This is a rush transcript from “Tucker Carlson Tonight," July 24, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS HOST: Good evening and welcome to TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT. Chicago is the third biggest city in the United States, millions of people live there.
For 150 years, it was the hub of America's manufacturing economy. If any one place can credibly claim to have built this country, it is Chicago, so we should care what happens there.
Unfortunately, what is happening now in Chicago is almost all bad. In fact, it's a disaster. Thanks to the corruption of local officials, Chicago is bankrupt. The city is so deeply in debt, billions and billions, tens of billions of dollars in debt that no economist believes it can ever pay its bills.
Taxpayers know this. They understand they will be punished for the crimes of their leaders, so they're fleeing the city in record numbers. Those who've stayed behind now worry about getting killed.
Just this week, so far, 106 people have been shot in Chicago. Just an hour after last night's show for example, six people were shot in one drive-by shooting on the city's Southside. Two of them died.
And it's not just happening in poor neighborhoods in Chicago. Here's surveillance video of gunman opening fire downtown. Two people were hit by bullets, one was killed.
Among many others murdered in Chicago have been many, many children. This man's first grader for example, was shot in the head.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To see my daughter on the table with a gunshot wound to the forehead.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): Seven-year-old Natalia Wallace was shot in the head and killed over the weekend in Chicago as she played outside with her siblings.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Visualize the seven-year-old shot bleeding to death while the family is there.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): Also, among the innocent victims, police say 14-year-old Fernando Jones was shot and killed by gang members on the Fourth of July.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: It's awful. Chicago wasn't always like this. And if you're from there, you know that very well. Chicago is a beautiful place.
There are a lot of reasons it isn't anymore, but near the top of that list is a woman called Lori Lightfoot. She's the mayor.
Like a lot of big city mayors, Lightfoot is incompetent. She has no idea what she is doing. You wouldn't let her plan your spring break. She'd send you to Wuhan by accident.
But what makes Lori Lightfoot unusual is the remarkably aggressive way that she lies. Lightfoot says things that are so implausible they could be part of a comedy routine, but she is not joking. She expects you to believe every word of it.
Here she is, for example, blaming violence in Chicago on of all people, Republicans.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAYOR LORI LIGHTFOOT (D-IL), CHICAGO: Why are we engaged in such violence? Because there's too many damn guns on our streets. And why is that so? Because the Republican leadership for way too long, including this President refuses to even have a conversation about commonsense gun reform.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: See. It's the Republicans' fault that Chicago is now more dangerous than many third world countries. That makes sense.
The only problem is, there aren't really any Republicans in Chicago. Donald Trump got 12 percent of the vote there. Of the 50 aldermen on Chicago City Council right now, not a single one of them is a Republican, not one.
So if you blame Republicans for what's happening in say, West Texas, The Villages, you might have a point. But in Chicago, it's absurd.
Even Lori Lightfoot seems to know that that excuse just won't work, it's too stupid. So she's moved on to a new excuse.
You know why Chicago is circling the drain right now? You know why all those children are getting murdered? Because of Christopher Columbus. Yes. An Italian navigator who never got within a thousand miles of the loop and who by the way died more than 500 years ago, he did it. It's Columbus's fault.
This morning, Lightfoot ordered the city to take down two Christopher Columbus statues, one in Little Italy and one in Grant Park. That'll fix the problem. You can let your kids play outside now.
Confusing on one level though, in case you're wondering why Lightfoot chose Christopher Columbus to blame for her city's decline, why not Marco Polo? Why not Vasco da Gama? Well, there's a reason. Her constituents demanded it. Not voters are taxpayers, there was never any groundswell of opposition to Christopher Columbus in Chicago. He's not on the list of present concerns for most people there. No.
Lightfoot's actual constituents wanted Columbus taken down. Her actual constituents are Antifa. Last week, the mob descended on Grant Park to rip down the Columbus statue
[VIDEO CLIP PLAYS]
CARLSON: Almost 50 police officers were injured in the riot you just saw, but Lori Lightfoot didn't care. They're not her voters.
Lightfoot cares about her base -- the looters, the destroyers, the angry Marxist rich kids with the spray paint. When they tell her to act, Lori Lightfoot acts immediately.
The problem for the rest of us is the mobs will not stop with Christopher Columbus. He is just the beginning. If they can tear down statues whenever they feel like it, how long before they tear down buildings? How long do they tear down homes? How long before they tear down human beings? Probably not very long.
Violence rarely remains symbolic. It accelerates until good people rise up to stop it.
If Lori Lightfoot and progressive mayors like her around the country -- and there are many -- are allowed to divert attention from their own failures by bowing to the mob and destroying public property, this will not end with Christopher Columbus. It will get much worse, and it will get more dangerous.
You may not think tearing down a statue is a big deal until you are the next designated Christopher Columbus.
Bob Woodson has studied American cities for decades. He founded the Woodson Center. We're honored to have him on tonight. Mr. Woodson, thanks so much for coming on.
ROBERT WOODSON, FOUNDER, WOODSON CENTER: Good to be here, Tucker.
CARLSON: I see a theme here and it's not just Lori Lightfoot, it is many big city mayors and even smaller city mayors. As the problems they face become more complex and harder to solve, their solutions seem to become more frivolous and disconnected from reality. Have you noticed this?
WOODSON: Absolutely. And what they're doing is falsely claiming that the failures of the last 60 years -- and most urban centers all over the country have been run by Liberal Democrats, many of them veterans of the Civil Rights movement, who moved from politics -- I mean, from the Civil Rights to run these cities, they also had to spend about $22 trillion on poverty money in these cities, and as a consequence, all of these inequities that they are talking about have been done on their watch.
And as conditions -- spending went up as conditions deteriorated, but rather than address the reality of what they do is they point to institutional racism or factors that exempts them from any responsibility for taking care of these problems.
And now the white left is coming in and exploiting this disparity and using it to really decimate this country and the collateral damage and these are the lives of poor blacks in these cities because what the left is doing is vilifying the police as agents of white supremacy, and the more they are vilified, the less aggressive they are about enforcing laws, the more the murder rate rises.
What low income blacks are facing is not bigotry or institutional racism, it is systematic neglect and abandonment and treasonous behavior. Bigotry is not their biggest challenge. It's treason.
What is happening in cities -- there is a difference, Tucker, between a burglar who steals what's in your house and an embezzler that steals everything you've accumulated over a lifetime.
And what black America is being stolen is their history of how they resisted and overcame oppression and that's being wiped away.
Chicago used to be the black Wall Street, in the segregation in 1929, there were 731 black owned businesses. They were a hundred million in real estate assets at the time when segregation was the law.
And so you can't blame institutional racism or systematic racism or legacy of slavery for their failures. These are -- this has occurred precisely as the Civil Rights leaders became leaders of the cities.
CARLSON: So Lori Lightfoot would tell you, and again, it's not just Lori Lightfoot by a mile, it is so -- it's virtually every one of these mayors that she cares so deeply about the poorest people in her city. Should we believe that?
WOODSON: Absolutely not. I mean, and I believe Tucker that the salvation of this country may sound odd are going to be that sleeping giant. When low income blacks wake up and realize that they've been bamboozled and hustled and scammed by people like Lori Lightfoot and others, they are going to be realize that they must adjust to the enemy within because the left derives this moral authority as being the legitimate representatives of the poor.
A metaphor for what occurred in Oregon, when a black police officer was talking to two young black demonstrators, and a white demonstrator interposed herself in between with the police -- and this -- so that's a metaphor for how whites are exploiting that.
But one day there's evidence that that sleeping giant, that low income leaders around the country are recognizing this as in Washington, an 11- year-old boy was killed, Tucker on Fourth of July and the people demonstrated internally and said, "No justice no sleep," and they picketed and made noise until the killers were turned in.
Another group, the Alliance of Concerned Men in Washington, D.C., a group of healing agents within the highest crime area that's going now 65 days without a single violent incident because they adjust their problems by mobilizing the internal resources, the resilience, the self determination of people inside.
And so we've demonstrated that islands of peace can be created if you stop looking externally and stop listening to the left and instead listening to the people and give them the power to be agents of their own uplift and stop these hustlers from exploiting them like Lori Lightfoot.
CARLSON: And it is about the power of the Democratic Party. That's all it's about. It's all it's ever about, of course. Mr. Woodson, thank you. Great to see you tonight. Thank you.
WOODSON: Thank you.
CARLSON: Well, Anthony Fauci has demanded that you wear a mask. He wants you to back off from the people you know and love. He wants you to stop shaking hands.
Not all of Dr. Fauci's advice comports with known science. Dave Portnoy runs Barstool Sports asked the President recently about Anthony Fauci in an interview with the White House. Here's how it went.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVE PORTNOY, FOUNDER, BARSTOOL SPORTS: So Fauci is on my X list because every time he talks and says the company is -- the country should stay inside, my stocks tanked, so I don't like that aspect of it.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Yes, well, he'd like to see it closed up for a couple of years. But that's okay. Because I'm President. So I say well, I appreciate your opinion. Now, give me another opinion. Somebody please?
PORTNOY: Overrule.
TRUMP: Yes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: So Fauci took a day off from giving advice to the powerful and lecturing the nation yesterday. He was busy throwing out the first pitch at the Nationals game, the baseball game in Washington.
But once Dr. Fauci thought he was off camera, the mask came off, literally. You want to see hypocrisy in action? Look at this. Here's Dr. Fauci sitting within six feet of other people to a most mostly empty stadium without wearing his mask. Ooh.
He was immediately called on this, but rather than copping to it and being honest, he acted like so many people in power do and scorned anyone criticizing him. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: I think this is sort of mischievous with this thing going around. I had my mask around my chin, I had taken it down. I was totally dehydrated, and I was drinking water, trying to re rehydrate myself.
And by the way, I was negative COVID literally the day before. So, I guess people want to make a biggie of that. I wear a mask all the time when I'm outside, to pull it down to take some sips of water and put it back up again. I guess if people want to make something about that, they can.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Oh, if people want to make a thing of it. If people want to make a fetish of masks. People are worried about COVID. Lighten up, America. Oh, wait, no, I'm sorry. You're Dr. Anthony Fauci. You're one of the reasons our economy is ground to a halt. You're one of the reasons that people are as unhappy as they've ever been.
Weren't you just four minutes ago lecturing us about how we're immoral if we don't wear a mask, but when you do it, it's totally cool because you've got good excuses? You were thirsty.
No, you were laughing with your friends. We bet that Dr. Fauci won't have to pay the thousand dollar fine that the District of Columbia is now imposing on citizens who don't wear masks in public.
Here's the Mayor of Washington, air quotes are on that word, Muriel Bowser announcing the policy. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAYOR MURIEL BOWSER (D-WA), DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: I am also today signing a new mayor's order on mask, and basically what it says is if you leave home, you should wear a mask.
This means if you're waiting for a bus, you must have on a mask. If you are ordering food at a restaurant you must have on a mask. If you're sitting in a cubicle in an open office, you must have on a mask.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Until the day Joe Biden wins the presidential election, you Mr. and Mrs. America must wear masks unless of course you're the people who wrote the mask ordinance in D.C., the politicians, they exempted themselves.
Oh, because they've suspended the rules of science because they're in power and you're not, so shut up and obey until Biden wins. That's the rule, masks for thee, but not for me.
Well, a secretive Pentagon unit that has been studying unidentified flying objects for decades is now divulging some of its secrets, and it turns out some of them are a big deal.
A retired naval aviator who has seen unidentified flying objects joins us next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: While much of the media have mocked the existence of unidentified flying objects, the U.S. Pentagon has been studying the subject for quite a long time, and apparently will soon release some of its findings, which remain classified.
According to a new report in "The New York Times," the U.S. government may have physical evidence of -- and we're quoting -- "off world vehicles not made on this Earth." Huh? The government has also released footage of UFO sightings including a 2004 encounter recorded from an advanced Navy fighter jet.
Commander David Fravor is a retired naval aviator who once saw something he could not explain, that science can't explain. We're honored to have him on tonight. Mr. Fravor, thanks so much for coming on.
So tell us if you think this is being misinterpreted. According to "The New York Times," the U.S. government has physical evidence of some sort of vehicle made not on this Earth. Is it what it sounds like?
DAVID FRAVOR (RET), NAVAL AVIATOR: Well, that sounds that way to meet, Tucker. I just - you know, I never want to speculate what the government truly has. But I would say there's stuff out there.
I mean, the four of us that chased the Tic-Tac in 2004 have attested to it multiple times that what we saw exceeded anything that we had in our inventory, far superior to the airplanes that we were flying in at the time and they were brand new. So, I would say yes, there's something out there. And hopefully the government does have stuff.
CARLSON: So we spoke before about this, and you suggested that the object you saw that you chased, the Tic-Tac behaved in ways that challenged your understanding of Aeronautics, of Physics, and that you didn't think it was likely that that object belonged to a foreign military.
Do you think the U.S. government has concluded that this is not Russia, China or some other country?
FRAVOR: I'm pretty sure that that, you know, just by some of the phone calls that we've gotten, some of the people that we have talked to in the government, that they are unaware of what this is. I think that ties directly with the East Coast siding with the gimbal video, and I'd be willing to say just because I'm in contact with a lot of these people, that there are more incidents that are starting to come out, that people are starting to report inside the governments of things that they've seen and I think you're seeing it from people in the past, because it always had that taboo to come out and talk about these things.
You're now finding people from the past that are saying, hey, I saw this, I just never told reporter, but when I did, I was told not to say anything.
CARLSON: Yes.
FRAVOR: So I think, since 2017, the world is starting to change, because of the publicity, because of the attention of the Senate and the Congress, because of people like Marco Rubio and the Intel Committee of telling the DoD, hey, I want a report. I think you're starting to see more and more of that.
And I would say, if the government does have stuff, and I don't know what they have, but if they do, I would think that, you know, there's probably stuff -- if you go to Roswell, it was 73 years ago, if something did happen, because there's a lot of speculation that there was something other than a weather balloon, where is all of that at?
CARLSON: Yes.
FRAVOR: I mean, if it's just by odds, something would be here.
CARLSON: So that raises the question, why all the secrecy? I mean, clearly, the U.S. government has lied to the public for maybe 73 years. Why do you think?
FRAVOR: Well, you know, if we go back to like Project Bluebook, and go, you know, it was done -- it really did two things. One, it investigated occurrences and sightings that people saw. The other one was, it primarily was sent out to debunk -- to prove that it wasn't or to make excuses of why it wasn't.
I don't know why. I think some of it was trying to capture that technology. But if something lands in your front yard, there's no reason to deny that it existed or, you know, or for the government to cover it up.
Because, you know, if it's not collected by some means that's going to question our national security of our offensive or defensive capabilities then why would you hide it? That just baffles me, just like our incident. Why wasn't it thoroughly investigated at the time for something that literally could penetrate air spaces, and they did nothing. I mean, there was nothing done until really about 2009.
CARLSON: I mean, there's a story here that a lot of us can't wait to see. Finally do you feel vindicated?
FRAVOR: I never -- you could say that, but I've never -- you know, most of my fellow aviators that know the group of us, we were never like chastised or I mean, you get ribbed, but it was never like you're crazy or anything like that.
CARLSON: Right.
FRAVOR: But I know there are people that do have that fear of coming out saying you know that it's going to ruin their career and for me, it just wasn't it. It was never the case with us.
CARLSON: Well, that's the beauty of being a naval aviator. People take you seriously by definition. Mr. Fravor, thanks so much.
FRAVOR: Well, I try and be sober and believable for you, Tucker.
CARLSON: And you are, and we appreciate it. Thank you.
FRAVOR: Thank you.
CARLSON: Well, another amazing and heartening news, "The Washington Post" is settling a quarter billion dollar lawsuit brought by a teenager they slandered and attacked. An amazing story, one of the few wins for decency recently and of course, we'll bring it to you in all its detail after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Well, every day, a small group of highly privileged people seem to get more powerful and increase the crackdown on the country, but occasionally, there are reversals of fortune that we want to call attention to. Today was a day like.
"The Washington Post" has settled a quarter billion dollar defamation suit brought by Nicholas Sandmann. He is the high school kid from Covington Catholic in Kentucky who was vilified by the media, you'll remember. They selectively edited a video of him.
They made it sound like he was harassing an American Indian man. In fact, the full video showed the exact opposite of that. We reached out to "The Washington Post" today, its media reporter, Erik Wemple and we asked him to come on and explain "The Washington Post's" role in this. He was of course, too cowardly to do that. Loathsome.
But it wasn't just "The Washington Post," by the way that attacked these kids for the crime of -- we're not sure what the crime was.
Here was Don Lemon over on CNN describing the encounter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: The MAGA hat carries a certain connotation that provokes a conditioned reaction from many people, especially for marginalized people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Got that? So international TV star, Don Lemon wants you to know that if someone disagrees with his politics, you're allowed to harass them, maybe even beat them up. Who knows?
Sandmann sued for that, too, and CNN settled a $275 million case earlier this year. But it would be a mistake to say it was just "The Washington Post" and just CNN, it was NBC, too.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: Do feel from this experience that you owe anybody an apology? Do you see your own fault?
You looked at that video and thought about how it felt from the others' perspective. In other words, there were a lot of you, a handful of the others.
There is something aggressive about standing there.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Every single day, these people bully Americans, yell at them, berate them, attack them, force them from their jobs. The country is cowering in silence, thanks to people like this, but occasionally somebody fights back and even more occasionally, someone fights back and wins and that's what Nicholas Sandmann did today.
Robby Soave is the author of "Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump." He was the first to expose the smear against Sandmann and his classmates, and so we thought it would be worth having him back tonight.
Robby, thanks so much for coming on. What's your reaction to this since you've been on this since the first day?
ROBBY SOAVE, ASSOCIATE EDITOR, REASON: I'm really glad that there has been recognition from these couple journalistic institutions that have been sued that they did get it wrong.
I'm glad, you know Sandmann is getting a measure of justice. What I hope is that it will send a message -- now I'm not -- I'm not confident this message will be received, but my hope would be that this would send a message to others in the media that you have to practice the craft of journalism.
You have to be careful about stories if a clip, a video like this emerges involving non-important people, nonpublic people, and it's not clear what's going on, and you just race to smear someone where you're not aware of the facts of the situation as a racist.
And that's wrong. That goes against norms of journalism -- to seek the full story, or to even just consider the newsworthiness of like, this wasn't newsworthy. There was no reason to do this story.
So I want that to set in. That we don't need to always do a story about someone wore a bad Halloween costume five years ago or sent a homophobic tweet when they were 14 or something and in Sandmann's case, there really was no wrongdoing whatsoever.
But the other kind of -- the drive to cancel or smear or attack normal regular people who aren't famous or important or -- and that really needs to change. So I hope this could be a step in that direction. I'm not confident it will be.
CARLSON: I hope it is. Here, the richest man in the world, Jeff Bezos, his personal newspaper attacking high school kids. For what? So it's nice to see this, I will say.
Robby, great to see you. Thank you.
We should say that now that "The Washington Post" nor Sandmann disclosed the value of today's settlement. Jeff Bezos can afford all of it, of course. Jason Whitlock writes for and is part owner of a fantastic site called, Outkick. He joins us tonight.
Jason, you've been in journalism for a long time and so you know, the power of it, you can really hurt people and a lot of the time, that's fine.
But shouldn't news organizations be careful before training the bazooka on people much weaker than them? That's what bothers me here.
JASON WHITLOCK, https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__OUTKICK.COM&d=DwICAg&c=cnx1hdOQtepEQkpermZGwQ&r=tgDLkJy54PfJyWJwul3dKe54qGxqO7b7d5vjo7RcZds&m=hfeFOTDDvsIfTc_rB1er2ci4KC6IlMg8fhY8HUiXEtE&s=dMo4XDmJc7WvZiJMDGpp4JlTH8hpnlDTWkY6r6E_K7I&e= : We are supposed to be the voice of the marginalized and the weak and nothing fits that profile more than a 17- year-old high school student.
CARLSON: Yes.
WHITLOCK: But Tucker, I think as you alluded to early on and Don Lemon's comment proves this is all about Donald Trump. This is about that hat that the kid was wearing. And we have justified in the media anything that's against Trump is a positive, and the ends justify the means.
Anything we can do to stop Trump because he may be an evil dictator, he may be this or that. It's such an exploitation and a misuse and misunderstanding or just outright lying to the public.
The President of the United States just doesn't have the power that we keep ascribing to him. The legislative branch, the judicial branch can limit the President. We have term limits.
This isn't the next Joseph Stalin. This isn't Fidel Castro who ruled for 30 some odd years. This is a guy who can rule for four years, maybe, eight years at most, and then he's done. And he can only do what our legislative branch and our judicial branch allow him to do.
It's crazy. We have been so dumbed down by social media, we don't even have a fundamental understanding of how our country operates.
CARLSON: That is such a smart point. But I mean, I always give people a pass at being mad at politicians, because I think you have a right to give the finger to the people in power. And that is, as you noted, that is our job in the media is to hold them accountable and I actually believe that.
But you would think somewhere along the line, someone say, okay, there's a difference between a politician, in this case, Trump and the people who voted for him. He has power, they don't. No one says that.
WHITLOCK: But also -- I'm just sorry, the ends don't justify the means when you're a journalist. We're held to a higher standard.
We've been having a conversation in America for the last 10 years, seven years about, hey, police, we've got to hold them to a higher standard. They take an oath, blah, blah, blah.
As journalists, we take an unstated oath about a search for truth and our duty to inform the public so they can make informed decisions.
We are intentionally misleading the public. President Trump, President Obama, Bush, Reagan -- all -- their powers are limited. And there's only so long they can hold power in this country. We're not Cuba. We're not the old Soviet Union.
CARLSON: That's right.
WHITLOCK: These evil dictators that they think are going to just take over and Trump is going to just be this totalitarian that just runs this country down. No, he's not. Four years, eight years. It's a short time.
We have survived so much worse, if you consider, let's take their argument that Trump is the worst thing that ever happened to the presidency. This country has survived slavery. This country has survived a Civil War. This country has survived rulership from the United Kingdom and Great Britain.
We've survived -- the limits of rights and all -- we can survive four or eight years of a President that Antifa doesn't like or the media doesn't like. They are whipping us into a frenzy and have whipped all of us into a fit, if we don't destroy Trump and anybody who supports him, America cannot continue. Are you kidding me? That's a joke.
CARLSON: Nicely put, as always. Jason Whitlock of Outkick, thank you so much.
WHITLOCK: Thank you.
CARLSON: So California and New York, whatever you think of these states, do have some of the best restaurants in the world. Now those states are terrorizing restaurant owners who are trying to reopen. We've got details on that.
Plus, Dr. Marc Siegel interviewed the President the other day. Parts of that interview were everywhere, but perhaps no one is more entranced than the fashion industry. We will explain why. Just ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Earlier this week, we sent our doctor, Dr. Marc Siegel to Washington to interview the President at the White House.
Now, Dr. Siegel typically is against viruses. That's his job. But the interview itself went viral. It is now shaping the American fashion industry. Here's proof.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: It was 30 to 35 questions, the first questions are very easy. The last questions are much more difficult. Like a memory question. It's like, you'll go, person, woman, man, camera, TV. So they'd say, could you repeat that? So I said, yes, so it's person, woman, man, camera, TV. Okay, that's very good.
We have to have somebody that sharp. If this person isn't sharp because I can tell you President Xi is sharp. President Putin is sharp. Erdogan is sharp. You don't have any non-sharp people that you're dealing with and we can have somebody that's not a hundred percent.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: Person, woman, man, camera, TV -- repeat after us. You'll be able to because soon those five words will be everywhere. T shirts, baby clothing, hoodies, totes, mugs, facemasks. "Vogue" had a whole piece on this.
Dr. Marc Siegel started this craze, the pet rock of 2020 and we're honored to have him on tonight to recount his victory. Doctor, great to see you tonight.
DR. MARC SIEGEL, FOX NEWS MEDICAL CONTRIBUTOR: Tucker, great to see you. Now, if you think I'm a celebrity, I actually waited online to have a flat tire fixed today.
And last week when you were going trout fishing, I don't think the fish said, oh, there's Tucker Carlson's hook, either avoiding it or going towards it. I don't think -- but you know, what I think is special. Being in the White House was special and we were treated with kindness and respect.
We were tested for COVID-19. We were given masks, and during the interview itself, I'll tell you what I did. I returned some of the respect by not interrupting the President. That's been asked of me a lot. Why didn't you interrupt him on the cognitive question?
Well, I was brought up not to interrupt people, just as you don't interrupt me here on the show -- it's a sign of respect. And I would do that for any President of any party and any world leader. I don't believe in interrupting.
Now, he talked about something that I believe in --
CARLSON: Also, so let me interrupt you for the first time ever. It's not simply a sign of respect not to interrupt someone, it's also a way to hear them talk, like you're interviewing the person. It's about them, listen to them, which you did, and I'm glad.
SIEGEL: That's so true, and he was talking about something that's probably from the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test, where you draw a clock and you draw a cube. And then they asked you to identify an animal and as you pointed out last night, some anchors on TV can't get that animal right.
Then he talked about words -- word choices and how he remembered them. And I thought, this is a teaching moment. This is going to lead to a discussion of cognition, of thinking of people over the age of 70 years old.
Can they run for President? Can they pilot a plane? Can they be a Chef? Can they still be a surgeon? Can they be teachers if the schools come back? An open discussion, right?
Instead, no, we got back to the usual political quagmire. We had late night comedians mocking it. Now, we have shirts. And again, the President comes under attack. I was so disappointed with that. And I felt that the political division ruled instead of the question, how do you assess cognition and function in the elderly? Really important.
So I have a prescription for America this weekend. For once, let's not attack each other for the weekend based on our positions and try to destroy each other. Let's go for two words like were shown me at the White House, Tucker, respect and kindness. Respect and kindness, Tucker.
CARLSON: Something to meditate on over the weekend. Doctor, thank you very much for that.
SIEGEL: Thank you for interrupting me, Tucker.
CARLSON: And those are our producers. For the first time.
Well, "The Drudge Report" was for decades, a mainstay of conservative media. It has changed dramatically, you may have noticed if you've been there recently. So what happened, exactly? Matt Drudge's biographer joins us after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: So states all of a sudden have an awful lot of power they didn't used to have, thanks to the coronavirus pandemic. In New York and California, authorities are using those powers to police restaurant menus - - that seems like a wise use of their time.
Cheese sticks, calamari, chicken wings no longer constitute dinner options according to authorities in the State of California. In New York, you can't merely have a bag of chips with your beer, they don't think that's good enough, and suddenly they have the power to decide.
Fox's chief breaking news correspondent, Trace Gallagher has all the details on this bizarre story -- Trace.
TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CHIEF BREAKING NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Tucker. So in California, you can't drink alcohol at a restaurant without eating, but you have to eat what the state says is a meal. For example, fried cheese sticks and fried calamari checks in at about 2,000 calories. That's not a meal. A 500-calorie salad, that's a meal. Chicken breast, yes. Chicken wings, no. Tacos, yes, Rolled tacos, no. Pizza bites, egg rolls, pot stickers, onion rings and French fries are also non-compliant.
And if you're confused, the California Health Department offers this bit of clarity quoting, "Multiple courses are not required to constitute a meal. In order for the patron to be served a meal, there should be a sufficient quantity that it would constitute a main course in a multiple course dining experience." See, all cleared up.
If you think California is bizarre, try New York. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. ANDREW CUOMO (D-NY): ... bar, you had to have food available -- soups, sandwiches, et cetera. More than hor d'oeuvres, chicken wings. You had to have some substantive food.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GALLAGHER: So a beer and a bag of chips or a bowl of nuts is not substantive, but a beer and a bowl of soup -- that'll keep you sober.
And it's interesting because last week, bars in New York started serving Cuomo chips with every drink order, and a Cuomo spokesperson told "The New York Post" the chips did comply with the food requirement, now, chips are out and bar owners feel like they're being unfairly singled out -- Tucker.
CARLSON: They were soggy chips, I bet. Trace Gallagher, have the best weekend.
GALLAGHER: You, too.
CARLSON: So for decades, Matt Drudge is one of the most influential figures in conservative journalism. His self-titled "Drudge Report" broke news and set priorities in digital media.
Republican presidential candidates made wooing the famously secretive Drudge a high priority and for several of them, including Donald Trump, it paid off big.
But if you've seen "The Drudge Report" recently, you know that it has changed dramatically, 180 degrees. Matt Drudge is now firmly a man of the progressive left. At times his site is indistinguishable from "The Daily Beast" or any other woke propaganda outlets posing as a news company.
So many of Drudge's longtime readers have fled to "Revolver News" which has begun to fill the void he has left, but the question remains what happened to Matt Drudge?
It's a very interesting story and tonight we're joined but with one of a very few people who might be able to tell it.
Matthew Lysiak is Matt Drudge's biographer. He is a longtime reporter. He is the author of the book, "The Drudge Revolution." It is set for release next week. He joins us tonight.
Matt, thanks so much for coming on. So you have done what reporters talked about for 20 years of doing, which is write the definitive biography of Matt Drudge. So you're in a position to at least guess why has Drudge changed so dramatically, do you think?
MATTHEW LYSIAK, MATT DRUDGE'S BIOGRAPHER: Yes, thank you for having me, Tucker. I think one of the mistakes a lot of people have when they're trying to analyze Matt Drudge is the try looking at him through a political sphere.
The reality is Matt -- his history has shown that his loyalty isn't any political party or ideas, it's to his website. For example, I have this great part of my book where in 2008 Andrew Breitbart at the time was the editor of "The Drudge Report." And he comes absolutely convinced that Matt is trying to steer coverage in a favorable way to then Senator Barack Obama.
So he at some point contacts Matt and says, you know, what's up? Matt responds by telling him, a Brock Obama presidency might be terrible for the country, but it sure would be great for my website.
And you know, to a large extent, Matt would write because I can't think of more than a handful of people who did better under the Obama presidency than Matt Drudge. His net wealth has been estimated at over $100 million.
So you know, I hear all this chatter about why Matt did, his political stance and I think it is just Matt Drudge being Matt Drudge and he is working about his bonds in Milan than anything else and whether the speculation works out is up for debate.
CARLSON: Yes, it's a remarkable change. So there were reports and I think you chronicled this in your book that earlier in this administration, Drudge had become close to the President's son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Are they still close do you know?
Unfortunately, we have lost the shot from Matthew Lysiak, unfortunately.
But it's a really interesting book and it's a very interesting story. What happened to Matt Drudge?
Well, earlier this hour, we told you about "The Washington Post," which has just settled a quarter billion dollar suit after they slandered a high school student, and we told you we're hoping to speak to someone from "The Washington Post" and the person to speak to, of course, is a character called Erik Wemple who covers media there and covers for the owner of the paper, the world's richest man, Jeff Bezos.
He didn't come. He was afraid to come on the show. He has been here before. We want to put a picture of that on the screen because it's one of our favorite pictures ever, and we want to reiterate our invitation to Mr. Wemple. If you ever want to defend your newspaper or your owner, there's always room for you on our set. We hope you will take us up on that.
We're out of time tonight, unfortunately. But we hope you have the best weekend with the ones you love. That's always the payoff.
See you Monday.
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.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox