This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," January 13, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Good evening and welcome to "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

The Democratic primary race has been underway for nearly a year now, and finally, we are closing in on the first votes. Believe it or not, the Iowa caucuses begin three weeks from today. Who's winning? So far nobody is winning, although many candidates have already lost.

The latest departure from the race is Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey who just dropped out. Like Julian Castro and Beto O'Rourke, Booker spent most of 2019 searching for a campaign theme, something to run on. In the end, he decided to become the wokest candidate in the wokest presidential field in history. Watch him.


SEN. CORY BOOKER, D-N.J., FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: On day one, I will make sure that number one, we end the I.C.E. policies and the Customs and Border policies that are violating the human rights.

You can't be blind to the impact of generations of racism and white supremacy that were written into our laws over centuries.

We, as a nation have not yet truly acknowledged and grappled with racism and white supremacy that has tainted this country's founding and continues to persist in those deep racial disparities and inequalities today.

When the planet has been in peril in the past, who came forward to save Earth from the scourge of Nazi and totalitarian regimes? We came forward.

[Speaking in Spanish.]


CARLSON: Try hard. You just heard him promise to come forward and save Earth. But in the end, it didn't work for Cory Booker. He is gone now leaving us with one fewer blue ideal graduate in the race.

As explained over on MSNBC this is a kind of moral tragedy and that it leaves America bereft of essential diversity.


JAMICHE ALCINDOR, PBS NEWSHOUR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Now that Cory Booker is out, you really have one African-American contender left, that's Deval Patrick. And then you have Andrew Yang, both of which have not qualified for the next debate.

So the next debate at this point, it's going to be an overwhelmingly white debate, a white -- all white debate. And there are a lot of Democratic voters that are wondering if the Democrats are going to continue to rely on African-American voters and specifically African-American women for their loyalty, how they're going to continue to make that case while not having a field that looks like the voters are trying to get.


CARLSON: An all-white debate. MSNBC can't imagine anything more offensive than that. So how did it happen, this atrocity? Well, it happened because despite claims to the contrary, the Democratic Party is racist, they're telling you. It turns out black and Hispanic voters aren't voting for enough black and Hispanic candidates. They're bigots. That's MSNBC's position.

Meanwhile, in the rest of the media, this week's storyline -- and there's always a storyline -- is that Bernie Sanders is surging and in fact, in this case, there's some truth there. There's some evidence that he is.

The most recent Des Moines Register poll, for example, shows Bernie Sanders with a three-point lead in the State of Iowa. Elizabeth Warren, Sanders main rival on the left, meanwhile appears to be fading. Her fundraising has tanked. She's now in fourth place.

And yet the race is far from over. Joe Biden may seem to you weak and confused and for good reason. But if you look at the numbers, he hasn't trailed in the national poll in two months.

In the State of Iowa, the latest poll from Monmouth has Biden up. A CBS poll just after the New Year showed a three-way race between Biden, Sanders and Mayor Pete Buttigieg, a tie in effect.

In New Hampshire, polls had Bernie Sanders and Buttigieg battling for the lead. So what does that add up to? Well, the short answer is it adds up to chaos in the Democratic Party, which is just weeks to go before the actual votes begin.

Democratic primary voters face a choice between a punch drunk mediocrity, a wild eyed political extremist and a former McKinsey consultant who lectures than like a constipated Sunday school teacher. That's not good.

Some of the party is starting to panic actually looking over the landscape, a weekend report from POLITICO describes how many House Democrats are frantically rallying behind Joe Biden as a kind of default choice. They fear that nominating Sanders or Warren would cost them reelection.

When Democrats panic, only one thing is certain to happen. Somebody is about to be called a racist. In this case that somebody is fellow Democrats, they are doing it to each other. Case in point.

In an op-ed published on Sunday, Bernie Sanders's South Carolina campaign chair copied Kamala Harris and savaged Joe Biden as a bigot. Why? Because apparently he once opposed forced school busing. Now that puts him in the same category as virtually everybody in the country of all races, everybody hated school busing no matter who they were. Biden though apparently was a Klansmen for joining them and hating it.

Meanwhile, candidates who aren't being called racist are being denounced as sexist. Elizabeth Warren is now claiming today that in late 2018, at some point, Bernie Sanders told her personally that a woman wasn't capable of being elected President.

Did he actually say that? Or is Warren lying and not for the first time? Who knows? It's impossible to know. It's impossible to prove. But of course in today's Democratic Party, that is hardly a barrier to saying it.

In fact, the standard operating procedure as you've noticed. As Democrats attack each other as immoral, the party discipline, meanwhile, appears to be disintegrating. And that's really a sign that things are falling apart. Case in point.

Freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York is refusing to pay what are, in effect, her dues to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. She accuses them of being insufficiently woke.

So instead she struck out on her own. She is fundraising for even more left wing candidates. On Friday, she blasted her own party, America's leftwing party which has more leftwing than it's ever been is not leftwing enough for Ocasio-Cortez.


REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, D-NY: Those Democrats who supported passing rules that were attacking the progressive wing of the party and attacking progressive candidates are not seeing -- are somehow seen as team players, but those progressive candidates who are defending themselves are suddenly deadbeats. It's just a total and complete double standard.


CARLSON: Oh, a double standard. Ladies and gentlemen, it sounds like sexism, maybe racism, too.

Bernie Sanders being old is trying a different approach, a more substantial approach, if we're being honest.

Last week, Bernie Sanders did something unusual in this season. He attacked his rival, Joe Biden, on policy. Watch what he said.


SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, I-VT., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Joe Biden voted and helped lead the effort for the war in Iraq.

Now, Joe Biden has been on the floor of the Senate, talking about the need to cut Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid. Joe Biden voted for the disastrous trade agreements like NAFTA, and permanent normal trade relations with China which cost us millions of jobs.


CARLSON: So it's an interesting moment. Unlike almost all of what you hear these people yell at each other and at you -- racism, sexism -- those are legitimate criticisms no matter what side you're on.

So how did Joe Biden respond to this critique of his record? Well, he didn't bother to respond. Watch this.


QUESTION: Do you have any questions about Bernie Sanders judgment on foreign policies?

JOE BIDEN, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You're not going to get me in a fight with Bernie.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you. We're running late.

BIDEN: Bernie has got enough baggage.


CARLSON: Yes, squint, chuckle, dismiss it. It is immaterial. Bernie has got his own problems. In fact, Joe Biden has it exactly backwards. Baggage? Sanders, in fact, has the least baggage of any Democrat in this race, believe it or not.

He is the least beholden to his own party. He's made it clear for years that he wants to overturn the entire American system. Now, that's appalling. It's without precedent. But keep in mind, this is a country where a lot of people are suddenly fed up with the system.

And because of that, Sanders's position gives him power. In fact, at this point, he is the most credible change candidate in the Democratic Party, and in 2020, that could make him the most formidable challenger.

Saagar Enjeti is chief Washington correspondent for The Hill. He's author of the forthcoming book, "The Populists Guide to 2020." And he joins us tonight. Saagar, thanks so much for coming on.


CARLSON: So it seems like Bernie Sanders really is surging. This isn't just one of those storylines of the week that you can dismiss as stupid. This seems may be more real than most of them, do agree with that?

ENJETI: It's definitely real. You see him at the top of the Des Moines Register poll. I think even Jennifer Palmieri, who's worked for the Hillary Clinton Campaign came out and said that the winner of that poll have gone on to win the nomination, I think for the last six times in a row.

This is a very real possibility that the Democrats are facing. You see a lot of the establishment really beginning to freak out because they don't know how to deal with somebody who's been telling, well, you know, some truths about the economy and about war.

It's really analogous to President Trump's run in 2015 when you saw the exact same thing, all these people who beat the war drum for Iraq, who signed a lot of these trade deals have really no response. That's what you saw from Joe Biden. He's just -- he can't even deign to respond to it because there's no defense. He voted for the Iraq War. That's it.

CARLSON: Right. It is, I think, taking a lot of Democrats in Washington by surprise, and this is hardly an endorsement of Bernie, who I think would really hurt the country if he were elected.

But I think from their perspective, they're thinking, you know, our future is really a guy who is almost 80, a socialist who is recovering from a heart attack? How did this happen?

ENJETI: The way it happened is that they failed. You know, they've run this country now for 40 years and all of their policies that they put into place. This is what President Trump ran on, the boiling anger in the American people.

I think there was an NBC poll that came out a few months ago, 72 percent of the Americans are fed up with their political institutions, a slight majority want to burn all their institutions to the ground. They agreed with that statement, Tucker.

They understand that the system is not working for them, and that's what Bernie has been able to tap into.

CARLSON: So Elizabeth Warren, is obviously vying for that -- the leftward pole in the party, against Bernie. Here's her latest attack on him, and I'm quoting, "Bernie and I met for more than two hours in December 2018 to discuss the 2020 election. Among the topics that came up was what would happen if the Democrats nominate a female candidate? I thought a woman could win, he disagreed."

So essentially, Warren is attacking Sanders as a sexist. Is this an effective attack, do you think?

ENJETI: It's not a sexist attack. And the funny thing about this is they're collapsing under the purity tests that they set for themselves. You're not allowed to impugn or ask the character or why this attack would be forthcoming at this time.

The truth is, Elizabeth Warren seems to be upset that Bernie's and other people were pointing out the obvious truth, that upper middle class white people are really the only people who support her.

And so they have launched this attack against Bernie, and they've used their media allies, because anybody, like you said in your opening, they want to just cry racism and sexism. They don't understand an actual indictment of the economic system, and so this is what they resort to.

CARLSON: I guess the one thing about Bernie that makes me think I don't understand what he is running on is his position on immigration.

So if you are running as an economic populist, and you're saying that we need, you know, Scandinavian style socialism or whatever, which has some support, frankly, you can't really have that position and support open borders and the last time I was reading it, that is what he is arguing.

ENJETI: No, that is what Bernie supports. He supports de facto open borders, abolishing I.C.E., decriminalizing illegal immigration.

The funny thing is, he was on with Lou Dobbs, not even 12 years ago, talking about corporate amnesty. In 2015, he called open borders a Koch Brothers proposal. And in "The New York Times" editorial interview that just came out today, he acknowledged that illegal immigrants pushed down the wages of American workers, but Tucker you can't be a Democrat today, if you don't believe in de facto open borders.

And Bernie who is actual -- who was a real economic populist maybe once in his time had to cave to the woke cultural left on immigration, and if he loses it's going to because of that. That's why.

CARLSON: I totally agree with that. Smart. Saagar, great to see you tonight. Thank you for that.

ENJETI: Thank you, Tucker.

CARLSON: Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not apologizing for breaking ranks with the party, stiffing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee on its dues.

On Friday, she tweeted this, "DCCC made clear that they will blacklist any organization that helps progressive candidates like me. I can choose not to fund that kind of exclusion." She went on. "I regularly and happily fundraise sizable amounts for fellow members. I also believe the Democratic majority should be transformative, which is why I give strategically. It seems fair, no"

Let's see Francis co-hosts "Outnumbered" along with "After the Bell" on Fox Business. She joins us tonight. Seems fair, no, Melissa?

MELISSA FRANCIS, FOX BUSINESS NETWORK HOST: Well, I don't know. I mean, if it were me, the last thing I would ever want to do is screw around with Nancy Pelosi's money. I mean, she is very serious about money that woman, so I would be very concerned about that.

What AOC is saying is basically, the dues are not compulsory. What it is, is they give Congress people an amount. For AOC, it's $250,000.00. For the big deal people who are in big committees on Ways and Means, on other things where you can extort companies for donations, those folks have to give up to a million dollars. That's people like Nancy Pelosi.

AOC has gone out there and she raises small dollar donations from all across the country. But she raised the most money out of anybody in Congress last year. She raised about $5 million.

And what the DCCC says is, you need to kick in of some of what you raise, when you're out there to the party so that we can support candidates who don't have the fundraising power. AOC is not a team player. We've seen that from day one.

The problem is politics, especially in Congress is a team sport. If you don't have the majority, you really don't have any power. The party can come back and punish her by not putting her on committees or by not letting her legislation see the light of day. But she's not going along with the basic rules.

And, you know, she says things like, well, my college loans are still $20,000.00; yet I get a bill for $250,000.00 which is totally disingenuous because she raised $5 million. That money doesn't go for her college loans, that's campaign money, and she won't kick it into the party.

CARLSON: She's exactly what Nancy Pelosi deserves, I think. Melissa, great to see you tonight. Thank you for that.

FRANCIS: It'll be interesting to see what happens. I mean, I'm popping the popcorn. I just want to see how these two work it out.

CARLSON: Oh, it's just wonderful.

FRANCIS: It's good stuff.

CARLSON: Thank you.

FRANCIS: See you later.

CARLSON: Richard Goodstein has been around the Democratic Party for a long time. He is lawyer, former adviser to both Clintons. He joins us tonight.

So obviously, like most Democrats in Washington, I think like most people in -- like most sensible people, you're very worried about the possibility of a Bernie Sanders campaign, the nomination of Bernie Sanders. I think that's -- I think I'm speaking to you, but I think you probably feel that way.

If you're -- if you don't want Bernie Sanders then why would the Democratic Party back a credit card company shill like Joe Biden? If you back a statist like Biden with a long track record of total mediocrity of just like ruling class nonsense, should you be surprised when you get Bernie Sanders in return?

RICHARD GOODSTEIN, FORMER ADVISER TO HILLARY AND BILL CLINTON: So I think the answer to that is Democrats, certainly, a lot of Independents, some Republicans, look at Joe Biden, and the reaction is, uh, maybe somebody could be in the White House, who doesn't say crazy things or do crazy things, or have -- you know, looking at Twitter 24/7 because we're afraid of setting off a war or a conflict or something like that.

So put the credit card stuff aside, I'm happy to talk about it. But the fact is that is how they look at Joe Biden.

CARLSON: Wait, wait. Hold up. Are you really making the case that you should vote for Biden because he doesn't say crazy things, Mr. Clean and Articulate Guy? Is that really the case? Hey, come on.

GOODSTEIN: So you know, Biden, as you know, Tucker, Joe Biden says don't compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative and if he gets the Democratic nomination, he is going to be running against the guy who cannot pronounce the word origins or anonymous or who thinks that Frederick Douglass has a great future.

So yes, I'm prepared to take my chances with Joe Biden if it comes to that.

CARLSON: So, this is a sincere question.


CARLSON: Like, he was literally a shill for MBNA, for the credit card companies based in Delaware. He was one of the driving forces behind the Bankruptcy Bill that shafted a lot of people in the middle class.

In a moment when people are yearning for populist economics, that's your candidate? It's not a small thing. It's a major thing.

GOLDSTEIN: Right. And I think, they -- the public generally looks at Joe Biden as somebody who is going to stand up for the middle American guy, who if he does tax cuts, it's going to be for them, not for the rich.

So that's -- you know, you can call that one --

CARLSON: Was that his position on the Bankruptcy Bill?

GOLDSTEIN: I'm just saying that's -- look, first of all, it was a constituent company. He's not the first senator who stands up for a constituent, but --

CARLSON: Is there anything uglier or is there anything that hurts the middle class more than credit card companies? Sincere question.


CARLSON: What's the average person's credit card debt? No, really.


CARLSON: What actually destroys families more than credit card debt? I can't really think of anything.

GOLDSTEIN: It's the fact that the people in the middle class can't pay for the combination of healthcare, education and housing, based on what they make. That hurts them a lot more than credit card issues.

CARLSON: So taking out 19 percent interest loans is the answer to enrich some bank and this guy is their spokesman? That's really your case? I mean, this is a sincere policy critique, I'm not attacking his personality or his senility or anything like that, in just attacking his policy prescriptions. You really think he is going to get the nomination with that track record? Honestly.

GOLDSTEIN: I think that he gets that track -- he gets the nomination, because Democrats look at him as, again, somebody that they can actually breathe easy and not worry, and the fact that he is beating Trump in states that Trump won -- Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, even Florida -- and Trump beats him nowhere in states that Hillary won.

So Democrats are actually pretty smart. They look at those things. And incidentally, there's a Monmouth poll that came out since this Des Moines Register poll that shows Biden ahead in Iowa.

So I think we're kind of looking at margin of error stuff in that Des Moines Register poll.

CARLSON: Maybe you're right.

GOLDSTEIN: I'm not saying that the Monmouth poll is the end all, but I'm just saying let's not make too much of one Des Moines poll.

CARLSON: We'll see. I think Bernie has got a better shot, unfortunately. Richard, great to see you tonight. Thank you.

GOLDSTEIN: Thank you.

CARLSON: Well, for the 20th year in a row, American soldiers are dying in Afghanistan. Why exactly? How long will this go on? Who is benefiting from it? That's next.

Also, the Queen of England is reacting to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's strange and surprising announcement last week. It's hard to believe we're covering a Royal story, but we are, without shame. Mark Steyn will help us, after the break.


CARLSON: In the aftermath, the days after Qasem Soleimani's death, it looked like Iranians might unite behind their country's regime -- or not. It wasn't clear what was going to happen.

Now, though the government in Tehran is battling a major wave of protests after they admitted to shooting down a civilian aircraft. Chief breaking great news correspondent, Trace Gallagher has the very latest on that. Hey, Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CHANNEL CHIEF BREAKING NEWS CORRESPONDENT:  Tucker, it's day three of angry demonstrations by the Iranian people aimed at the regime. The unrest as you say began when the Iranian government admitted it shot down a Ukrainian commercial jet, but now the anger is more focused on government reform, calling on the Ayatollah and other leaders to step down.

And that has resulted in what appears to be Iranian Police firing live ammunition to disperse the crowd, though, we cannot verify the videos.

President Trump has issued statements supporting the demonstrators and calling on the regime to stop the violence. Meantime, Democrats who heavily criticized the President for the escalation with Iran and some even faulting him for the plane crash have remained largely silent at the rage toward the regime.

Of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates, only Joe Biden and Amy Klobuchar have spoken out in support of the people. Journalist, Yashar Ali, who is of Iranian descent, and still has family there said quoting here, "I've gone through some of the most prominent liberal Twitter accounts and none of them mentioned the Iran protest today."

Meantime, despite President Trump saying that Qasem Soleimani was planning imminent attacks on four of our embassies, Defense Secretary Mark Esper deny seeing that Intelligence.

And now there are reports the President authorized killing Soleimani, seven months ago, but only if Iranian aggression led to the death of an American, which happened in Iraq two weeks ago -- Tucker.

CARLSON: Trace Gallagher, thanks for that.

Well, you know, last week, America avoided a full scale war with Iran, such a war would have been costly and a tragedy for thousands of Americans, but sadly there is another tragedy very much like that ongoing and has been, of course for decades.

Over the weekend, we're sad to tell you, two American servicemen were killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan. One leaves behind a wife and four children; the other was 21 years old, just a toddler when 9/11 happened and American troops first went into that country. These are the first deaths this year in Afghanistan.

Sadly, though, and this is the poignant part, it is not clear what these men died for. Possibly the same thing that more than 2,300 American troops have died for since the Taliban was toppled in 2001. Not much. It hurts to say that, but it appears to be true.

The Afghan War Papers obtained by "The Washington Post" late last year have confirmed these suspicions. Our leaders have no strategy in Afghanistan. Our troops -- and this is their assessment -- have simply been ordered to stay in the country indefinitely until Afghanistan magically turns into Belgium. And it's not clear that will ever happen.

For more than a decade, America has lost ground to the Taliban. According to the Pentagon's own estimates, 40 percent of the money the United States spent gets diverted to the Taliban, or to the pockets of corrupt officials.

Billions of dollars have been blown on things like flying Burger King into the country with a goal of spending the Pentagon's budget allocations, so it is not cut the following year. For the metrics bureaucrats use, that's success.

For soldiers though, it means another deployment, more days and months and years spent away from their families in the path of harm in many cases.

Every year, the money we spend in Afghanistan is enough to make every soldier currently deployed there a millionaire. Imagine if we sent that money back to the communities these soldiers came from. But we're not doing that. Some are coming home in coffins, two more as we just said.

It's obvious what's going on here. We don't need someone in Washington to recognize the tragedy of this unfolding. Anyone who's paid any attention at all knows that it's a tragedy. We need someone brave enough to stop what's happening there for the sake of this country.

Doug Macgregor is a retired U.S. Army Colonel, author of the book, "Margin of Victory." He joins us tonight. This is such a depressing topic, Doug that we're almost hesitant to bring it up. But you can't not. Two more American soldiers killed in Afghanistan.

What is the Pentagon's explanation for why this is continuing?

COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR (RET), U.S. ARMY: Well, I think they go back to the boilerplate reasons that had been used in the past to justify it that we can't leave until there is some position of advantage for this government, which we helped to set up, which as you point out, is hopelessly corrupt. It is very likely to fold almost instantly once we leave.

And we've got to continue to back the police and the military there, which is equally disappointing. These are the reasons that are given. But the truth is, it doesn't make any difference when we leave. It's all going to fall apart.

But the good news is that once we're out, at least we will no longer be subsidizing the corruption, and we will no longer subsidize Afghanistan as the global engine of heroin production, which it has become under our watch.

CARLSON: It's such a distressing series of facts coming out of Afghanistan. It's such an insult to the thousands of Americans who died there. But you've got to kind of wonder why it's being ignored. I can't remember the last time I saw a newscast or a newspaper leading with the question, what are we doing there and how long must we remain? Why is the country's news media ignoring us?

MACGREGOR: I think for a couple of reasons. One is accountability is a dirty word. The press never uses it. I'm sure that the general officers that are identified in the Afghan papers who routinely lied about what was or was not happening in Afghanistan, are very interested in avoiding any accountability.

The policy makers, politicians, like Joe Biden and others that you mentioned just recently, all want to avoid any discussion that would implicate them as co-conspirators in all of this and no one wants to examine where the money went, and how it enriched many people here, not just contractors, but people connected to the system, the system of laundering money through contracts, not just in Afghanistan, but all over the world that are supposed to support the military. There are a lot of reasons nobody wants to talk about this.

CARLSON: Do you think there's any chance in the next year that someone will take decisive action to end this?

MACGREGOR: There is one man, only one man who can take decisive action and end this. His name is Donald Trump. He promised to do that a long time ago. He has disappointed a lot of us because he hasn't.

He can stand up tomorrow and pull us out. But he needs to send everyone out of the Oval Office who keeps telling him if you do that, and something bad happens, it's going to be blamed on you, Mr. President, and that could hurt you.

He needs to say, I don't give a damn, this is wrong. What do I tell the families of these people that just recently were murdered in Afghanistan for no reason at all? For no strategic purpose? For no attainable political or military objective? I'm telling you now I want our troops out. That's why we voted for him. He needs to do it.

CARLSON: You're absolutely right. I think he wants to do it. Let's hope he will. Colonel, thanks so much.

MACGREGOR: Thank you.

CARLSON: You've got to kind of wonder where "The New York Times" is on this question. It is the paper of record, the most important paper in the world.

If you're a longtime watcher of "The New York Times," it can be hard to settle on a low watermark. When exactly that newspaper abandoned its duties as a news gathering operation and become captive to its own neuroses, obsessions, and increasingly lunatic political theories? In other words, when did "The New York Times" become absurd?

Well, theories vary on the subject. Was it when the paper intentionally hid the deaths of millions during Stalin's famines in the 1930s? Was it when its reporters hyped neocon lies to plunge us into a catastrophic occupation of Iraq?

Obviously, these are serious contenders. Here's our vote. Just last week, as you remember, the United States barely avoided war with Iran. This show you may recall, opposed that war on the grounds it wasn't in America's interest. For our troubles for doing that, "The New York Times" attacked us in a piece over the weekend.

The paper denounced the show as immoral for opposing a war in Iran. Doing that, opposing the war, it explained is a, "direct result" brace yourself - - "of racism." Let that sink in.

If you're not for killing Persians says "The New York Times" you're a bigot. That's their position. And to prove it the paper quoted the question that we asked on this show at the time, "Why are we continuing to ignore the decline of our own country in favor of jumping into another quagmire?"

And there you have it said, "The Times," another crazed right winger putting the interest of his own country above more pointless wars in the Middle East. What a racist. Decent people should cheer the bombing of Tehran. That's what they wrote.

Imagine writing a piece like that. Imagine editing that piece and sending it to the printer. Imagine reading that piece in your morning newspaper and continuing to subscribe. And yet, all of that actually happened.

And in a way, thank God that it did happen, because 50 years from now, historians will want you to understand how America's ruling class went completely and utterly insane. And they'll have "The New York Times" to provide a roadmap.

Well, Queen Elizabeth II has come to a decision on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's plans to transition out of the Royal family. We're covering it with Mark Steyn.

Meanwhile, America doesn't have a monarchy just yet, but Chelsea Clinton is proving that being a child of a top politician is almost as lucrative as being a member of the Royal family. We've got details on her finances. Stay tuned.


CARLSON: Well, here's the upside of the whole impeachment drama. We've learned even more about how it really works in our ruling class. It's brought attention to the lucrative jobs that Hunter Biden was able to get because he had an important father.

As CNN and MSNBC and The Washington Post have all informed you repeatedly just so you don't forget, there's "no evidence" that Biden broke the law by taking money from people hoping to influence his father.

And the sad thing is, they're technically right. In America today, there's nothing illegal about paying de facto bribes by handing fake jobs to the unqualified family members of powerful people.

And since it is perfectly legal, naturally, Hunter Biden isn't the only one shamelessly cashing in on his family name -- hardly.

Here's one offender. Chelsea Clinton, certified non-genius. Since 2011, Chelsea Clinton has served on the board of a company called IAC. It is a media and online investment company, a big one.

When she started serving on the Board, she was barely into her 30s, which is just a few years of non-distinguished work experience, but IAC paid her like a seasoned expert.

She got a $50,000.00 a year salary, plus a quarter million dollars in stock. But here's the real payoff. By the end of last year, her stake in IAC had grown to just under $9 million. And the good news for Chelsea is, sitting on the Board of the company hasn't been very demanding.

At the very same time, she was collecting millions from them, she was getting $600,000.00 a year for example, from NBC to produce a handful of forgettable television segments.

She also served on the Board of the Expedia Group which is believed to be paying her another quarter million dollars a year and of course, she's kept busy working as Vice Chair of the Clinton Foundation, writing bad children's books and lecturing America from her perch on Twitter. Read her feed some time. It'll tell you a lot.

She went to Stanford, by the way, unlike you. How much money is that? Well, the average American would have to work five lifetimes to earn the $9 million to Chelsea Clinton collected from IAC for doing nothing, but Chelsea Clinton did it in less than a decade because she had the right last name.

Just in case you're wondering if the system is rigged.

Well, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's announcement last week that they will step away from the British Royal Family shocked everyone, apparently, even the Queen was stunned. Nevertheless, the Royal Family reportedly held a private meeting today and afterwards, the Queen announced that she is "entirely supportive" of her grandson's decision to flee their country and cash in.

But the drama is far from over. According to "The Daily Mail," which is always true, Palace aides fear that Harry and Meghan will give an interview accusing the Royal Family of -- and you could have guessed this -- racism, if they're not happy with how things proceed.

Author and columnist Mark Steyn joins us tonight to explain all of this to we, Americans. Mark Steyn, welcome, and I have to ask you this, apparently Harry was caught on tape talking to Bob Iger, head of Disney, begging him to give his wife Megan Markle voiceover work? Could this be true?

MARK STEYN, AUTHOR AND COLUMNIST: Yes. That is the absolute lowest point of the monarchy in the last hundred years. I think of all the pathetic things that the Duke of Windsor did after he entertained -- abdicated the throne where he entertained wealthy Americans and give them a sort of pseudo glimpse into Royal Life. Nothing like actually touting your wife available for "Lion King 7" or whatever it is.

That said, Tucker, I would love to see any of the useless American media interviewers subject -- to go back to what you were just talking about -- Hunter Biden or Chelsea Clinton, to the kind of interview that Prince Andrew had to sit through at the BBC or in fact the kind of press criticism that the Duchess of Sussex is getting in the papers today.

CARLSON: Good point.

STEYN: You mentioned that the talentless Chelsea Clinton made nine million bucks for doing nothing. Right now, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Mounties are going to have to pick up the half million dollar tab for Harry and Meghan's security costs in Canada.

And this -- and people are already beginning to chafe under that and gripe about that, that would be a rounding error in Chelsea Clinton or Hunter Biden's expenses.

CARLSON: That is a very good point that the British press for all the criticism it's taken over the years including from me from being sensationalists and inaccurate, is actually more vigorous and honest than our own, which tells you a lot.

STEYN: Well, I think actually, I mean, we've heard these. We've sort of tapped dance around some of these issues before. But I do think actually, one of the good things about a monarchy is that a certain percentage of the citizenry always resent it.

So for example, when Kate and William get $128.00 comforter set for their Royal Canadian Air Force plane, the Canadian media moan and whine about it, because they resent these useless parasites getting a $128.00 comforter set.

When you have a Republic, it's a Republic, if you can keep it because people like Hunter Biden and Chelsea Clinton and all the rest of them will try to steal it away from you.

CARLSON: I just -- I just want to repeat it so that this quote will live forever, wherever quotes live, the good part about a monarchy is that a certain percentage of the population will resent it.

STEYN: That keeps them on their toes.

CARLSON: It's so deep and so true. Mark Steyn, thank you for that.

STEYN: Thanks a lot, Tucker.

CARLSON: Well, bail reform in New York City is going pretty well. It just allowed a bank robber to go free and commit -- you're going to be shocked - - another robbery less than a day after being released. Is the City of New York doomed? Will lawmakers finally let police protect the public once more? That's next.


CARLSON: Well, a massive change in New York this year that very few anticipated, bail laws changed. Cash bail has been abolished even for several felony crimes, and not surprisingly, criminals are taking advantage. Case in point.

A man called Gerod Woodbury was arrested last week and charged with robbing four banks since the end of the year. But it turned out to be his lucky day. Thanks to new bail laws, Woodbury was out the next day, no bail.

According to police -- and this is the part you could have guessed -- within a day he had robbed another bank. That would be his fifth bank robbery in just two weeks.

Nicole Malliotakis is a Republican candidate for the Congress of the United States. She's also a New York State Assemblywoman and former candidate for the Mayor of New York City. She joins us tonight.

Nicole, you've joined us a lot to sort of chronicle the decline of the city and the state of New York. This seems like a quantum leap in the wrong direction.

NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, R-N.Y., NY STATE ASSEMBLY: Look, this is an overhaul that no state in America has seen and as a matter of fact, you named just one incident but there are so many more that we can talk about.

On Christmas Eve, you saw an illegal immigrant who was driving unlicensed who killed a mother of three, and he was -- he left the scene. He was caught and they released them back into the street.

We had a number of people assaulted including a police officer, Orthodox Jewish women who were assaulted in an admitted hate crime. We saw a woman in the streets of New York City punched -- had her teeth punched out, all these individuals were released, and two of the three of them were rearrested within the same week.

This is what's happening in the State of New York under a very bad law that needs to be fixed and it needs to be fixed immediately. And we're here in Albany, and we're pushing for that -- those changes.

And you know, the Governor has not really given us a straight answer. He is saying that there's something wrong with it. But he doesn't want to fix it and needs to be fixed immediately to consider, first of all, someone's criminal history, to consider their danger to society, to restore judicial discretion, to protect witnesses, which this bill actually makes you release witness information to defendant within 15 days of the arrest.

All these things need to be addressed, and people need to go to my petition and sign now at

CARLSON: I guess I'm a little bit confused here. I mean, who's the constituency for this? Is it bank robbers? Is it people punch who women in the face and knock their teeth out? I mean, are they the voters that Cuomo is worried about? I mean, who is for this?

MALLIOTAKIS: Well, you know, interestingly enough, you have the Democrats from all levels of government, the city, Mayor de Blasio, who wants to see Rikers Island closed is looking to release people from our jails.

We have people in the Federal level like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, my opponent for Congress; Max Rose, both came out and supported this and supported the closure of Rikers Island and this is all part of the problem. People are afraid --

CARLSON: Wait. Let me stop you there. Max Rose, the purported moderate Member of Congress is in favor of this?

MALLIOTAKIS: You know, and he is not a moderate and I think people are learning that right away. But look, he said he supported the bail reform that Cuomo proposed. He also supports the closure of Rikers Island, and he is joining AOC and the squad and Nancy Pelosi and voting with them regularly.

But besides that, the thing here is that the people of New York know it's wrong. The Democrats know it's wrong. The Governor is saying that something needs to be done and yet we're here now, second week in session, and nobody has done anything to address it, and it's been us, the Republicans that are putting forward legislation for fixes.

And I've got to tell you, if it doesn't get fixed, there's going to be blood on Governor Cuomo hands.

CARLSON: Yes. And people are just going to continue to leave the state, of course, because it's like, why would you live there? Nicole, thanks so much for joining us.


CARLSON: Well, the Democratic primary field isn't the only bastion of leftism being blasted for having the wrong skin color. Today's Oscar nominations are getting the same treatment. We will tell you what happened after the break.


CARLSON: It's the award season in Hollywood and just like in the Democratic Party, everyone is yelling at everyone else about being immoral.

It was just a year ago that Hollywood was telling you about its virtue. It nominated a diverse field for several major awards. This year, some categories are a bit paler, so critics are back to claiming Hollywood is a bigoted place.

When all the best director nominees turned out to be male, the announcer didn't hide her disgust.


ISSA RAE, ACTRESS: And "Parasite" Bang Joon Ho.


RAE: I did it. I did it. Thank you so much. Congratulations to those men.


CARLSON: Armond White is one of the smartest film critics in the country. We're happy to have him on tonight. Mr. White, thanks for joining us tonight. So what do you make of this? It's not really about the movies all of a sudden, is it?

ARMOND WHITE, NATIONAL REVIEW FILM CRITIC: No, it's not about the movies. I'm happy to be here, Tucker. You know, that Issa Rae Performance there, it had nothing to do with anything except her own petulance, and she is catering to the Hollywood fashion.

You know, when you talk about the issue of diversity and skin color in the Oscars, it has nothing to do with that, really, it's really about social engineering, I think, where the media -- the media is social engineering, trying to keep people at odds and separate from each other, and keeping people in a complaining mood.

If the Oscars are really about excellence and quality, then race has nothing to do with it. It's just the media of fomenting separation.

CARLSON: Making us hate each other and causing us to ignore the essential questions which are -- is it good or not? I'm wondering how long can this continue?

WHITE: It can continue as long as the media people think that they can manipulate the public rather than talk about good movies, like the best films of the year, which were like Craig Zahler's "Drives Across Concrete," instead of talking about good movies, get people upset about, oh, our tribe is not getting enough.

It's not about art anymore. It's all about agitation and manipulation of the public.

CARLSON: So you watch films for a living, you review them, you've done it for decades. Is there any correlation between tribe and excellence? Does it matter, any of this stuff in the end?

WHITE: No, it really doesn't matter, not when you have excellent filmmakers like Jonathan Demme and sometimes Steven Spielberg making great movies about black people. That's what matters. It doesn't matter -- tokenism doesn't matter.

Setting quotas in the Academy Awards doesn't matter to anybody except Academy members and media people again, who want to look good and feel good about themselves.

CARLSON: Is anybody finally empowered by this? Like does anybody actually see his or her life improved by this? Does it help anybody?

WHITE: I really -- I really don't think so, and especially not when movies about race like "Harriet" are bad films. That doesn't help anybody except the people who make them who want to feel self-righteous.

CARLSON: This must be depressing for you to do this.

WHITE: It is depressing, but except that when I see a good movie like "Dragged Across Concrete" or even a good film like Tarantino's "once Upon a Time in America."

What's depressing is when crappy movies, bad movies that push poor politics upon the public don't get discussed. That's what bothers me as a critic. I want to talk about the political aspect of movies when they're good and when they're bad.

CARLSON: Right. No, it's such a good point. Thank you for being a rare voice for aesthetics for quality of a good film. Appreciate it. Armond White, great to see you tonight. Thank you.

WHITE: Thank you.

CARLSON: What a time. Amazingly, remarkable how fast it all goes, like life itself.

Tune in every night, 8:00 p.m. to the show that is and will always be the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness and groupthink.

Good night from Los Angeles. We have snuck out to the other coast to see what it's like here. Good in some ways, not so good in others. We will be back tomorrow.

Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2020 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.