This is a rush transcript of "Tucker Carlson Tonight" on March 10, 2022. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.


Last night, we told you that the Biden administration is funding a number of secret bio labs in Ukraine, labs that are conducting experiments on highly dangerous pathogens. Now, that's not a story as we told you, we wanted to do. In fact, we didn't think it could be true. It's so over the top and bizarre.

And in any case, the administration had repeatedly and very aggressively denied that they were doing anything like this, and then they attacked anyone who has questions about it as a tool of Russia.

We foolishly assumed that in this one instance, they might be telling the truth. And then out of nowhere, the Biden official in charge of Ukraine confirmed the story.

Toria Nuland, the Undersecretary of State casually mentioned in a Senate hearing on Tuesday that actually, yes, the Biden administration does fund a series of bio labs in Ukraine, and whatever is in these labs is so dangerous that she is deeply concerned these materials will fall into the hands of the Russian military.

Now, that struck us as a shocking development. Once again, not for the first time what had seemed like a nutty conspiracy theory turned out to be true.

Toria Nuland's testimony raised at least two immediate questions. What exactly are these labs doing with our money and in our name? And why didn't the Biden administration secure the contents of these labs before the Russians invaded?

So far, we haven't received any answer at all to the second question. We think we're the only ones who have even asked it. Whoever decided to leave deadly biological materials sitting in Ukraine as Russian troops massed on the border has not yet been identified. We hope that person will be identified and we will keep asking.

As for the first question, what exactly is going on in these labs? We've gotten several answers, all of them insulting.

Initially, the administration claimed the labs were designed to help Ukrainians fight tuberculosis, as well as various livestock diseases. That's what officials told Members of Congress. It didn't seem plausible, and in fact, it's not plausible.

And then after our show last night, the Pentagon released what it non- ironically called a fact sheet designed to make the bio lab story seem small and ridiculous.

Virtually every news organization in America with almost no exceptions, repeated the administration's claim verbatim, with no verification of any kind. "Foreign Policy" Magazine ran this version of it, which is identical to many other versions you saw if you followed the news today, quote: "Fact check: DoD has worked with Ukraine to eliminate (in all caps) bio weapons left behind by the Soviet Union since 2005," said a senior U.S. Defense Intelligence official. "But these are not (again in all caps), weapons labs as Russians falsely claim," the official said.

"The Washington Post" assured us of the same thing, so did countless other so-called news organization. Okay, so no big deal. This is not actually a story. The Pentagon has been doing it since 2005 working with Ukrainians to quote, "eliminate biological weapons" left behind by the Soviets. That makes sense.

But wait, 2005 was 17 years ago. How long does it take to eliminate Soviet bioweapons? Seventeen years seems like a long time. If you had 17 years and ample funding from Congress, you could probably remove and catalogue every grain of sand on Waikiki Beach. And yet somehow, over that same period, 17 years, the Pentagon has not finished removing test tubes from Soviet era freezers.

How does that work exactly? How heavy are these bio weapons? Do we lack the transportation capacity to get them out of Ukraine and bury them in the desert in Nevada? When was the Pentagon planning to finish this important job? In 20 years? In 50 years?

Those all seem like very obvious questions, but not a single reporter asked any of those questions.

Meanwhile, over at CNN, perhaps where the first explanation didn't make sense, once you thought about it, offered a new alibi.

According to CNN's website, the labs in Ukraine exist to quote "secure old Soviet weapons." Okay, secure, not eliminate, which raises the question, what does it mean to secure a bio weapon? And again, why has it taken 17 years to do it?

And by the way, if these are really just old Soviet weapons, why is Toria Nuland so worried they'll wind up in the hands of old Soviets who presumably already have these very same weapons? Probably don't need more.

It is absurd when you think about it, so don't think about it. And that was the point of today's coverage of the Biden administration's secret Ukrainian bio labs. Stop thinking about it, start accepting what they tell you at face value, otherwise you are an agent of Russia.

Here is CNN.


KATIE POLGLASE, CNN INVESTIGATIVE RESEARCHER: The foreboding music, biohazard warnings.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Speaking foreign language.

POLGLASE: This Russian state media footage from 2015 claims to show America running facilities in Ukraine and Georgia that cause deadly outbreaks of disease and killed local livestock.

This story is false. But that does not stop it continuing to circulate, evolving from biological hazards to biological weapons, and becoming a key part of Russia's disinformation campaign justifying the invasion of Ukraine.

The claims were debunked several years ago, when in 2020, the United States issued a statement to quote "set the record straight," explaining the facilities are in fact for vaccine development, and to report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats.


CARLSON: "These claims were debunked several years ago. These facilities work on vaccines and reporting outbreaks." And then they play Russian propaganda. The point is, anyone who has questions about this is repeating Russian propaganda. Got it?

And the truth is, we are not interested in what Russian propaganda say about these Ukrainian vital labs. We're not interested in what the propaganda that CNN say about these bio labs. We're Americans. So we would like in fact, we think we have a right to demand the Biden administration to answer simple questions, straightforward questions.

These are obviously questions important enough to make Toria Nuland very nervous, but why? We don't know. They won't answer. So instead, we did some digging of ourselves to see what we could find. Here's what we came up with.

The day after Russia invaded Ukraine, Robert Pope, the man who heads the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program at DoD sat for an interview with the website Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Pope was the man in charge of securing or eliminating Soviet era bio weapons, so he knows a lot about the subject, maybe more than anyone else.

But it turns out that not all of these Soviet weapons are being destroyed or even secured, and Pope acknowledged that in the interview, which apparently CNN didn't see.

According to his interview, Pope said the labs, quote: "May hold pathogen strains leftover from the Soviet bioweapons program preserved in freezers for research purposes." Pope said that, quote, "Scientists being scientists, it wouldn't surprise me if some of these strain collections in some of these laboratories still have pathogen strains that go all the way back to the origins of that program," end quote.

In other words, because as Pope put it, scientists being scientists, they don't want to destroy all the bio weapons. Instead, they're using them to conduct new bio weapons research. That's what he said, and not just on strains leftover from the Soviet Union. The second lie. In fact, the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv has acknowledged joint American and Ukrainian research on other pathogens such as hemorrhagic fever virus.

Apparently, there is a lot of this going on in Ukraine funded by the United States. Did you know that? Why Ukraine? We don't know. We can only guess.

We do know that in 2010, the U.S. government helped fund construction of a brand new Level Three Bio Lab in Odessa, Ukraine. The purpose of that lab was not to eliminate or secure aging Soviet weapons. No, that lab was designed for research on new and quote, "especially dangerous pathogens" in Ukraine, the poorest country in Europe. Again, not a hotbed of biomedical research. Why Ukraine? We don't know. Someone should find out.

We do know that the Pentagon talking points you saw reported as fact on television today and last night were an utter lie. Did the reporters who repeated those talking points verbatim know they were alive? Maybe they did.

On the other hand, how would they know? They didn't bother to do any reporting whatsoever. They got a text from some Biden administration flak, and they just read it on the air like it was true.

You shouldn't be surprised because that's what they do. And as possible, they're afraid not to do that. They know if they stray from the script the White House has written for them, they will be denounced from the briefing room as tools of Putin.

Here is Biden's publicist doing the very same thing today.


JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The main issue that prompted my Twitter thread yesterday was that Russia has a history also of inventing outright lies like this, which is the suggestion that the United States has a chemical and biological weapons program or Ukraine does that they're operating.

Russia is the one, is the country that has a chemical and biological weapons program.

So, the objective was to make clear the inaccuracy of the information, the misinformation they're trying to put out and make clear to the world that they not only have the capacity, they have a history of using chemical and biological weapons and that in this moment we should have our eyes open.


CARLSON: Yes, but no one denies that. That's the thing. No one denies that Russia has a chem-bio program. That's bad. No one denies that Russia lies, of course and has for a long time, that Russian propaganda is absolutely real, of course. That's not up for debate. That's all true.

The question is, why is the United States funding these bio labs that are not doing anything close to what the Pentagon claims they are doing? Why is the White House Press Secretary from the podium contradicting what the Director of the Pentagon's Bio Weapons Control Program has already admitted is true?

Why is she doing that? And how should we feel about all of this? Insulted, but also very concerned. There is absolutely a story here, a story that matters. Clearly. That's why they're lying about it.

Glenn Greenwald is an independent journalist. His work is on "Substack." He is an expert on detecting deception and explaining what it means. We are grateful to have him join us now.

Glenn, thanks for coming on. So I guess the first and most obvious question is, this is kind of a blockbuster story. I have no idea what it means or where it goes. But it's clearly a case where the U.S. government has been lying, it has mounted a disinformation campaign, if you will, designed to cover up what it is doing and nobody in the press corps seems interested in finding out what's at the bottom of this. Why is that?

GLENN GREENWALD, JOURNALIST: Right, so first of all, like you, I've heard the Russian and Chinese accusations for weeks that the United States is partnering with Ukraine to have bio labs right on the other side of the Russian border and never talked about it because there was never any evidence for it.


GREENWALD: I don't take the word of the Russians and the Chinese for it.

CARLSON: Exactly.

GREENWALD: What made me get interested in the story was when Victoria Nuland went before the Senate and Marco Rubio asked her, are there biological and chemical weapons programs in Ukraine -- expecting her -- he even said, I only have a minute -- her to say no, of course not. So he could then claim it was debunked.

But she didn't say no. In fact, she acknowledged exactly what you just went through that not only are there labs, but they are so dangerous, whatever is in them, that they're deeply concerned it would fall into Russian hands.

The other point is any journalist who comes on the air and says that they can claim, that they can state that these concerns are false or a byproduct of disinformation, like journalists have been doing for weeks under the guise of fact checking is not telling the truth.

All they know is that the Pentagon denies it. The C.I.A. tells them, it's not true and then they equate that, they conflate that with proven fact, which is the number one problem in journalism that we are seeing very pervasively in this war.

CARLSON: It's so shameful that anybody employed as a reporter would do something like that without doing any actual reporting whatsoever, even bothering to learn about the subject, and then to scold anyone for asking legitimate questions.

So here's the problem that I have with it. Government does things that are secret, we don't always know what they are, maybe some cases that's legitimate, but to attack anyone who American citizens who ask honest questions as tools of Russia seems to be so far out of bounds, I'm worried this is being established as a precedent.

GREENWALD: Well, as we know, this has been going on for five or six years that anybody who questions the predominant mainstream narrative from the media, from the Democratic Party are tools of Vladimir Putin, are Kremlin agents, are sympathizers for Moscow. This has been their tactic forever. And obviously, it has escalated now.

But the one point I want to make, Tucker, is when the government comes out and emphatically denies that they have biological weapons, we know they're not telling the truth. Remember, the anthrax attacks were right after 9/11? They were incredibly terrifying because of how weaponized they were.

First, the government said it was from al-Qaeda than they said it was from Saddam Hussein. In 2008, they said, we solved the case. Actually, it came from the U.S. Army lab, from an infectious disease specialist under the auspices of Tony Fauci, a scientist who cultivated these weaponized strains of anthrax and deployed them on U.S. soil.

We know they did the same thing with the coronavirus, where they manipulated the coronavirus to become more lethal and more contagious. They claim that those aren't biological weapons, because inside their brain, their intention is not to use them, but just to study them. But the things they are making are exactly the same as what you would make if you were to make biological weapons and you have to be so careful to understand what they mean when they deny that they have these.

CARLSON: Well, the last question, maybe you don't know the answer, but why Ukraine? You know, of all the countries you would conduct this kind of research in, you would pick one with like a solid medical infrastructure. You'd pick Germany or Israel or someplace with first class scientific research going on. You would not pick Ukraine. Why Ukraine?

GREENWALD: Unless you viewed Russia as your primary threat, unless you want it to be provocative toward the Russians, unless you wanted to be in Ukraine developing all sorts of weapons as we clearly have been, we've been flooding that country with lethal arms for five or six years.

So clearly, there is an intention for the United States to be heavily involved in Ukraine. The Russians say their motive is to be threatening and provocative. The United States denies that, but they have their tentacles in Ukraine and have for many years all the time, which is a critical part of the narrative that has been lacking.

CARLSON: That's right. It's fair to ask, what have they been doing in Ukraine? Why are all their kids working for Ukrainian companies? What is going on here?

Glenn Greenwald, I appreciate you coming on tonight. Thank you.

GREENWALD: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: I'm going to bring you a FOX News Alert. These are new satellite pictures just into us. Apparently, the Russian convoy stalled outside the capital city is dispersing, as we approach 3:30 in the morning, Ukraine time.

For more on what is happening there, we head live to Lucas Tomlinson of FOX News who is still in Ukraine for us and we're glad he is. Lucas, what do you see?

LUCAS TOMLINSON, FOX NEWS CHANNEL PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Tucker, for over a week, the Pentagon has said that long Russian convoy, they said it was actually 40-miles long, if you can believe that, was stalled outside the capital. Today, U.S. satellite company, Maxar said it has dispersed. I don't know exactly where all those vehicles and tanks went, but it is no longer threatening the capital. This is what Ukrainian forces did after it left and they went on the offensive.


TOMLINSON: About 50 miles northwest of the capital appeared this Russian armored column of tanks and armored vehicles drove into another ambush. This Ukrainian artillery unit looks pre staged, it looks like they fired as soon as those Russian vehicles went into what's called the kill zone, Tucker. You see, these Russian tanks are all bunched up.

Officials I've spoken to said this is very poor tactics and speaks volumes about the Russian military strategy here in Ukraine. Here is supposedly, Russian trained forces all bunched up and their tanks walking straight into this ambush.

A very similar scene in eastern Ukraine, or excuse me in east of the capital as well, Tucker about 15 miles east, another Russian armory column fell into an ambush. Artillery units can fire from the capital and they appear to be crushing these Russian tanks.

Now Tucker, five cities around Ukraine are still surrounded by Russian forces, including increasingly the capital where Russian forces are sending their troops, but it's worth saying that over two weeks since the Russian invasion, Tucker, the Russians have failed to take the capital and President Zelenskyy is still firmly in charge -- Tucker.

CARLSON: Lucas Thompson from Ukraine for us tonight. Thanks so much for that.

So you're hearing lawmakers in Washington, you have for a week, the calls are increasing for a no-fly zone over Ukraine. Case in point, Congresswoman Maria Salazar of Florida, a member of the Republican Party has just endorsed this idea.

Now, she was honest enough to acknowledge this could very easily cause World War Three, a direct war between the United States and Russia, but she said it's worth it anyway. Watch.


QUESTION: Do you support a no fly zone in Ukraine?

REP. MARIA SALAZAR (R-FL): I support everything that has to do with punishing Vladimir Putin and helping the Ukrainians.

QUESTION: Wouldn't that mean direct conventional warfare with Russia?

SALAZAR: I don't know what it will mean. But you know, freedom is not free.

QUESTION: So you don't know what a no-fly zone will mean? You have to shoot down Russian planes, I mean --

SALAZAR: Of course.


CARLSON: Of course, shoot down Russian planes. That's from the gray zone, by the way, we're grateful for it and they are reporting on that. Too few reporters have asked Members of Congress, what's your view of this? We should say that Congresswoman Salazar has been one of the loudest voices in the Congress pushing for open borders into this country, but we should get into a hot war with Russia to protect the borders of Ukraine. That's the Republican Party.

So far, the Biden administration has refused to implement a no-fly zone. That is making some CNN anchors very, very angry. Today, one CNN personality grilled a Biden administration official on why we aren't yet shooting down Russian planes. Watch.


JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR AND NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Hold them accountable, but not stop them because they're continuing here. Why won't the U.S. shoot down the planes that are bombing hospitals?

NED PRICE, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESPERSON: Well, Jim, we are providing our Ukrainian partners with what they need to engage in self-defense and you have seen the effectiveness of that strategy. The Russian war effort really has been stalled.

President Putin has severely miscalculated. If he thought he would roll into Ukraine, not find any resistance, clearly, he was wrong.


CARLSON: So the reckless guy in hairspray who has no idea what he is talking about grilling the Biden official who has never once told the truth on camera. No wonder nobody watches that channel.

Joe Kent is the former member of the Army Special Forces. He is running for Congress as a Republican in the State of Washington. We're happy to have him join us tonight.

Joe, thanks so much for coming on. I hope no one is going to call you a Russian stooge. You've left a lot that's dear to you on the battlefield. So I'm wondering how you assess given your experience in the U.S. military these calls for a no-fly zone.

JOE KENT (R), CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE FOR WASHINGTON STATE: Well, I think it's extremely reckless, Tucker. I mean, because a no-fly zone against a country like Russia that hasn't developed surface to air capability and an Air Force that is an act of war. Within minutes, we would be in a shooting contest with Russia and that would trigger essentially World War Three. It is extremely reckless.

There were some calls earlier from so-called National Security experts for a limited no-fly zone. There is no such thing as a limited no-fly zone. That's like halfway being at war.

This is just combined with the pattern of reckless talk we've seen from Members of Congress, members of the Senate, Lindsey Graham calling for an assassination of Vladimir Putin.

What all these representatives who are very passionate about us going to war need to do is they need to go back to their districts, and they need to sell it to their constituents, and then demand a war powers vote, demand an actual constitutional vote on going to war and sell the American people, tell us what we're going to be asked to do, to send our sons and daughters off to the blood lands of Eastern Europe or if we keep halfway provoking this conflict with billions of dollars of arms and aid going to the Ukrainians and cheering the Ukrainians on as they are slaughtered.

Then we have to tell the American people that, hey, this is likely going to result in the Russians going right into the arms of the Chinese Communist Party and then the Chinese Communist Party is going to challenge our status as the prime reserve currency holder and open up a new front in the economic war that they're already waging on our country.

We need clarity and honesty from our lawmakers, not reckless talk.

CARLSON: I've got to agree with that. I mean, after watching just the pure recklessness of our leadership, the Biden administration, and a lot of Republicans, who is going to buy our debt going forward? And if people start buying our debt, it all ends, like it all ends.

But let me ask you this question. So the pictures on TV, the suffering in Ukraine are real. Some of them are incredibly heart wrenching. It's not the only suffering in the world, but it is real suffering.

The argument from people -- limited people like Maria Salazar is well, people are suffering, we have to commit arms. You've been in a conflict firsthand, does our committing arms necessarily relieve the suffering on the ground? That's the assumption. Is it true?

KENT: No, no, not whatsoever. No, this whole idea number one, that we have a responsibility to protect every single place where human tragedy is occurring is just absolutely ridiculous on its premise. If that's the case, then we need to reinstate the draft, again, sell it to the American people, because there's a lot of horrible human tragedy taking place throughout the world.

But us simply adding arms to this, especially in a conflict like this, when we're cheering on the Ukrainians and telling them, hey, we'll send you some arms, we're leading them on and we're making them believe that someday the American and the Western Calvary is coming to save them.

So they're going to continue to blow off any kind of negotiation, they're not going to take that process seriously and they are going to continue to be slaughtered and this will drag on for years, at least, until they are fought to some form of a stalemate and a negotiation.

I'm calling for lawmakers to be pragmatic, to recognize the world as it is, Ukraine has always been a buffer state. Let's try to cut a deal that stops the bloodshed and brings Russia back into our orbit as much as we possibly can. I know that's not 100 percent realistic, but we need to pull them away from the Chinese Communist Party.

We have to think about what's best on the ground for people to alleviate the suffering, but then also what is best for our country in terms of the broader strategic picture. We need to stop playing on these hit pieces from the media and on silly emotions and think like actual rational adults that are putting our country first.

CARLSON: Oh, rational adults. I remember when Toria Nuland told us we are going to improve the lives of the Iraqi people and she has never apologized for failing to make good on that promise.

Joe Kent, I appreciate the clarity of your thinking and your willingness to say it. Thank you.

KENT: Thank you, Tucker.

CARLSON: We've got a FOX News Alert for you. The Biden administration just deployed its foremost foreign policy expert to Eastern Europe. It's a very tense situation there tonight, as we've told you, but rest easy. Kamala Harris is on the scene to calm tensions, to bring a wise measured perspective to this powder keg.

Harris just held a joint press conference with the President of Poland. At that event, Harris was asked about the refugee crisis in Ukraine. Watch how she responded.


QUESTION: Is the United States willing to make a specific allocation for Ukrainian refugees? And for President Duda, I wanted to know if you think and if you asked the United States to specifically accept more refugees?

KAMALA HARRIS (D), VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Okay. A friend in need is a friend indeed.


CARLSON: Yes, it's pretty funny. More than a million people fleeing in the wake of an invasion that you, Kamala Harris, incited certainly failed to defuse, made much more likely your recklessness and then you laugh about it.

That's who she is.

So Jussie Smollett was just sentenced for faking a hate crime. It was a hoax. Wait until hear what the sentence was. That's straight ahead.


CARLSON: So, it's time to wrap up the Jussie Smollett saga.

Smollett was in court today to be sentenced in Chicago. He was convicted as you well know of staging a fake hate crime, blaming Trump voters, paid people to assault him. This afternoon his family cited the war in Ukraine as well as COVID as reasons Jussie Smollett should receive a light sentence.

Inventive. Did it work? FOX's Matt Finn is covering for us in Chicago. Hey, Matt.

MATT FINN, FOX NEWS CHANNEL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Tucker. A short while ago, Jussie Smollett reacted very loudly in court standing up and shouting after he was sentenced to 150 days in jail. Here is Jussie Smollett moments ago in court.


JUDGE JAMES LINN, COOK COUNTY: You will spend the first 150 days of your sentence in the Cook County Jail, and that will start today, right here right now.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT, ACTOR: I am not suicidal.

LINN: Okay.

SMOLLETT: I am not suicidal. I am innocent, and I'm not suicidal.

If I did this then it means that I stuck my fist in the fears of Black Americans in this country for over 400 years and the fears of the LGBTQ community. And if anything happens to me when I go in there, I did not do it to myself, and you must all know that.

I am not suicidal.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Stop laughing at my --

SMOLLETT: I'm not suicidal and I'm innocent. I could have said that I was guilty a long time ago.


FINN: Judge James Linn roasted Smollett just before he sentenced him to 150 days in jail, probation, restitution, and fines. Judge Linn told Smollett that Smollett's name has now become an adverb for lying, pulling a Jussie. The Judge said he cannot think of anything worse than that.

The judge also telling Smollett that his hypocrisy is astounding because Smollett and his entire close-knit family are known for their social justice work.

The Judge telling Smollett he has a profoundly dark arrogant side that betrayed social justice. Judge James Linn said he arrived at four aggravating factors that influenced his sentencing. Number one, Smollett's extreme premeditation; number two, Smollett caused pain to real hate crime victims. Three, damage to the City of Chicago; and four, The Judge says Smollett lied and perjured himself on the stand for hours and hours.

Smollett's defense team read aloud multiple letters requesting mercy, written by Jesse Jackson, Black Lives Matter, the Illinois Innocence Project, and Samuel L. Jackson. Smollett's defense team immediately asked for the sentence to be overturned. The Judge immediately denied saying the wheels of justice are turning -- Tucker.

CARLSON: That is all so great. Matt Finn for us from Chicago.

So Jussie Smollett is worried he's going to get Epsteined while in jail. Did he offend Hillary Clinton somehow? Not that we know of.

We will watch the story carefully.

We do remember that back in February 2019 when this whole thing began, a lot of people had doubts that Jussie Smollett was in fact attacked by racist Trump voters. But, shut up, he said. Anyone who doubts his story is a bigot. Remember?


SMOLLETT: If I had said it was a Muslim, or a Mexican, or someone Black, I feel like the doubters would have supported me a lot much more, a lot more and that says a lot about the place that we are in our country right now. The fact that we have these fear mongrels, these people that are trying to separate us, and it's just not okay.


CARLSON: It is one of the greatest clip ever. So first, you have Jussie Smollett attacking the fear mongrels, not the purebred fear people, but the fear mongrels.

And then you have Robin Roberts, the highest paid person in television saying, "Beautiful Jussie, beautiful." But is it beautiful?

Jason Whitlock has watched the whole thing. He is the host of "Fearless." We are happy to have him join us tonight.

So Jason, I mean, first concerns for Jussie's safety. Do you think he's going to get Epsteined in jail?

JASON WHITLOCK, HOST, "FEARLESS WITH JASON WHITLOCK": No, I don't think he's going to get Epsteined. Actually, I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this, Tucker.

CARLSON: I know.

WHITLOCK: I don't want to unlock and unpack all of my ideas and thoughts, but Jussie Smollett may be crazy like a fox, and I say that, because he certainly has mental issues. What the Judge said about his narcissism and a dark side to him, he certainly has it.

But maybe that nutty display today was actually a play that he does these 150 days inside a psych ward or mental hospital where he thinks he'll be safer, but then on a more serious side, and the more like down -- or my other thought that just ran through my mind, so many people from Jesse Jackson to the NAACP, to so many people in the elite, so-called Civil Rights movement, social justice movement, attach their credibility to that guy, a narcissist with a dark side who did something really heinous here who clearly is starved for attention.

They attach so much of their credibility to him. I felt like what we just saw from Jussie when his sentence was rendered was like that movement, the social justice warrior movement, the civil rights movement. Were these the death throes for Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the NAACP, because I'm just not sure how you attach your credibility to that guy, and he makes a clown out of himself, and you, I don't know how you survive that.

CARLSON: What's interesting is that they left to his defense, he is not oppressed. He is the opposite of oppressed. He's a highly paid actor. He's a famous guy.

You know, it's just interesting like they identify with him. They think they're victims, the most powerful people in our society pose as victims. Here's one of the most powerful people in our society posing as a victim and they are all over it, backing up a story like that. What does this tell you?

WHITLOCK: Well, the Judge pointed it out, I thought brilliantly. I think he took 30 to 40 minutes unpacking his decision here, and basically like Jussie Smollett comes from privilege, a great family that supported him tremendously. And that's why -- this is inexcusable. This isn't a crime of premeditation.

I mean, this isn't a crime of opportunity. This is a crime of premeditation. You actually thought about this and given your family background and history, that's really heinous that you thought about playing a game with a race crime when your family seems so invested in protecting people from race crimes.

I just -- Tucker, I will never promote my show, but people need to watch me tomorrow on "Fearless with Jason Whitlock" because I can't wait to unpack all of this. This was the craziest thing I've ever seen in a courtroom and on TV.

I'm just blown away by the acting display and the nutty display from Jussie Smollett, and I feel sorry for all the idiots that leapt to his defense and were crying for mercy.

This is a bad day for the grievance industrial complex.


WHITLOCK: You know --

CARLSON: I wonder if his friend, Kamala Harris has weighed in.

WHITLOCK: Jesse Jackson just toppled.

CARLSON: Yes. It's unbelievable. I will say --

WHITLOCK: Jesse Jackson's statue was just toppled.

CARLSON: Jussie Smollett is committed to his craft as an actor. That's kind of impressive. Jason Whitlock, we appreciate your coming out. We will watch "Fearless" tomorrow. Thank you.

WHITLOCK: Thank you.

CARLSON: So politicians in Washington are telling us that economic sanctions are all good. They hurt Putin, they do not hurt us.

But what if sanctions against Putin had no real effect on Putin, but undermine the United States? RUSSIAN propaganda or true? We've got that story, next.


CARLSON: This is a FOX News Alert. Air raid sirens have just gone off in the Ukrainian capital. This comes as new images into FOX News show Russian forces redeploying. Those forces were stalled outside the city. We think they are redeploying. That's what the images seem to suggest.

FOX's Trey Yingst is actually on the ground there in the capital of Ukraine. He joins us tonight. Trey, what do you see?

YINGST: Tucker, good evening. Last hour we did hear air raid sirens go off throughout the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv. This comes as one U.S. Defense official says Russian forces just outside the city are making some progress in their advance on the capital.

We know according to that official those forces are about 10 miles from where we are standing in downtown Kyiv right now.

We're also getting some new images today, Tucker, of a rocket launcher from the Ukrainian side showing they are trying to push back this Russian offensive in some parts of the country. Take a look.


YINGST: Some of that video they're showing how the Ukrainians are responding to the shelling by Russian forces. There have also been airstrikes in a number of locations.

Here you can see the aftermath of a residential area that was hit with Russian artillery in the southern town of Mariupol. This is a town of about 400,000 people and was also the site of that Russian strike yesterday that killed three people at a maternity hospital.

This video also showing some aftermath of damage in the Donetsk region of Ukraine. A number of emergency services there saying people were injured when Russian forces shelled this area.

The Ukrainians still believe that the plan of Vladimir Putin is to surround this city. It's part of the reason we've seen so many defenses inside the city. When you leave the hotel here you see roadblocks, every single block soldiers are checking documents. They want to make sure that Russian forces aren't sending any sort of reconnaissance troops into the city to see how much resistance they'll face -- Tucker.

CARLSON: Trey Yingst for us in Ukraine. Thanks so much.

So everyone loves sanctions. They seem like they a relatively painless way to punish people who deserve to be punished. Vladimir Putin for example, a lot of people were very upset about the invasion of Ukraine. Understandably. So why not sanction Putin?

But there are two questions that you should have to answer before you move forward with a policy like that. The first is, do the sanctions punish the people they are intended to punish? And the second is, are there unintended consequences that we should be thinking about?

Good intentions are not enough. You have to care about the effects of your policies. That's how adults make decisions. Are these adult decisions that are helping us and hurting Putin?

Clint Ehrlich is a Russian policy analyst. He joins us tonight to assess those questions. Clint, thanks so much for coming on. So to the first, are these sanctions hurting Vladimir Putin? That's the point. Are they working?

CLINT EHRLICH, RUSSIAN POLICY ANALYST: No, the sanctions are helping Vladimir Putin. His approval rating has actually gone up in Russia 10 points from 61 percent to 71 percent now.

And so even though the sanctions may be hurting Russia, they're consolidating Putin's power within the country and making him a more robust enemy of the United States.

CARLSON: Well, but wait, that's kind of the last thing we want to do, isn't it? And by the way, I just want to assume for the purpose of this conversation, good intentions on the part of people who back sanctions, I think most people who are for sanctions think that they work. But you're saying they're having the opposite effect.

EHRLICH: I know individuals on the ground in Russia who were frankly, anti-Putin and pro-Western before this happened, and they've been impacted by the sanctions so much that they're now really turning against the West, your viewers may not realize this, Tucker, but international calls into Russia are being blocked today.

When Russians tried to call home, they get a message telling them to go expletive themselves. And so these are cruel measures that are making the Russians turn against us in a really significant way. They're angry. They're angry at us about the way that they're being treated.

CARLSON: Russians who don't support the invasion of Ukraine who don't support Putin, I think it's an interesting point. Are there counterproductive effects -- effects of sanctions that might hurt the United States? I think that's probably something we should think about. Are there any that come to mind?

EHRLICH: Certainly, what we've effectively done is started to redirect the Iron Curtain, it was our policy during the Cold War to try to integrate Russia with the West to try to integrate them politically and economically.

Instead, what we've done is isolate them. And so essentially, we've created a new North Korea, but this time with 6,000 nuclear weapons. And so that doesn't advance our national interest, and frankly, it threatens global security.

CARLSON: So if you're kicking Russia out of the global financial system, so that's an idea that has actually been affected. We've done that. But you've got to wonder if that might boomerang and make the United States less influence influential over time in the global financial system? Is that a possibility?

EHRLICH: It's already happening. Today, any state has to consider the risk that if it holds dollars as a reserve currency for its Central Bank, that those assets or other fiat assets that are under the control of the West could be frozen.

So Russia and China have an incentive to create essentially a parallel economy separate from ours so that they won't be under our control, it frankly undermines our influence very directly.

CARLSON: Last question, Econ 101, everyone who looks at United States realizes that the rest of the world would stop buying U.S. debt, the United States would grind to a halt and no longer be a rich country, I mean, instantaneously.

Does any of our reaction to the Russian invasion of Ukraine make it more likely that other countries will stop buying U.S. debt?

EHRLICH: Certainly, I mean, there are a real threat that they could stop buying our debt. And so, we're undermining really our most valuable asset that way. We're living on borrowed time economically, and we're getting into an economic war that we may not leave unscathed.

CARLSON: I think every American most are horrified by this invasion, we should ask our lawmakers, is anything you're doing making it less likely the rest of the world will buy our debt, will start unloading our debt and what would be the consequences of that, Dumbo?

Clint Ehrlich, I appreciate thinking like an adult. We don't hear it very often, you do clearly. So thank you for that.

EHRLICH: My pleasure. Thank you, Tucker.

CARLSON: So a shocking new low in the masking regime, not surprisingly from California. FOX's Bill Melugin is live with that story from Los Angeles tonight. Hey, Bill.

BILL MELUGIN, FOX NEWS CHANNEL NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Tucker. Good evening to you. This is a wild one. FOX News has learned that California state regulators actually went into a preschool in San Diego and privately interviewed children as young as two years old about their masking practices without any parental consent.

Officials at the California Department of Social Services visited all three locations of a preschool in San Diego, Aspen Leaf Preschool, this was in January, after they got a complaint that the school wasn't enforcing the state's mask mandate.

Now, according to a letter from the agency obtained by FOX News, California officials went into that preschool's three locations on January 19th, separated the kids from their teachers, then interviewed them privately about their masking practices.

The preschool's owner, Howard Wu is describing this investigation as a simultaneous multi school raid that unnecessarily resulted in appropriate child interviews.

Now, in response, the California Department of Social Services says their investigation showed the school did fail to ensure that staff and kids were masking up and they issued in the school a Type A citation, which happens to be the most severe of its kind.

And Tucker, as you can imagine, parents at the school are understandably outraged, telling FOX News, this California agency overstepped its authority and they are frustrated, aghast, and confused about why this happened, and some of them feel it just did not serve their child's well- being.

We will send it back to you.

CARLSON: Yes. How do you spell police state, Bill?

Bill Melugin for us, thank you so much for all of your reporting.

MELUGIN: Thanks.

CARLSON: So, if you found that unsettling, prepare yourself for this story: Giant spiders. Apparently, not making this up, it is a news channel, giant spiders apparently about to invade a large portion of this country.

We have scoured America for the men who might be able to stop this invasion, they join us next.


CARLSON: A story we feel duty bound to bring you tonight, new fears that monster spiders could invade the East Coast of the United States. When will this happen? Well, experts say it's only a few weeks away.

Invasive spiders here. Researchers at the University of Georgia tell us that these spiders could parachute down from the sky and that could be a problem, so we have scoured the arachnid community for people who might be able to help. One of these exterminators is called Billy, the Exterminator. He and his brother have dealt with this species in the past.

Before we get to them, we want to give you some sense of how they deal with invasive spider problems. Watch.


BILLY BRETHERTON, EXTERMINATOR: The Johnsons just opened up their cabin for this summer when they discovered it's been completely overrun by spiders while it was closed up.

Now, they can't even enjoy their summer home.

MR. JOHNSON: So you see, we have the spider webs all through here on the front.

RICKY BRETHERTON, OWNER, VEXCON PEST CONTROL: The spiders can really build up in a high abundance. So we're going to have to get in here with the vacuum cleaner and get all this webbing out of there, so these guys won't be hiding from us anymore.

B. BRETHERTON: The Johnson residence has a number of different types of spiders infesting their cabin. Some are deadly as the Black Widow and others similar to the common house spider.

It's amazing how they can just get so much silk coming out so fast. You know, it's amazing how they do that.

R. BRETHERTON: It really is.


CARLSON: Billy Bretherton is known in the arachnid community as Billy the Exterminator, Ricky Bretherton is the owner of Vexcon, a pest control company in Louisiana.

Billy and Ricky, join us tonight. Gentlemen, thanks so much for coming on. How concerned should we be about giant spiders dropping from the sky?

B. BRETHERTON: You know, Tucker, this is a New Age. There has been a lot of problems with the weather, climate change, forest fires, all of this stuff is pushing large groups of insects and animals all over the place. That's what's going on with this species of spider.

I've seen some images already of this spider where it's like turning the sky like black, like a giant black cloud coming at you. And I think it's displacement from the stuff that we're doing.

CARLSON: So you're describing a plague of spiders? Really, I mean, not to get theological. But I think that's what you've just outlined for us. How are you going to deal with it?

B. BRETHERTON: Yes, sir. You know, there's a lot of different ways of doing it. I don't think chemicals would be a smart move with that many spiders because we have a lot of non-target pests and animals. They will try to eat the poison though once. So, it is just not good.


B. BRETHERTON: I think the best way to deal with it is when they start to accumulate on the ground somewhere. They have these industrial vacuum cleaners with a 12-inch hose. They run on gasoline and they will suck a dead raccoon up.

They certainly can handle a job like this. Just suck them all out off the ground and they'll be dead.

CARLSON: Given the rising price of gasoline, I wonder if a broom might work.

B. BRETHERTON: Yes, anything you've got, man. I mean, smashing with the boot, or whatever, man because I mean, it's coming. I mean, this isn't our only problem. We've got a lot of insect issues that are going to become a problem in the near future from the climate change harp.

CARLSON: It sounds like --

R. BRETHERTON: Anything a homeowner can do.

CARLSON: Yes. Sorry, go ahead, Ricky.

B. BRETHERTON: Sounds like what?

R. BRETHERTON: Yes, sir, anything that the homeowner can do as far as getting rid of mosquitoes or flies or any type of thing that the spider can eat on, then that would really help to shoo them away from your property and have them go elsewhere searching for food products.

CARLSON: That makes sense. It sounds like we should repent.

B. BRETHERTON: We've got a spider in here.

CARLSON: We have only 15 seconds left. Show us the spider really quick. Horrify us one last time if you would.

B. BRETHERTON: So these things have a three-inch diameter.

CARLSON: All right, I've got to get to Sean Hannity in three seconds, but that spider is horrifying and I hope you kill it.

Gentlemen, thank you.

We will be back tomorrow. Sean is now.

Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2022 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2022 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.