This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," November 15, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Good evening and welcome to “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” It's the end of impeachment week one.

The public hearings began this week in Washington. The Democrats kicked off the spectacle on Wednesday, you'll remember by trotting out a procession of State Department functionaries each explaining how deeply upsetting it has been to watch an elected President control America's foreign policy. They hate that.

Interestingly though, none of them said they'd seen the President commit any sort of actual wrongdoing. It was much the same story today.

The star witness was the former Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch who was dismissed from her job earlier this year by the President. Now keep in mind that Yovanovitch was testifying at an impeachment hearing. So the only question on the table was and remains has Donald Trump committed crimes that would justify his removal as President of the United States? And fairly early on, Yovanovitch stated unequivocally that as far as she knows, he has not.


REP. CHRIS STEWART, R-UT: Do you have any information regarding the President of the United States accepting any bribes?


STEWART: Do you have any information regarding any criminal activity that the President of the United States has been involved with at all?



CARLSON: Well, there you have it. No, I have no evidence of any kind that the President was involved in criminal activity. That was her answer. And it should have been the last thing that she said today. Everything after that was a waste of our time in a country with so many problems, that time wasting is a sin.

And yet Marie Yovanovitch kept going and going and going. By the end, the hearing sounded like a therapy session or an extended meeting with the HR Department. The definition of hell.

Donald Trump's real offense turned out to be wounding the beautiful soul of a highly sensitive former American ambassador.


DANIEL GOLDMAN, DEMOCRATIC COUNSEL: So just like that, you had to leave Ukraine as soon as possible?


GOLDMAN: How did that make you feel?

YOVANOVITCH: Terrible, honestly. I mean, after 33 years of service to our country, it was terrible.


CARLSON: How did that make you feel? That's a real question. How did that make you feel? If you had to choose a color to represent your emotional state right now, what color would it be? It went on like this for hours. C-SPAN meets the shrinks office.


GOLDMAN: Without upsetting you too much, I'd like to show you the excerpts from the call and the first one where President Trump says, "The former Ambassador from the United States, the woman was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news. So I just want to let you know." What was your reaction when you heard the President of the United States refer to you as bad news?

YOVANOVITCH: I couldn't believe it. I mean, again, shocked, appalled, devastated that the President of the United States would talk about any Ambassador like that to a foreign head of state, and it was me. I mean, I couldn't believe it.


CARLSON: Yes, without upsetting too much. I was shocked, appalled, devastated that someone would criticize me. I couldn't believe it.

Now, keep in mind, this is the person we hired to represent our country's interest before a foreign government in one of the roughest regions in the world. Shocked, appalled, pretty embarrassing. In fact, it's kind of scary. Who is doing the screening over there at the State Department? How many other neurotics currently hold Ambassador rank?

Before anyone could ask that obvious and in fact, vital question, Adam Schiff jumped into rattle the witness still more.


REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: As we sit here testifying the President is attacking you on Twitter, and I'd like to give you a chance to respond. I'll read part of one of his tweets, "Everywhere, Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad. She started off in Somalia. How did that go?"

And now the President real time is attacking you. What effect do you think that has on other witnesses' willingness to come forward and expose wrongdoing?

YOVANOVITCH: Well, it's very intimidating.

SCHIFF: I want to let you know, Ambassador that some of us here take witness intimidation very, very seriously.


CARLSON: It's very intimidating. It's witness intimidation. It's right. Witness intimidation. That's apparently what it's called now when someone criticizes your job performance in a tweet. The gall. It's just terrifying.

You know, in the same country, someone might step it maybe from the media even to identify this for what it is, a grotesque joke. But Washington is no longer sane, so instead, MSNBC spent all day praising Yovanovitch as a holy victim of Trump's terror.


NICOLLE WALLACE, MSNBC ANCHOR: This is a witness who is there, not just as a fact witness, as the witnesses on Tuesday, but as a victim.

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, FORMER U.S. SENATOR: If you really walk in her shoes, the country she has gone to, the loneliness.

GARRETT HAAKE, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: Yovanovitch is such a soft speaker, it really demands the attention of all these lawmakers.

CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC ANCHOR: They're working against this straight arrow woman -- I shouldn't call her a woman because that's the President's language -- this State Department hero.

MCCASKILL: The State Department, historically over the last 30 years has not exactly been where you go to find all the powerful women in Washington. Usually, it was a lot of men. A lot of white men.

I'm so proud of her. And every woman in America who has fought in a male- dominated career should cheer for this woman today.

I could get choked up when I think about what this woman has given.


CARLSON: Wow. Did you hear that, America? The State Department is quote, "A lot of men. A lot of white men," and that's the worst kind of men according to accredited moron and former senator, now open racist Claire McCaskill.

Ambassador Yovanovitch is nothing like those horrible white men, MSNBC would like you to know. In fact, she lives at the very opposite end of the moral spectrum, among the sainted. Somewhere between Gandhi and your average teenage Swedish climate activist, right in there, that sweet spot of goodness.

Yovanovitch is the sort of person in fact, and they told us this on CNN, that it is, quote, "a gift to know."


JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR: Remarkably poised, remarkably credible, Democrats may regret not putting her in the witness chair first.

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: This woman has ice in her veins. She's got a spine of steel. She laid out, I thought, in brilliant detail who she was.

This was I thought, remarkable testimony. She's incredibly charismatic.

KING: Why was she a powerful witness? It's about, I'm an American dream. I was appointed by Ronald Reagan. I have done this for years. I'm trying to fight the bad guys.

I've covered the White House during the Bill Clinton presidency and the George W. Bush presidency -- one of the gifts of the job is when you meet these people, when you travel the world.

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, in this age of Trump, I am genuinely shocked by his behavior with regard to this Foreign Service officer of three decades, to disparage her, to demean her in sexist overtones saying the woman over there.

She made a mockery of his dismissals of the Deep State. If this is the Deep State, I bet a lot of Americans looked up and said, yes, I'll take more of that.


CARLSON: Oh, yes. Oh, yes, that's right. Americans love the Deep State. They can't get enough. Let's vest even more power in the hands of shadowy retired Intel officials who lie for a living and whose agenda is going to be fully known.

If you spend enough time in Walmart or Denny's, you'll actually hear people say that out loud. Americans are sick of this democracy thing. And yet at the same time, as CNN points out, Americans also despise sexism, which if you want a precise definition means any criticism of a woman who is currently serving the interests of the Democratic Party.

So attacking for example, Kellyanne Conway, that's not sexism, which is why they were able to do it yesterday on CNN, but criticizing Ambassador Yovanovitch for her work product, that is sexism. Got it?

Okay, onto lesson number two that we learned today. What Donald Trump has done in Ukraine is bribery. How exactly is it bribery? Don't ask dumb questions. It just is bribery. Listen to the geniuses explain.


REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO, D-TX: It seems to me that the President of the United States either committed extortion and bribery of a foreign official, or attempted extortion and bribery of a foreign official.

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF.: The devastating testimony corroborated evidence of bribery.

REP. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, D-N.Y.: She is right to use that word. It is bribery.

SCHIFF: There are any number of potentially impeachable offenses including bribery.

REP. ERIC SWALWELL, D-CALIF.: The American people will hear evidence of bribery, extortion, the President using his office for personal gain.

REP. JACKIE SPEIER, D-CALIF.: And this is a very strong case of bribery.


CARLSON: We will take the primary, it's got a new word bribery. There's a very strong case for bribery. Actually, there's no case for bribery. And that's why they only started using the word bribery this week after running the whole thing for the focus group and finding out that bribery was the scariest possible description of something they won't actually define. But whatever, the specifics don't matter. None of this matters. You know exactly what happened. Everyone knows and they do, too.

Democrats decided on the punishment three years ago, impeachment, and they've been looking for the crime ever since.

Congressman Louis Gohmert represents the proud State of Texas in the House of Representatives, which is currently impeaching the President. He joins us tonight. So what did you think? So here you had the press telling us that Ambassador Yovanovitch who was undone by relatively mild criticism from the President, I mean, she was shocked, appalled and immobilized in the fact, but she also has a spine of steel at the same time. How does that work?

REP. LOUIE GOHMERT, R-TX: It's amazing and, you know, she -- to have Adam Schiff tell her, oh my gosh, you know, the President just tweeted about you -- I think it was to intimidate you, well, the only way the President could have been intimidating the witness is if Adam Schiff were a co-conspirator in the intimidation because if he had just shut his mouth, she would never have even known. It could have had no effect on her whatsoever.

But I mean, for heaven's sake, and to hear all these liberal, alt-left media, some call them mainstream, but they're alt-left. You hear them talking about, you know, these white guys in the State Department, let me add one adjective to that, Tucker.

CARLSON: Casual racism of cable news.

GOHMERT: They are liberal, liberal, white guys, and they hate Donald Trump, and actually, there were about 70 people that were on a list that was given and it included the two staffers that ended up going to work and given all the advice to -- they call him a whistleblower, he is not under statute. A more proper term is gossip in chief.

So the gossip monger in chief and the Deputy Assistant gossip monger, they consult with those two staffers that have been with the N.S.C. and you might say there was actually a sale from Intel state, but when the President made that call on July 25th, the news was closing in on these people because he was going to get evidence of the corruption that involved Ukraine as well as the United States and their effort to affect our election.

And that's when the gossip monger and chief goes to Adam Schiff's staff and he didn't come up originally with the idea of a whistleblower, the staff did, and it also helps provide him some protection for a little while. The courts will eventually throw it out, but the news was closing in and the thing that the State Department people were really ticked off about this President quit talking about helping Ukraine and actually sent them lethal weapons that could use to defend themselves. That infuriated even Taylor, and you can see in his comments, you read his transcribed testimony --

CARLSON: Can I stop you right there?

GOHMERT: Yes, sure.

CARLSON: Is there some reason that we're abetting a war between Ukraine and Russia? Why are we taking Ukraine's side in a war against Russia? I don't understand that at all. What's in it for us?

GOHMERT: Well, it can't be because the President is in cahoots with Putin. That's for sure.

CARLSON: No, I think you're right.

GOHMERT: But we do have -- we do have an interest in seeing that Russia doesn't keep expanding and taking in other countries. And frankly, the only reason they invaded Crimea, I'm sick of listening to that crap that they've been talking about in the hearing about oh, you know, Trump wanted to help in and he was holding them hostage. No.

The reason Crimea was invaded was because Obama and Clinton had her go over there with a red plastic button with the wrong Russian word on it, but they wanted to reset. And the message there that Putin got very clearly is, look, we know Bush over. He overreacted when you invaded Georgia, and he did all these sanctions. Well, we want to reset. We won't overreact when you invade anything. That's the message Putin got, and that's why Crimea was invaded and the State Department people knew --

CARLSON: Let me -- that's totally fine with me.


CARLSON: And it's like it has no effect on America as far as I'm concerned. But whatever. I am outlier.

GOHMERT: I understand. I understand.

CARLSON: Congressman, thank you so much. Good to see you.

GOHMERT: But the bottom line is the State Department doesn't like them not going through them. Thank you.

CARLSON: Yes. That is true. I agree with that. Well, the last three days have made it pretty obvious that impeachment is not about what they say, it's about fundamentally it's a policy disagreement between permanent Washington and the elected President.

Douglas Macgregor is a retired U.S. Army Colonel and author of the book, "Margin of Victory," he joins us tonight. So please put in the way that you do better than anyone I know, Ukraine into some context for us. We should care about Ukraine's sniping with Russia, because why?

COLONEL DOUGLAS MACGREGOR, RET., U.S. ARMY: Well, firstly, I'll say one thing.


MACGREGOR: You never publicize private conversations between heads of state. You don't do it.


MACGREGOR: And now we know why. Because they are widely misinterpreted, twisted, not understood, and they create bad relations between the two states.

If we were to publicize all the private conversations between JFK and Khrushchev, or between Eisenhower and Khrushchev, between any of the heads of state over the last 30 to 40 years, it would probably be devastating in their content, to most people. People would not understand it.

CARLSON: So that's just the point, so why are we doing this?

MACGREGOR: Well, you know, you heard Louis Gohmert talk about the man who is not a whistleblower at all, who actually has a very checkered past that I think will come out over the next few weeks. I think you're going to hear a lot from the FISA report when that is published that will clarify some of the points that Louis just made and we will discover this is another, broadly speaking soft coup, an attempt to remove the President of the United States yet again.

If you can't remove him, at least damage him in some way between now and the election. So I think that's very important to understand up front.

Now, I've got to hand it to the Democrats, because this was beautifully stage managed performance by Yovanovitch. This is a Christ-like figure.


MACGREGOR: Who is being crucified by the satanic man in the White House.


MACGREGOR: And that was the game that was played. And what we got out of it was, he didn't commit any crimes. He hasn't done anything wrong, not at least as far as Yovanovitch knows, but she is very unhappy that she was removed from office.

CARLSON: Yes, well, that's kind of the crux of it here. He hurt her feelings. She was really clear about that, all right, so I was watching CNN and MSNBC today, and I don't know if that's a crime. Like you can't do that. She's a U.S. ambassador. You can't criticize her.

MACGREGOR: Well, as far as Ukraine is concerned the people that preceded Donald Trump in office have been absolutely insistent from day one that Ukraine must become part of NATO. And the reason for the invasion of Crimea was the conviction in Moscow that this was going to happen. And that then would become that is Crimea, it would become a base for NATO, from which you could project power against Russia. That never comes up for discussion. But that's a very real concern.

CARLSON: Why would we ever do something like -- why would we do that?

MACGREGOR: Why did we bring in Macedonia? Why have we brought in Bulgaria? I mean, you've got to ask the question.

CARLSON: There are people at the State Department pushing the United States to war against Russia.

MACGREGOR: Well, they don't think they're pushing it towards war, because they don't think the Russians will go to war and that's where I think they're wrong. I think there is a red line out there and we're very close to it. And the Russians, whether we like it or not, are probably more paranoid than the left in the United States.


MACGREGOR: And they are quite capable of striking back at us. Hopefully, not on the nuclear level, but it's real. And this is another reason why this whole Ukraine business needs to be treated differently.

The first thing we should announce is Ukraine is going to be a member of NATO.


MACGREGOR: We want to facilitate a solution. Let's sit down and find a solution that will work for both the Russians and Ukrainians and I think that's what Zelensky, the new President really wants.

CARLSON: It's also crazy. Thank you very much.


CARLSON: Doug Macgregor. All right, more on tonight's hearing, hearing coming up, Ambassador Yovanovitch's gender -- it has nothing to do with impeachment, but Washington is still obsessed with it.

Plus, Roger Stone was convicted of supporting the wrong presidential candidate today on seven counts. He faces the rest of his life in prison. We will speak with his daughter after the break.

And "Final Exam" was bumped yesterday by a presidential rally. Don't miss our weekly news quiz. We have it tonight. Just ahead.


CARLSON: Well, every day it seems like the left's total obsession with race, gender and sexual orientation, things that don't change is getting more intense and weird. It's so bad now that they can't even stop themselves even while trying to impeach the President.

So instead of exposing high crimes and misdemeanors, which is what the Constitution calls for them to do, Friday's impeachment hearings somehow wound up being a fable -- a moral fable -- about gender.

"The Washington Post" Jeff Bezos's rag ran this headline, quote, "For Trump, Yovanovitch's testimony brings moment of reckoning on gender." They never explained how exactly -- what morons. Members of Congress though agreed with that assessment. Watch.


REP. VAL DEMINGS, D-FLA.: I have four little girls in my life and as I sit here thinking about them and as a woman, I could not be prouder of you, and I consider you an inspiration for women around the world.


CARLSON: Francey Hakes is a former Federal prosecutor and D.O.J. official and a woman by the way, which we should point out because it's essential -- just kidding -- joins us tonight. So Francey, thanks a lot for coming on. What is -- what is the sex of the witness have to do with impeachment?

FRANCEY HAKES, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Tucker, it has absolutely nothing to do with her job or her testimony. In fact, she should be insulted that she was being treated in any way different than the men who testified on Wednesday and she was treated differently. The stories about her were different.

Let me tell you something, as a Federal prosecutor, no jury treated me differently. Well, actually, maybe they were a little harder on me than they were the male prosecutors. But it's not like I could cry and somehow that would make my arguments better or more acceptable.

The whole thing is insulting and it sets women back decades. When you're talking about wanting equality, then treat me equally. I do not need to be treated with kid gloves, and I do not need someone trying to get me to cry on demand so that somehow I will engender sympathy. It's insulting.

CARLSON: And it also doesn't seem material exactly. I mean, so if the question is, is Trump rude sometimes? Well, yes. And okay, but that's not an impeachable offense. Nobody claims that it is. This hearing is designed, we're told to discover whether or not he committed a high crime or misdemeanor sufficient to remove him from office.

So what -- her being a woman, him being rude, like, that's a non sequitur. That's not relevant at all, is it?

HAKES: Well, it isn't relevant and, Tucker, President Trump insults everyone. He insulted John McCain after he was dead. I routinely get insulted. I wrote a column this morning for "The Hill" and I was called a bimbo in the comments section.


HAKES: Am I going to cry about that? Do I expect someone to say they're sorry and pat me on the head or treat me differently? It's ridiculous and insulting. It has nothing to do with trying to impeach and remove the President of the United States and frankly, Ambassador Yovanovitch ought to object to this treatment of her.

CARLSON: Well, it's infantilizing. This was a U.S. Ambassador in one of the roughest regions in the world and she spent a lot of the day telling us how much her feelings were hurt by a naughty tweet. I mean, really, it did not make you confident in the State Department. Not that I had any confidence anyway, but still. Francey Hakes, great to see you tonight. Thank you.

HAKES: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: Well, the impeachment buffoonery continues on Capitol Hill, the Democratic Party's previous attempt to nullify American democracy continues and it continues to destroy lives.

Former Trump adviser Roger Stone was found guilty today of witness tampering, lying to Congress and another charge. Lying to Congress, by the way, they can't be charged with lying to you, which they do every day. But if you misspeak and you've got the wrong political sympathies, you can spend the rest of your life in prison.

Now, in case you weren't certain, this was all driven by political spite. Consider this, Stone is 67, a threat to no one. Prosecutors still sought to have him in prison until his sentencing in February.

By the way, he is gagged and can't even speak about his conviction in public or else they will send him to jail immediately. So we are instead - - and we're happy to be joined tonight by Adria Stone, his daughter. She joins us tonight. Thanks so much for coming on.

So have I misstated that that your dad is not allowed somehow unlike everyone else in this country to exercise his First Amendment rights and talk about what happened today?

ADRIA STONE, ROGER STONE'S DAUGHTER: Absolutely. And I can't either. That gag order spreads to the family and his friends and it's been extremely isolating and has had a chilling effect not being able to share with other people what is going on and what we see.

CARLSON: I don't -- on what grounds are you -- you haven't even been accused of a crime, much less tried for one, much less convicted of one. How can a judge, Amy Berman Jackson, take your First Amendment rights away?

STONE: I am not quite sure yet. I haven't figured that out. But it supposedly has been three days before.

CARLSON: So lots of people commenting on this. So today like Meghan McCain, for example, tweeted, "Roger Stone rot in hell." And lots of other people on the left have also gloated over your dad's conviction. Is the judge going to imprison any of them?

STONE: No, not at all. But he's looking at spending the rest of his life in jail over what I saw in court I'll have to share with you after February, but it doesn't seem right to take somebody's entire life away over some bickering.

I don't see where anybody was physically hurt or he harmed anybody.


STONE: But to take our -- you're just not punishing him. They're just not punishing him, they're punishing our entire family. They're taking away our rock. They're taking away my mother's life partner. I'm concerned about her and her security and things aren't going to be the same.

CARLSON: So the President pardoned two people today. I believe that the President also, of course, signed a law not that long ago, that, in effect, pardoned a lot of crack dealers and also some rapists, they are out of prison.

And yet we're hearing that certain people around the President, possibly his son-in-law, maybe not, are telling him no, you can't pardon Roger Stone, even though the President has come out and said publicly, I think that this was a travesty. What's your view? Do you think the President will?

STONE: Roger has so much support, he really does. He has a lot of support. He has been around in politics for his entire life, and to take him away, it would be a huge loss for everybody, for Republicans all over the world.

He thinks 40 steps ahead of most political analysts out there. That's why he gets invited to go to Harvard and to Oxford to go and speak about what he knows about his skills, and it would be lost not only for our family but for everybody. This is has been a horrific experience.

CARLSON: This is wrong. I mean, this is a travesty, the President said it today. And I think, I honestly do think that after watching a series of people, some of whom are not deserving at all get pardons from this White House in effect or literally, you know, I think people are going to be watching really carefully to see if your dad is pardoned. I'm going to be. That's for sure.

STONE: I can only -- I can only ask -- I can only ask and I do and this is -- if he can -- Donald Trump, if you can hear me, please save our family. He does not deserve this. Nobody deserves this. And after February, when everything is said and done, I would like a lot of people to look at the money trail and where this all started? Because it shouldn't happen to anybody.

Nobody should have to lose their life to what we have just experienced.

CARLSON: Yes, for supporting the wrong candidate.

STONE: And there's a lot more to come out, but obviously I can't talk about it.

CARLSON: Yes. Adria Stone, thanks so much for joining us tonight. Godspeed.

STONE: Thank you for having me. I so appreciate it. Thank you. God bless.

CARLSON: Well, it's very easy to stay in this country legally if you want to, as you know, but some are determined to game the system even more. Authorities say a group of immigrants faked a robbery in order to get immigrant visas. We've got details on that amazing story.

Plus, it's Friday, Dan Bongino joins us for his weekly news explosion. A particularly violent news explosion this week and hilarious. Stay tuned.


CARLSON: Well, the families of 9/11 victims are still trying their best to make our government care as much about them as we apparently care about the Wahhabists who run Saudi Arabia. Gillian Turner has been following this story and joins us with more tonight on their lawsuit seeking to expose the full truth of Saudi links to 9/11 -- Gillian.

GILLIAN TURNER, CORRESPONDENT: Tucker, survivors of 9/11 and their family members banding together today in court to call out the Justice Department for protecting the Saudi government and by extension, the al Qaeda terrorists who killed nearly 3,000 people on U.S. soil.

At the heart of their complaint, a classified report from 2016 that details everything the U.S. government knows about the 9/11 attacks, reports the Justice Department is refusing to make public. One survivor at the hearing in New York City today, Tim Frolich says it left and feeling nauseated.


TIM FROLICH, 9/11 SURVIVOR: Our F.B.I. is clearly protecting this out. Clearly protecting it by not releasing this information. After 18, 19 almost 20 years now later, there should be no national secrets -- security secrets anymore.


TURNER: One explosive detail in that report, the name of a Saudi co- conspirators who allegedly ordered assistance to the hijackers, but to this day remains free and faces no charges.


FROLICH: The third man was the individual who tasked Thumairy and Bayoumi who were handlers in Los Angeles, excuse me, I'm a little out of breath, who were handlers in Los Angeles. He was their boss who provided and tasked them to help the hijackers in Los Angeles back in 2000.


TURNER: Now the Saudi regime has for decades denied any part of 9/11. But both the F.B.I. and congressional investigators have directly linked two Saudi officials to hijackers. The family's attorney agrees.


ANDREW MALONEY, 9/11 VICTIMS FAMILIES' ATTORNEY: We think that the evidence in the material and the documents show direct connection to Saudi officials.


TURNER: Now the name of that third Saudi official is already known to a handful of victims' family members who say straight up that is not good enough. They say the Fed should dignify all Americans by new naming the terrorists, Tucker, who attacked the homeland on 9/11.

CARLSON: You think. Yes, I think. You're not allowed to say it, but Amen. Gillian Turner. Great to see you tonight.

TURNER: You bet.

CARLSON: Thank you. Well, it's a story so nuts and unlikely, it can only happen in something like America's immigration system where crazy things do happen quite a bit.

According to the Sheriff's Office in Kings County -- King County, Washington, that's where Seattle is, a group of about 10 immigrants carried out an elaborate fake burglary against themselves and why did they do that? But one of the many visas that we offer to foreigners is called a non- immigrant visa. It allows a foreigner who was a victim of a crime in the United States to stay in this country for the sake of assisting authorities in solving the crime.

Now, since this crime was fake, of course, the hope was that the case would never be closed and they could stay in this country long term, maybe even forever.

Jason Rantz has been following the story. He's a Seattle area radio show host and he joins us tonight. So Jason, did I describe that correctly? I mean, you know, it's almost like out of a movie this story.

JASON RANTZ, RADIO SHOW HOST, SEATTLE: It's insane and obviously this is a crime that freaked out a whole bunch of people. It happened in Sea-Tac, it's right outside of Seattle. We don't normally see these kinds of robberies where in this case it was alleged that two men in masks, one with a handgun went into Bob's Burgers and Teriyaki. It's this restaurant. They held people up, they tied people up. They sexually assaulted two of the female victims before getting away.

And the story was that some customer wandered in and noticed that this had happened and called 911, and then obviously King County Sheriff's Deputies took this incredibly seriously. They had a specific description of the two individuals. They had a car and a license plate, and it turns out it was completely a hoax. And they found out pretty quickly that it was a hoax.

And during the investigation they discovered, yes, this was so they thought they would qualify to have a U-Visa which says under certain circumstances under certain crimes, you're protected from being deported because you would have to participate in the actual you know, justice system to go after these bad guys.

Now in theory, when you think you're not actually going to be deported because there's not actually a crime, but they think there's a crime, it means indefinitely they'd be able to stay here.

Now, the ironic part about this story is now that they figured it out, right? They haven't yet pressed charges, and the expectation is there are going to be some charges. Well, in Washington State, and in King County, and in Seattle, we are sanctuary. We have sanctuary policies, which means even after they are convicted, and let's say they do some jail time, they're unlikely to actually be deported anyway, because we will not participate with I.C.E. and we won't turn them over.

CARLSON: Even though they faked the crime and tied up Seattle area law enforcement trying to solve a crime they that they committed, they won't be turned over to the Feds for deportation.

RANTZ: They will not be -- they can't be turned over because of our Washington State sanctuary law. It's absolutely ridiculous and it's dangerous.

CARLSON: Well, it's also -- it's masochism, so you can sort of see what's going on. I mean, there are people who hate our society and are seeking to destroy it obviously.


CARLSON: Jason Rantz, great to see you tonight. Thank you for that -- for your explanation.

RANTZ: Thank you.

CARLSON: Well, the creepy porn lawyer is back on television, but if you can believe it, not in the way he would like to be back on television. He is not sitting across from Brian Stelter again on CNN. We will tell you what he is doing.

Plus it's time for "Final Exam," our weekly news quiz back after a one night delay due to the rally last evening. That's just ahead. Stay tuned.


CARLSON: Well, it's not that easy being creepy porn lawyer these days. There is the legal problem he faces. Likely, he is going to head to the big house for extortion, but relatively speaking, that's not the biggest problem.

The bigger problem for CPL is that nobody seems to remember him. Just last night, the all-time greatest champion on "Jeopardy" was asked to name the creepy porn lawyer and he couldn't do it. Watch this.


ALEX TREBEK, HOST, JEOPARDY: This lawyer's star rose while ripping Stormy Daniels but fell after he was accused of trying to extort millions from Nike in 2019. His name, quickly forgotten obviously.


CARLSON: Ouch. But Alex Trebek, knowledgeable though he is wasn't exactly precisely right. It's not that his name is forgotten. It's the people never knew his name in the first place. "Jeopardy" wanted some obscure other name for the creepy porn lawyer, but if you watch this show, you know he goes by only one title.


CARLSON: So who is this creepy porn lawyer?

Well, the world's creepiest porn lawyer has gotten very famous recently.

We mentioned the creepy porn lawyer you've just been hearing about the one you've seen on TV recently threatening people.

You may have heard us cover the creepy porn lawyer.

It's all about the creepy poor lawyer.


Please stick around, the creepy porn lawyer is back.

That creepy porn lawyer is back. That's the bad news.

Picture yourself standing in your kitchen at night getting one last glass of water from the kitchen sink and you look out into the backyard and there's creepy porn lawyer.

We invited the creepy porn lawyer on to this show.

Creepy porn lawyer great to see you.


CARLSON: CPL's real name, we can hardly blame even a "Jeopardy" all-star for being stumped.

It's time now for "Final Exam" where we find out who the really smart people here are at Fox News. Let our news hands show up their knowledge in an effort to win fabulous prizes from the TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT online store. Tonight's first contestant, our old friend, Town Hall editor, Katie Pavlich and she is facing off again tonight with Jesse Watters who of course host "The Five," "Watters' World" and maybe the single most regular and successful contestant in "Final Exam" history.

JESSE WATTERS, HOST: You hear that?


CARLSON: He is unbelievable. I mean, kind of laid back. You wouldn't think he'd like drop the hammer like he does, but --

WATTERS: I am smarter than I look. Thank you, Tucker.

CARLSON: Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut.

WATTERS: That's right.

CARLSON: You all know the rules, but for the sake of our audience, I'm going to repeat them. Hands on buzzers. I ask the question. The first two buzz in gets to answer the question. You have to wait until I finish asking it before you answer. That's key. You can answer once I acknowledge you by saying your name.

Every correct answer is worth a point. Each incorrect answer subtracts a point from your total. The best of five wins. Does the math make sense?

WATTERS: Yes, it does.


CARLSON: All right, let's get started. This is a multiple choice. Okay, so wait until you get all the options presented. Here we go. Roll prompter, please. The question is this, residence in Toms River New Jersey are under attack tonight by a gang of violent birds.

The birds are taking over the town, destroying infrastructure. So says a news report. What kinds of birds are these? Are they A. Mute swans? B. Wild turkeys? Or C. Canada geese? Jesse.

WATTERS: B. Wild turkeys.

CARLSON: Wild turkeys like your favorite brand of bourbon. Is that true?

WATTERS: Correct.

CARLSON: Wild turkeys?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Resident say the gangs of turkeys traveling together for house to house are terrorizing one neighborhood in Toms River, New Jersey. Turkeys in the driveway blocking traffic, scratching cars and chasing residents this Thanksgiving when turkeys are on the menu, apparently they fight back.


CARLSON: This is what happens when people stop bird hunting. They just go everywhere.

PAVLICH: Yes, that's true.

WATTERS: That's right. You've got to get Katie out there.

PAVLICH: You've got to shoot them.

CARLSON: It is true. Exactly. All right. Question two, congrats on that. Another multiple choice this time. On her recent tour, Madonna, the singer with one name has been making the audience wait for two hours before getting on stage. Obviously, the fans are furious. But Madonna says she doesn't care what they think. What was her arrogant message to angry fans? Was it A. A queen is never late? Was it B. I'm Madonna, deal with it? Or was it C. The existentially curious claim, time is irrelevant? Katie.

PAVLICH: C. Time is irrelevant.

CARLSON: Time -- it's almost like -- it's something like a French philosopher would say. Is it C. Time is irrelevant?


MADONNA, ARTIST: There is something we all need to understand and that is that a queen is never late.


PAVLICH: Dang it.

CARLSON: A queen is never late. You incorrectly quoted Madonna which means you lose a point, but you went up in my personal estimation.

PAVLICH: Also going to gulag now.

CARLSON: If you had known that I would have thought less of you. So congratulations for not knowing it. All right, question three. Senator Elizabeth Warren -- this is not a multiple choice -- Warren just unveiled some new campaign merchandise. It's a $25.00 mug that she says contains the tears of what group of people. Jesse Watters.

WATTERS: Billionaires.

CARLSON: She is selling billionaire tears mugs. Is that true?


SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, D-MASS., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It is time for a wealth tax in America. I have heard that there are some billionaires who don't support this plan.

All we're saying is when you make it big, pitch in two cents so everybody else gets a chance.



CARLSON: Twenty five bucks for a foreign made mug.


CARLSON: Jesse Watters. Nice. All right.

PAVLICH: Can you redistribute some of that? I like Warren now. Redistribute your point to me. That'd be great.

WATTERS: No, I'd rather have a Tucker mug.

CARLSON: That is the Warren plan. All right, question four. This is another multiple choice. After a long term ban, the U.S. Marine Corps just announced its lifting its prohibition on Marines doing what while in uniform. Is it A. Wearing sunglasses? B. Chewing gum? C. Using umbrellas. Jesse Watters.

PAVLICH: My buzzer is not working.

WATTERS: This is a guess, but I'm going to go with A. Wearing sunglasses.

CARLSON: A. Wearing -- had the Marines banned wearing sunglasses?


PAVLICH: I think it is --


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The military ending the 200-year old tradition of making Marines tough it out in the rain. They are now allowed to carry all black plane umbrellas while wearing service or dress uniforms. But they must hold them in their left hand so they can still salute with the right.


PAVLICH: Nice rules.

WATTERS: All right.

CARLSON: I don't know if I am for that. There's something kind of cool about umbrella-less Marines. But whatever. I'm not in charge. Final question. This is multiple choice. And it's worth two points. That means we're currently at one to negative one, so we could get back to par, which is to say, pretty much even, I guess, right, depending upon this.

WATTERS: Right, sure. Yes.

CARLSON: Here we go. A viral video this week shows a wild animal in China that appears to have the face of a human. What kind of animal is it? Is it A. An alpaca? Is it B. A carp? Is it C. An otter? Jesse.

PAVLICH: This is not working. This is rigged.

WATTERS: It is B. Carp, Tucker.

CARLSON: It's a human faced -- by the way, you're a savage with the button. I think that's part of it.


CARLSON: Is Jesse right? Is it B. A carp?

WATTERS: Oh, that's scary.

CARLSON: How did you know that?

WATTERS: We did it on "The Five."

CARLSON: You did it on "The Five." This is what happens when you have like nine different TV shows. You know all the trivia. It's impressive no less.

PAVLICH: Good game.

WATTERS: Thank you.

CARLSON: Great game.

WATTERS: Thank you.

CARLSON: I told you, Katie, he is really good.

PAVLICH: If I were a Democrat, I wouldn't concede the game, but since I am not, you win.

CARLSON: Okay, Jesse, so we don't have -- we're out of Erik Wemple mugs for the moment.


CARLSON: Due to overwhelming demand from America itself. So instead, you are getting a show baseball cap, the mouth breathing baseball cap. You want to get punched out in a movie theater, wear this cap.

WATTERS: Yes, I'll wear that at home.

CARLSON: Good. Thank you, guys. Thank you, both.

PAVLICH: Thanks, Tucker.

WATTERS: Thank you.

CARLSON: Good to see, Katie. Thanks, Jesse. That's it for us tonight. Pay attention -- close attention -- to the news all week. Tune in on Thursday to see if you are worthy of Erik Wemple paraphernalia. We'll be right back.


CARLSON: It's Friday and you know what that means, if you're keeping track. It's time for the news explosion with the news bomb disposal expert, Dan Bongino, the former New York City cop and author of the great book, "Exonerated," here to give us his top stories in a momentous week. Dan Bongingo. Hey, Dan.

DAN BONGINO, CONTRIBUTOR: Hey, Tucker. Yes, this was a tough week to pack stories into the two-minute drill news explosion tonight, so - - but I'll try. I'll do my best.

So my first story which I think is kind of comically sad a bit, is Elizabeth Warren is proposing some tax rates, you know, for millionaires and billionaires, as Bernie would say upwards of 100 percent, Tucker. As I wrote down here in my little list.

CARLSON: Which is the maximum, I think technically.

BONGINO: There's nothing like -- yes, right. There's nothing like unwittingly working for the government 100 percent of that. And I have a question for you, even though it's the news explosion segment. Tucker seriously, is there anything in your life you work harder to finance, that you get less from in return than the government? I'm just going to throw that out there?

CARLSON: Well, I live in the District of Columbia, so I get literally nothing, not one thing? Not one thing.

BONGINO: Yes, nothing -- either -- right, neither do 99 percent of other Americans either, especially for 100 percent of your time.

All right, story number two. Finally, we have a news outlet doing what used to be called journalism, trying to track down the whistleblower. Great you must be saying, this is fantastic. It's one of the biggest story of our time.

No, no, no, not that whistleblower. No, no. It's the whistleblower who outed the poor reporter on ABC who reported on the Epstein case. That whistleblower.

They're trying to track that person down. That's a big story.

CARLSON: That's a big story.

BONGINO: But the whistleblower who started an impeachment, overthrowing an election, forget that. That's a sacred cow. Nobody is allowed to talk about that, of course.

All right, so I see people in the back -- story number one. The impeachment circus continues. I have to make this one quick. But this is fascinating this case, we've now had three witnesses who must think, Tucker, they are at some kind of a motor vehicle auction or something.

It's an impeachment trial, and yet all three witnesses Taylor, Kent, and Yovanovitch when asked if there's an actual high crime or misdemeanor, all seem perplexed by the question, and come up with the remarkable answer of, no. I don't know what they think this is.

Like I said, a car auction? What do you think they're doing here?

CARLSON: The President was rude. That was the news flash. Donald Trump has bad manners. Yes.

BONGINO: He hurt her feelings. Yes, he hurt her feelings. So sad.

CARLSON: Dan Bongino. Thank you. That was a particularly explosive version. Good to see you.

BONGINO: Thank you, buddy. See you later.

CARLSON: We're back Monday, 8:00 p.m., the show that's the sworn enemy --

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 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.