipe available online on our Facebook page. Take a look after the show.
So Mark, really quick, were you won over by her DNA test?
STEYN: Oh, yes. This is a no doubt traditional Oklahoma Cherokee crab recipe. It's in the state song, Oklahoma where the crab comes sweeping down the plain. It is in - it is in fact the Duke and Duchess of Windsor's favorite recipe from a Manhattan restaurant. And I--
CARLSON: That's --
STEYN: --love that about - I - there's a displaced Cherokee with an authentic Cherokee recipe, who didn't get in because according to Elizabeth Warren, the House of Windsor were one of the five tribes in her world.
That's - that's where affirmative action - that's where affirmative action leads folks. The first Native American Head of State in America was King George the Third, if only we'd known.
CARLSON: Nobody beats Mark Steyn. That's always the lesson when you come on. Mark Steyn, thank you, great to see you.
STEYN: Thanks a lot, Tucker.
CARLSON: Elizabeth Warren's made-up Cherokee heritage helped her a lot at Harvard. Meanwhile, Asians are hurt by the discriminatory policies of that school. We'll talk about the lawsuit underway right now against Harvard. Stay tuned.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Harvard University going on trial right now for discrimination - racial discrimination. One group is suing the school saying that it systematically penalizes Asian applicants based on their race, and there's a whole lot of data to believe that is absolutely right.
Vijay Ingam is the author of Almost Black: How I Got Into Medical School By Pretending that I'm Black, and he joins us tonight. Thanks so much for coming on.
So, we've been laughing about this Elizabeth Warren story because it's obviously ludicrous. But the fact is she was helped, it seems clear, by claiming to be one race. Many others are hurt by this system though, which is not quite as funny. Tell us your reaction to what you've seen at Harvard?
VIJAY JOJO CHOKAL-INGAM, ALMOST BLACK AUTHOR: Well, you know, the scam that Harvard has pulled by hiding their racial discrimination beats posing as Black to get into Medical School any day.
CARLSON: Yes.
CHOKAL-INGAM: OK? Harvard has used diversity as a justification for racial discrimination against Asian-Americans and White people. They reduced Asian-American enrollment in their class from 43 percent to 18 percent using discrimination.
In fact, their own Internal Committee found evidence of discrimination, and, of course, they buried the report. Edward Blum, I spoke at a rally with Edward Blum, and Students for Fair Admissions, the Asian American Coalition for Education recently, and all of this was caught alike because of that. We can see the racism plain as simple in front of our eyes.
CARLSON: But I'm confused. So why is this not one of the biggest stories in the country? The most famous university in the world, the oldest in America, the most prestigious has been caught red-handed discriminating on the basis of race, they're not even defending themselves and nobody covers it, why?
CHOKAL-INGAM: I - I can't speak for - for the - for the motivations of the media. But what I can say is that people - it's so hidden. They buried in such a way that only a Professional Admissions Consultant like myself can understand how complicated it is, their discrimination. It's plain and simple racism. But it's so carefully hidden behind words like personality trait and that. What is it? It's racism.
CARLSON: Yes.
CHOKAL-INGAM: It's carefully hidden but it's racism.
CARLSON: We only have, unfortunately, like 30 seconds left but I mean you said this. You're one of the bravest people I've seen on this topic.
CHOKAL-INGAM: Well I - I want to tell - I want to say something --
CARLSON: Have you taken a lot of gut for this?
CHOKAL-INGAM: I've taken a lot of gum. But I wanted to thank President Trump. He has been our greatest ally in our fight against racial discrimination. We have a conservative majority, an anti-affirmative action majority in the Supreme Court because of him. Because of President Trump, our issues are being brought before universities like this.
CARLSON: You know, you'd think that--
CHOKAL-INGAM: With his support --
CARLSON: --Liberals would be on your side because supposedly they were against it too, but they're not, it turns out. Vijay, thank you very much for coming on. I wish we had more time. It's great to see you.
CHOKAL-INGAM: Thanks.
CARLSON: We're done for the night. We'll be back tomorrow, the show that's the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. Good night from Washington.
Sean Hannity, live from New York City right now.
Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. 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 CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox