Tucker: Can our democracy survive America's leadership class?

close

Video

Tucker: Can our democracy survive America's leadership class?

'Tucker Carlson Tonight' host accuses news media of suppressing potential criminal activity by Bidens

This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight" December 10, 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. October surprise. You've heard that term. It's political slang for
a damaging news story that appears in the final days of a campaign.

This year, we had one. One of the biggest October surprises ever. "The New
York Post" -- that's the oldest daily newspaper in this country --
published a trove of documents showing that members of Joe Biden's family
have been selling access to the former Vice President to a number of
foreign governments including the communist government of China. Now that's
a blockbuster.

But the rest of the media decided to kill it before you could read it.
Social media companies banned their users from sharing "The New York
Post's" reporting. Other news organizations simply ignored it.

On October 22nd, that was 11 days before the presidential election,
National Public Radio, an organization that is literally state media,
funded against your will by your tax dollars, issued the following
statement through its public editor. NPR explained that they would not say
anything negative about the Biden's and here's why, quote, "We don't want
to waste our time on stories that are not really stories and we don't want
to waste the listeners' and readers' time on stories that are just pure
distractions." End quote.

You're probably thinking that is the single dumbest, most dishonest, high-
handed infuriatingly, arrogant thing I have ever heard. But if you feel
that way, obviously, you don't watch CNN.

On that same day, October 22nd, an R.N.C. spokeswoman called Liz Harrington
made the mistake of submitting to an interview with Christiane Amanpour.
Harrington hoped to talk about the Biden's business deals.

Amanpour is, and we're quoting here, "CNN's chief international anchor."
Here's how it went.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: As you know perfectly
well, I'm a journalist and a reporter and I follow the facts.

LIZ HARRINGTON, R.N.C. SPOKESWOMAN: Yes, we know that.

AMANPOUR: And there has never been any issues in terms of corruption. Now,
let me ask you this. Yesterday, the F.B.I. --

HARRINGTON: Wait, wait. How do you know that?

AMANPOUR: I'm talking about reporting, and any evidence. I'm talking to you
now to ask you a question about what the F.B.I.'s --

HARRINGTON: Okay, I would love that you guys would start doing that digging
and start doing that verification.

AMANPOUR: No, we are not going to do your work for you. I want to ask you a
question. The F.B.I. --

HARRINGTON: That's a journalist's job.

AMANPOUR: Contrary --

HARRINGTON: That's a journalist's job.

AMANPOUR: Contrary to what President --

HARRINGTON: It's a journalist's job to find out if this is verified.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: "As you know perfectly well, I am a journalist and a reporter,"
says Christiane Amanpour, who of course, is neither of those things, and
never has been.

Christiane Amanpour is a celebrity script reader, a halfwit whose self-
esteem far outpaces her accomplishments. She is also it turns out the
personal flack for the Biden family international finance corporation.
That's not in her Twitter bio, but it's pretty obvious.

There have never been any issues of corruption with the Bidens, Amanpour
announced, as if she hadn't just been confronted with something. And so it
went just like that across the entire American news media until the
presidential election.

Now, six weeks later, it is finally safe to speak freely, and so the truth
is coming out.

We now know "The New York Post" was right all along and so was poor Liz
Harrington of the R.N.C. Yesterday, millions of Americans learned, some for
the very first time that the Biden family has indeed been deeply enmeshed
in a series of sleazy international business deals that undercut America's
core interests.

We learned that there's an active Federal criminal investigation into Joe
Biden's son, Hunter, for that very reason. What's interesting is how we
found this out.

The media didn't tell us, neither did the Justice Department. Hunter Biden
has far better connections than say Roger Stone. Hunter Biden was allowed
to tell his own story. He wasn't rousted from bed at 5:00 a.m. by dozens of
armed paramilitaries, his arrest in his boxer shorts carried live on CNN.

No, no, no. He is a prominent Democrat. So he is spared those humiliations.

Instead, the Biden-Harris transition team broke the news in the form of a
bizarre press release that informed us with a straight face that Joe Biden
was quote, "Deeply proud of his boy, Hunter," who by the way may have had
some minor tax trouble that he will clear up soon the minute his account
returns from Cabo, but no big deal. Happy Holidays.

Okay, guys, thanks for the heads up.

But actually, and you may have guessed this part, it turns out there's
more. A report in POLITICO today reveals that Joe Biden's younger brother,
Jimmy, is involved, too. This was a family business, keep in mind.

Jimmy Biden is also under Federal criminal investigation for corruption in
the hospital business. We don't know more than that, and we should stress
that fast Jimmy Biden is presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a
court of law by a jury of his peers.

Jimmy is not a felon yet. We will keep you updated.

For the few who are able to follow the details of the Biden's business
deals back in October, who actually read "The New York Post" series or
watched the show, none of this comes as a complete surprise. At the time,
we talked to Tony Bobulinski about what he saw.

Bobulinski was a business partner of the Biden's as they tried to wheedle
money from companies connected to Communist China. Tony Bobulinski by
contrast, was a legitimate international businessman. And at some point, he
began to wonder what the hell is going on.

In our interview, Bobulinski described one of his meetings with fast Jimmy
Biden. Bobulinski wanted to know why the Biden family was so brazen, so
open about peddling Joe's influence to oligarchs and enemies of the United
States. That a risk? Here is how Jimmy Biden responded.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TONY BOBULINSKI, FORMER BUSINESS AFFILIATE OF HUNTER BIDEN: And I remember
looking at Jim Biden and saying, "How are you guys getting away with this?
Like, aren't you concerned?" And he certainly looked at me and he laughed a
little bit and said, "Plausible deniability."

CARLSON: He said that out loud.

BOBULINSKI: Yes, he said it directly to me, one-on-one in a cabana at the
Peninsula Hotel.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: "Plausible deniability." When your business partner tells you that
your business strategy rests on plausible deniability, that's not
reassuring. And it certainly wasn't reassuring to Tony Bobulinski. Why
would it be?

An independent media wouldn't be fooled by plausible deniability either.
They demand answers. What exactly were you doing? Let's see the documents.
But they didn't.

When "The New York Post" published the outlines of this story, the media
raced to find its own plausible deniability, some reason, any reason not to
report the story.

Any reporter who broke rank and decided to state the facts was quickly
disciplined and brought to heel. POLITICO's Jake Sherman, for example,
apologized in public for the crime of discussing "The New York Post" story
after Twitter suspended him for posting it, for posting facts, quote, "I
tweeted a link to 'The New York Post' story right after it dropped
yesterday morning. I immediately reached out to the Biden Campaign to see
if they had any answer. I wish I had given the story a closer read before I
tweeted it."

In other words, bless me, CNN for I have sinned.

Over at CBS News, a kid called Bo Erickson didn't get the memo on the
boundaries of this new journalism. So he tried to get Joe Biden himself to
respond to the story and here's how it went.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BO ERICKSON, CBS NEWS REPORTER: Mr. Biden, what is your response to "The
New York Post" story about your son, sir?

JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENT ELECT OF THE UNITED STATES: I know you're that
good. I have no response. It's another smear campaign. It's right up your
alley. They are the questions you always ask.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Yes, you're a smear merchant, says Joe Biden to a guy he has never
seen before and doesn't recognize. Everyone looks the same to Joe Biden.
It's all kind of a blur.

But he attacked Bo Erickson of CBS News as a liar and a propagandist, and
what's so interesting is that none of Bo Erickson's colleagues in the news
media came to his defense.

In fact, several former flaks for Barack Obama mocked him on social media
and again, his colleagues stayed silent. Now, we're being told to pretend
that none of this ever happened. It's all down the memory hole.

In an article published today in "The Daily Beast," probably the single
worst example of bad journalism on the internet, we learned that, quote,
"Evidence of the larger Hunter Biden probe was apparent in the markings on
a series of documents that were made public, but went largely unnoticed in
the days leading up to the November election."

Largely unnoticed. Oh, of course, a middle of a presidential campaign,
front page story about one of the candidates doing business with our main
global enemy, but somehow, nobody noticed. Just weird. Unaccountable. How
did that happen?

One group who did notice were the professional liars in our so-called Intel
community, the ones that work hand in glove with so-called journalists in
our media.

Shortly after "The New York Post" story, ran a number of these people, all-
star propagandists like Jim Clapper and John Brennan, people who have lied
in public under oath and never been punished for it, they denounced "The
New York Post" series as Soviet style disinformation.

The stories they said had, quote, "All the classic earmarks of a Russian
information operation." They didn't explain what that meant, but they
didn't need to, the media class ate it up.

Like the seals they are, they clapped and barked in unison, Russia, Russia,
Russia.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He is receiving and is now regurgitating, repeating and
disseminating disinformation that he knows to be fabricated and supplied by
a foreign intelligence service, and despite the warning, he is still doing
it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You have said this entire thing is so obviously a
Russian plot. It is to me and I was never even an Ambassador to the Russian
Federation. Tell me why it's so obviously a Russian plot to you.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Rudy basically functioning as a Russian asset by
pushing Russian disinformation.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: CNN reported on Friday, the
U.S. authorities are seeing if those e-mails we just talked about are
connected to an ongoing Russian disinformation effort.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Yes, it's just obviously a Russian plot. Obviously. Obviously,
none of these people should ever appear on television again, though,
doubtless they will.

Some are saying tonight we need to go farther to find out what actually
happened. There are calls tonight for a new special prosecutor to
investigate what we have learned so far, about the Biden family's business
dealings abroad.

Now, let's be honest, as much as we are anxious to find out the truth and
we think it's important, too, a special prosecutor is something that no one
in this country should be eager to see, no matter what side you're on.

We've seen over the past four years what a special prosecutor can due to
the normal functioning of a government. Open-ended investigations of
politicians are hallmarks of corrupt regimes and dictatorships. And most
Americans are skeptical of those kinds of probes and rightly so.

But unless our media start doing its job and telling us what our
politicians are up to, the Justice Department and Bill Barr may have no
choice, and if they do move forward with a special prosecutor, they will
have one unlikely supporter: Joe Biden himself.

Last year, Joe Biden went on the record confirming that he would not
interfere with any Justice Department investigation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: Look, I would not direct my Justice Department like this President
does. I'd let them make their independent judgment. I would not dictate who
should be prosecuted or who should be exonerated.

That's not the role of the President of the United States.

Follow the law. Let the Justice Department make the judgment as to whether
or not someone should be prosecuted. Period.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: We'll see if he lives up to that. We should note, if the current
President was, quote, "Directing the Justice Department for political
ends," he didn't do a very effective job of it.

Robert Mueller spent millions of dollars spent years, ruined many lives,
purely as a favor to people who could not believe that Donald Trump really
beat Hillary Clinton. This country might not survive another investigation
like that.

On the other hand, you've got to wonder how long a democracy can survive a
leadership class like the one we have now.

Sean Davis has followed this story from the very first day. He is the co-
founder of "The Federalist" and he joins us tonight with the latest. Sean,
great to see you.

SEAN DAVIS, CO-FOUNDER, "THE FEDERALIST:" Thanks for having me.

CARLSON: I'll spare you the congratulations on how you've been vindicated
in your suspicions, some of us have, what do we know now? What has been
confirmed that was written off just a few weeks ago as Russian
disinformation?

DAVIS: Well, I think the most important thing that's been confirmed is that
the Biden family is being criminally investigated by Federal authorities
for a whole host of issues: tax evasion, money laundering, potentially
fraud, racketeering, back in October, when "The New York Post" and other
outlets including the one I work for, published that.

We were suppressed. We were censored. Big Tech tried to shut us down. And,
you know, it's important that we've learned the truth about what's actually
going on with Hunter Biden, but we've actually learned a really important
lesson about how irreparably corrupt our media is.

For the purposes of stealing the election, they censored news they didn't
like to favor their preferred candidate, and now they're pretending like it
all never happened. Like it's somehow news to them that Hunter Biden is
under Federal investigation.

We've known this for weeks. We've known for months because we reported it
back in May that James Biden had been accused of fraud and racketeering,
that the F.B.I. had raided the offices of a company in which he is an
investor back in January, and yet the corrupt media for the sole purpose of
getting their guy elected, suppressed and censored that information for
months.

And to me, that's almost as big a crime as whatever Hunter or Jimmy B did.

CARLSON: Very little attention has been paid to Jimmy Biden, a former
nightclub owner who has been drafting off his brother's success for 50
years. They kind of dismissed it as attacks on the former Vice President's
drug addicted son.

But the Jimmy Biden piece of this seems significant as well, to me.

DAVIS: It is because it was James Biden who was involved in these same
deals. Tony Bobulinski made clear that when they had their deal with, I
think it was CEFC in China, he was taking his 10 percent or 20 percent.

Now, I don't think James Biden is known as being a super successful
international businessman, and certainly nobody will accuse Hunter Biden of
that. They were selling the Biden family name to the highest bidder. And
that's one thing when the Vice President, your dad and your brother is out
of office, but now, he is the incoming President, and they've made it known
to the entire world that the Biden family is for sale.

That is a huge problem, especially after we spent four years being told
that there was a Russian agent in the White House because Trump made a joke
about Hillary's e-mails.

CARLSON: Sean Davis of "The Federalist" great to see you tonight. Thank
you.

DAVIS: Thank you.

CARLSON: Glenn Greenwald is an independent journalist. He left his former
job over this story. He resigned in protest because he wasn't allowed to
report on it. He joins us tonight with reaction.

Glenn, thanks so much for coming on. You could make the argument that these
charges aren't a big deal and that we shouldn't care.

I mean, people could make, I think, a legitimate argument. You can't
pretend this didn't happen, and yet, it was just last month that you were
attacked personally. A lot of people were attacked even for bringing it up.
What's your reaction now that you've been vindicated?

GLENN GREENWALD, JOURNALIST: Well, I still think we need to recognize what
a historic crime and disgrace this is, not only in journalism, but as soon
as these documents became known.

The operatives in the intelligence community, the C.I.A., John Brennan,
James Clapper, Michael Hayden, all the standard professional liars, issued
a letter claiming that this material was the hallmark of Russian
information -- disinformation, actually, even though they had no basis for
thinking that and that gave the media permission to lie to the public
continuously, and Silicon Valley to censor these materials.

So not only did the public not become aware of them, they were lied to, not
only by claiming that Russia was involved, even though there's zero
evidence that they were and no one thinks that, but also by calling
disinformation.

The implication was these documents were forgeries when now we know that
the criminal investigation that's been ongoing, it is about the very
transactions that these documents covered.

This is an incredible crime by the corporate media who lie to the public
and bury information before an election, but also again, domestic
interference on the part of intelligence agencies in order to manipulate
the outcome of our election.

CARLSON: It was only 10 or 15 years ago that big news organizations like
"The New York Times," NBC, and CNN reported on our own intelligence
services with some level of skepticism because they are powerful
institutions and you need to keep them in check. That's our job.

Why don't they anymore, do you think?

GREENWALD: Well, I think that the intelligence services in the Trump era
became one of the leading bulwarks against the Trump movement. And so the
media partnered with them based on the premise that the Trump presidency
was dangerous, which is fine if the media really wants to believe that the
Trump presidency poses a danger. That's their prerogative.

But what they don't have the right to do is to become disinformation agents
and the C.I.A. and all of those guys in the intelligence community were
open about the fact that they wanted Donald Trump to lose and that they
wanted to sabotage his presidency.

Remember, Chuck Schumer told Rachel Maddow in early June 2017 that the
C.I.A. was going to sabotage Trump's presidency if he continued to
criticize them. And that was the story of the last four years, a union
between the intelligence agencies that fed lies to the media that
mindlessly repeated it for their own interests.

CARLSON: You tangled years ago with our intelligence agencies. You've been
saying this for a long time. A lot of people didn't believe you. My
apologies for that. You turned out to be right. Glenn Greenwald, great to
see you.

GREENWALD: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: We're learning tonight that the Chinese government isn't simply
targeting little known politicians like Eric Swalwell early in their
careers and maybe sleeping with them against their will.

They are also targeting countries, little known countries, places like
Canada, our largest trading partner, the nation with which we share the
longest border: Canada.

We will tell you the result of our investigation into this after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: Well, here's a story that's hard to believe, but it's real.
Canada's Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau invited China's People's Liberation
Army to send its troops to Canada for a special cold weather training at a
base in Ontario. That training was cancelled after China kidnapped two of
Canada's citizens and held them for years.

A top aide to the Prime Minister then complained about the cancellation to
the Department of Defense in Canada, quote, "Canada does not want to be the
partner that is reducing normal bilateral interactions." In other words,
it's immoral for us not to train Chinese soldiers, probably to kill us at
some point.

Now, that's not the first time Justin Trudeau has sided with the communist
government of China. A few years back, he marveled at how the Central
Committee managed to keep the trains running on time. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUSTIN TRUDEAU, CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER: There's a level of admiration I
actually have for China, because their basic dictatorship is allowing them
to actually turn the economy around on a dime.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Ezra Levant is the founder of Rebel News in Canada. He broke this
story. It's an amazing story and he joins us tonight. Ezra, thanks so much
for coming on.

I read this and my first reaction was, this cannot be true. Your Prime
Minister offered to train Chinese troops in Canada. Why would he do that?

EZRA LEVANT, FOUNDER, REBEL NEWS-CANADA: It's a shock to Canadians, too,
that cold weather warfare that you're referring to was just one of 18
different joint projects the Canadian Armed Forces had with the People's
Liberation Army in 2019 alone.

Canada is training one and two-star Chinese generals in our war colleges.
We are training lieutenants and majors, commanders. We are sending
Canadians over to China. We're bringing Chinese. I think they're not just
soldiers, I think they are spies as well, to Canada, and I don't know a
single person in this country who knew about it but it has been happening
and we found out about it really by accident when the government sent me
freedom of information documents and forgot to black them out. Or maybe
frankly, someone inside the government wanted to blow the whistle on this
incredibly upside down relationship.

In those same memos you're talking about, Trudeau's office was supporting
China and condemning the Trump administration. It was upside down. It was
inverted morality. It's seeping all the way into our bureaucracy, our
diplomacy, and they're trying to get the military on side, too.

CARLSON: I mean, with respect, we're Americans, so our concern is the
United States. Canada is our biggest trading partner. We have the closest
relationship with Canada of any country, obviously, in the world. This
seems like an obvious threat to American national security. Does the Trump
administration believe that, do you think?

LEVANT: Well, in fact, in these memos, you can see that the Trump
administration warned Canada that this winter warfare training would
transfer knowledge to China that could be used. Now, they don't explain
would it be used to take on Uighurs in Xinjiang, Tibetans to fight India in
the Himalayas, or even to fight us?

And when the military -- the Canadian military said our American allies, or
our allies are concerned about this, Trudeau's staff pushed back and said,
is it just the Trump administration? Or is anyone else worried about it?

So there's an antipathy towards America that seeps through all these secret
documents. And the overarching goal is to let China's President Xi Jinping
save face.

I want to tell you, though, Tucker, that is not the view shared by
grassroots Canadians. Ever since China kidnapped those two civilians two
years ago today, actually, Canadian public opinion has hardened against
China. And the last Pew poll I saw actually says that Canadians are more
hostile to China than Americans are.

CARLSON: You have every reason to be. Ezra, thank you so much, and
congratulations on Rebel News. I know you take a lot of abuse up in Canada,
but you do a great job. We appreciate it. Thank you.

LEVANT: Thank you.

CARLSON: Well, the residents of new CHAZ, that's a new country within
Portland, Oregon have a big announcement. They made it tonight. Autonomous
zones will never be the same again. We're going to go to our CHAZ
correspondent after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: Well, we've got another new country tonight growing like a fatty
tumor within the body of the City of Portland, Oregon, an autonomous zone.
It made a big announcement today. The people of this autonomous zone are
sovereign citizens, they say, they're not going anywhere.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice over): Tense small fires and messages written in
the street inside the blockade. Demonstrators inside are holding their
ground for a second night in North Portland.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice over): All of this over a home that was foreclosed
on, those living here evicted and not wanting to leave. According to court
documents, they were given notice of eviction in November of 2018 and asked
to appear in court the following day. They remained at the property and
several people have joined in an occupation in protest of the eviction.

This week, it grew when deputies moved in to serve an eviction notice.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice over): But they were unsuccessful when
demonstrators there pushed police out.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice over): The group has weapons, stockpiles and
firearms.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We've got to stop this gentrification and we are going
to reclaim the land.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Yes, they've got weapons and borders. Not a big deal. Just another
new country, sprouting up like a psilocybin mushroom.

Jason Rantz is a radio show host in Seattle. He's our CHAZ correspondent.
He joins us for an update on this new independent nation. Hey, Jason.

JASON RANTZ, SEATTLE RADIO SHOW HOST: Hello, Portland's best and brightest
converge. This is night number three on the Red House Autonomous Zone
selflessly sort of putting on hold their careers as amateur Instagram
models and tattoo test dummies, getting arrested for people who apparently
don't actually think they have to follow the law. And I don't mean that
literally in the sense of the autonomous zone.

Last week, you and I had the conversation about Sovereign Citizens. These
are a fringe group of folks who believe that somehow they have divine right
to the land and they don't actually have to follow any of the laws of the
U.S. government.

Well, it turns out the Kinney family has a history that would indicate they
might subscribe to the exact same position. So they're in this position
with the home being foreclosed because of William Kinney, when he was 17
years old, the son, he got into some legal trouble. He got into a car
accident that ended up killing someone. He was hit with manslaughter
charges.

And in all of the court documents since then, they seem to be claiming they
are Sovereign Citizens, and they don't actually have to follow any of the
laws.

CARLSON: No one is trying to foist a mandatory gun buyback on this
sovereign nation, I noticed, which tells you a lot. Jason Rantz, great to
see you.

RANTZ: Chelsea Handler though is involved now, so let's be clear, things
could change now.

CARLSON: That's true. It's a dynamic country. Good to see you.

RANTZ: Good to see you.

CARLSON: Well, Democrats in Congress, well, not forming a new country did
make their own big announcement today. "Love is love," Nancy Pelosi
declared, if you're in love with the Chinese spy, who are we to judge?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): But I don't have any concern about Mr. Swalwell.
There are those in the Congress who believe, and I am among them that we
should be seeing what influenced the Chinese. I've been fighting them as
you know, for over 30 years.

I think we should make sure that everybody knows what they are being
subjected to. But I don't know that it means that we have to background
check every intern who comes into the Capitol.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Yes, you can't do a background check on every Chinese spy you have
sex with. If you did a full background on every one of your Chinese spy
mistresses, you wouldn't have time to subvert the Constitution. It's just a
ridiculous idea.

But if you so much as look -- and these are the standards -- at a Russian,
well, Nancy Pelosi's brain will start skipping like a record player.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PELOSI: What do the Russians have on Donald Trump? Politically, personally
or financially?

What is Putin blackmailing President Trump with? Personally politically or
financially?

So again, I ask the question, what do the Russians have on Donald Trump
politically, personally, or financially?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: We don't know what the Chinese government has on Congressman Eric
Swalwell politically, personally, or financially. He tells us it's
classified. It's very weird.

Claudia Tenney is a former Member of Congress. She worked with Eric
Swalwell there. She is running again in upstate New York. We're happy to
have her on tonight.

Claudia Tenney, thanks so much for coming on. So it is nothing personal ...

CLAUDIA TENNEY (R), CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE OF NEW YORK: Thank you.

CARLSON: ... but do you think that people who have sexual relationships
with Chinese spies should retain their seats on the House Intel Committee?

TENNEY: Well, not in the case of Eric Swalwell. Obviously, this is beyond a
personal mistake. You could say Katie Hill, famously resigned for a
personal reason, but not a national security threat, certainly not engaging
in a thropple with or any other kind of relationship with Chinese spies or
Dianne Feinstein's driver who is a Chinese spy for over 20 years.

So, you know, this situation without Eric Swalwell, I think is
unforgivable. I think he should be removed from the Intelligence Committee
immediately. I don't see how we can possibly justify keeping him on there
and Nancy Pelosi persists.

CARLSON: It seems like a very clear call to me, and we just needed someone
from the outside who had served on the inside for a little perspective of
it. Thank you for that.

I have to ask you about your congressional race in New York. It's still
undecided more than a month after the election, how would you characterize
the state of play as of right now?

TENNEY: Well, right now, we're -- the judge has ruled that we have to go
back and to recount some of the disputed ballots and we're also going to
count ballots that were not put into the canvas because they were removed
by the Boards of Election.

This is probably going to favor us, I would say, but at the same time, it's
now what -- we're going into the sixth week and this should have been done
a long time ago, and we should have looked at these, but these are mistakes
by the Boards of Election, who by the way, have been overwhelmed,
understaffed, under resourced to be able to take on 10 times more absentee
ballots because we have an unsolicited online database where anyone, a
third party, you know, all the Republican and the Democrat, and every other
party has access to all these voters, and they can order these without the
request of a voter.

So, you know, people want to say, well, that's not really happening, but
we've had numerous people come to us, call us, contest and say, geez, an
absentee ballot suddenly appeared in my mail, and I didn't order it and we
are now trying to figure out how did that mysteriously appear in their
mail.

And a lot of these people are regular voters. One gentleman who I don't
even know contacted me on Facebook and said, I voted myself in person my
entire life and all of a sudden a ballot appeared. And so I think that this
is just not necessarily widespread, but we've certainly heard dozens of
cases.

CARLSON: Boy, I cannot get over how restrained you are in the way you
describe this race. It's admirable, I guess, but if anybody has cause to
say I got shafted. It seems like it's you, so we're definitely rooting for
you and hope the truth will come out.

TENNEY: Yes, well yes, certainly we don't like to hear about ballots being
discovered in drawers months -- a month after Election Day and not knowing
where they're going.

I'm hoping that we prevail on this. I think the judge is going to, you
know, make a decision on our objections. Certainly, it seems that these are
coming up late.

CARLSON: Yes, it ought to be the word. Claudia Tenney, good luck. Thank
you.

TENNEY: Thank you.

CARLSON: So here's a question you may not have considered, of all the
countries on the planet, which country is the least racist? Well, our next
guest looked at the data, approaches it as a question of social science and
came up with a definitive answer and beware, if you're a highly paid
diversity consultant, you might want to leave the room because she just
undermined your reason for getting paid. That's straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: Well, if you know anything about this show, it's said that we are
big fans, apostles really have the book, the tome, "White Fragility" and of
its deeply accomplished author, Ms. Robin DiAngelo.

For example, when Robin DiAngelo told "The New York Times" in July that
capitalism is quote, "dependent on inequality," we couldn't get enough of
it. And when she wrote in her book, quote, "Whiteness has psychological
advantages that translate into material returns." We thought, well, it
sounds a little racist, but it's so well written.

We took three steps back and asked ourselves, wait, why is this creepy old
white lady pretending to be the savior of African-Americans? We didn't know
the answer, but we gave her a pass.

Tonight, though, it's time to have one of those difficult conversations
that Robin DiAngelo was always calling for, and here's why.

Documents obtained by "The Washington Free Beacon" on Campus Reform showed
that this very same Robin DiAngelo made $12,750.00 to headline a diversity
event in October at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

Here's the thing, another speaker at the very same event, an actual black
person called Austin Channing Brown, made just $7,500.00 for the very same
job. Ooh, systemic racism, anyone?

Of course, and prepare yourself for a hot glass of irony here, the title of
the event was, quote, "Exposing Racism and Inequities." It's so good. It's
got to be a big misunderstanding. And if Robin DiAngelo wants to explain
it, of course, she is welcome on this show, anytime.

Again to use language she can understand, it is time for a difficult
conversation. We're looking forward to it. We just hope for "White
Fragility," it doesn't prevent her from accepting.

Now the same people who tell us endlessly that the United States is racist
are the same ones encouraging people from non-white countries to come here
as soon as possible. That's kind of weird. Why is that? Well, here's our
possible future Ambassador to China, for example. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: Do you think that people who support President Trump and his
immigration policies are racist?

PETE BUTTIGIEG (D), FORMER MAYOR OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA: Anyone who
supports this is supporting racism.

Our healthcare system is burdened by racism.

We know that our housing is burdened by racism.

Our schools are burdened by racism.

Yes, the uniform is burdened by racism. But it goes far beyond that.

It is a matter of concern for every American that we dismantle systemic
racism before it ends the American project in our lifetime.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Yes, so there's the former McKinsey consultant lecturing us about
how our country which he has done nothing but degrade is a terrible place
and we are the reason it is, but it does raise the academic question. How
racist is America exactly? Can it be measured?

Well, Kathleen Brush thought it could be measured. She tried to measure it.
She's the author of "Racism and Anti-Racism in the World before and after
1945." She joins us with the results of her study on this question.

Kathleen Brush, thanks for coming on. So how racist is the United States?

KATHLEEN BRUSH, AUTHOR: Thanks for having me.

CARLSON: Of course.

BRUSH: America is one of the leading anti-racist nations. And you're right,
it is the reason I wrote my book is because of people like Pete Buttigieg.

I have been studying racism around the world for more than a decade,
including visiting 114 nations. I know what systemic racism looks like. It
is opposite to the United States.

Now, the year 1945 is actually pivotal to understanding discrimination.
Because before it, people didn't see discrimination, they saw ordered
societies.

Well, in 1945, FDR parlayed American victory in World War II to get global
powers to agree to end the colonial subjugation of Africans, Asians and
Europeans, and to get all nations to agree to abolish discrimination or to
end discrimination.

Well, come the early 1970s, America becomes the first nation to have an
anti-racist system of government. Meanwhile, the rest of the nations, they
didn't honor their commitments, they just continued right on discriminating
as they had before.

And so this is the reason in the 21st Century, you can see select
populations that still experience slavery, arbitrary detention,
statelessness or just garden variety privileged and non-privileged people.

Now, there's lots of examples in my book. But what I'd like to do is I'd
like to cement America's anti-racist bona fides because they are so strong.
African-Americans are the most prosperous, educated black population in the
world.

America's Latino GDP is the highest GDP of any Latin American nation. And
that includes Brazil with three and a half times the population. Asian-
Americans are the most educated and prosperous racial group in America.
Their incomes are 25 percent higher than whites on average. For Indian-
Americans, household income is 60 percent higher.

Now there is no indigenous population that has been cordoned to ensure fair
compensation for their land, in addition to receiving wealth transfers,
protected freedoms and other concessions than Native Americans.

The year 1964, the year of our Civil Rights Act of 1964, America's
population was 87 percent white. Today it is 60 percent non-Hispanic white.
For one comparison point, let's look at Liberia which has a population that
is 100 percent black, because you can only be a citizen of Liberia if you
are black.

Now there was a global survey that answered the question: how many people
do not want somebody of another race? Sorry. How many people of another
race do not want -- how many people do not want a person of another race as
their neighbor? The answer was in the United States, zero to five percent.
In Iran and Nigeria, it was 30 to 40 percent. In France it was 20 to 30
percent.

CARLSON: Let me just summarize it, and you're dealing with facts and facts
immediately cause the systemic racism lie to evaporate into steam, and I
hope that our readers will arm themselves with the facts in your book,
because again, they're true.

Kathleen Brush, I appreciate your coming on tonight. Thank you.

Well, Democrats have finally admitted that one of their party's leaders and
this is sad, but is senile. It's not who you think it is. We'll tell you
who it is after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: "New Yorker" Magazine is out today with an article that claims
Dianne Feinstein, that's the senior senator from California is senile. No
word yet on what the "New Yorker" thinks of Joe Biden.

Marc Siegel is a FOX News medical contributor here to assess that claim.
Doctor, thanks for coming on. A lot of older people in politics, Dianne
Feinstein is very old. Do you think it's fair to say she's senile?

DR. MARC SIEGEL, FOX NEWS MEDICAL CONTRIBUTOR: Well, she is 87, Tucker, and
this was a devastating piece in the "New Yorker." How old is it to be to be
a pilot? To be a surgeon, right? To be a U.S. Senator? To be a President?
How old?

Well, Strom Thurmond went to the age of 100, didn't he, but he wasn't doing
too well towards the end of 2003.

Dianne Feinstein, there's a lot of things in this article deeply
disturbing. You know, when she was grilling Jack Dorsey at a Judicial
Committee meeting recently, she attacked him on this tweet, President
Trump's tweet, and she asked him about it. She heard his answer, then
repeated it exactly the same over again, as though she didn't remember that
she had even asked it.

And she's had multiple conversations, according to this article with Chuck
Schumer -- Senator Schumer, who's been telling her you're not really
winning anymore, and apparently, she doesn't remember the conversations and
he has to come back and ask her all over again.

Now, I'm not her doctor, and I liked her kindness at the judicial hearings,
but they also sent an aide there to keep an eye on her.

You know, the problem is that over the age of 85, the risk of dementia or
cognitive impairment is about 40 percent, and over the age of 75, it's
about 20 percent. Speaking of someone who is 78, Joe Biden this week,
Tucker, this week, he announced his new choice for H.H.S. Secretary, right,
except he called him Health and Education Secretary, Xavier Becerra, Health
and Education Secretary?

Tucker, do you remember, of course, you'll remember that in 1979, they
changed Health and Education and Welfare over to Health and Human Services
to spin out another Department of Education.

So I'm wondering, did Joe Biden in that moment forget? I mean, he has a
history of two aneurysms repaired, atrial fibrillation that can lead to
some cognitive decline. Are these just gaffes? Health and Education?

I don't know Tucker, but you know, something. I think it bears thinking
about an investigating. There's plenty of people over the age of 85, over
the age of 75 that are completely with it. But when you start to see signs
like this, you have to pay attention whether it's a pilot or a senator or
you know what I mean, Tucker.

CARLSON: I think that's right. I think for Biden, it's always 1979, he
wants to get those hostages back from Iran. Dr. Siegel, thank you.

Sean Hannity, next. Have a great night.


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.