THE STRAIGHT STORY EVERY
NIGHT.
HERE'S TUCKER.
♪
♪ ♪
>> Tucker: GOOD EVENING AND
WELCOME TO "TUCKER CARLSON
TONIGHT."
THERE WAS A LOT OF DRAMA ON
CAPITOL HILL TODAY.
DEMOCRATS AND THE PRESIDENT
CONTINUE BATTLING OVER A
BORDER WALL.
YESTERDAY, YOU PROBABLY SAW,
THE HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY
PELOSI ASKED PRESIDENT TRUMP
TO POSTPONE HIS STATE OF THE
UNION OR HAVE IT SOMEWHERE
ELSE, NOT IN CONGRESS.
SHE ARGUED THE SHUTDOWN HAD
CREATED SECURITY CONCERNS.
THAT WAS NOT CONFIRMED BY
ANYONE WHO ACTUALLY PROVIDE
SECURITY BUT THAT'S WHAT SHE
SAID.
TODAY, THE PRESIDENT
STRUCK A BLOW OF HIS OWN.
HE CANCELLED A CONGRESSIONAL
TRIP ABROAD AT THE VERY LAST
MINUTE THAT PELOSI WAS
PLANNING TO TAKE.
FOX CHIEF NATIONAL
CORRESPONDENT ED HENRY HAS
BEEN FOLLOWING EVERY BIT OF
THIS AND HE JOINS US
TONIGHT.
>> SHORTLY AFTER RETURNING FROM
GOVERNMENT ON MY CHRISTMAS
VACATION IN HAWAII, YOU WILL
RENDER, AND A MERE HOURS BEFORE
HER GOVERNMENT JET WAS AT THE
TAKE OFF AGAIN, BEFORE
PRESIDENT TRUMP DISMISSED IT AS
A PUBLIC RELATIONS EVENT.
TODAY, PELOSI WAS THAT HE WAS
ALL KINDS OF GOVERNMENT SECURITY
FOR AN OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL
TRIP TO A WAR ZONE IN
AFGHANISTAN, AS WELL AS
MULTI-DAY STOPS IN EGYPT AND
BELGIUM, WHERE THE SPEAKER WOULD
SPEND MORE TAXPAYER MONEY COME
ON, YES, SECURITY BUT ALSO
HOTELS, CARS, MEALS, YOU GET THE
IDEA.
IN FACT, THERE WAS A BUS
FULL OF LAWMAKERS THAT WAS
HEADED FROM THE CAPITOL TO
JOINT
FORCE BASE ANDREWS TO
MEET AN AIR FORCE JET TO TAKE
PELOSI AND THE GROUP OVERSEAS.
HER SPOKESMAN TOLD US THE
SPEAKER WANTED TO THANK OUR
MEN AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM AND
OBTAIN WHAT THEY CALLED
CRITICAL NATIONAL SECURITY
BRIEFINGS ON THE FRONT LINE.
THE PRESIDENT BROUGHT THAT
BUS TO A SCREECHING HALT
WITH A LETTER MARKED "DEAR
MADAM SPEAKER."
HE WROTE, "DUE TO THE SHUTDOWN
I'M SORRY TO INFORM YOU YOUR
TRIP TO BRUSSELS, EGYPT AND
AFGHANISTAN HAS BEEN
POSTPONED.
WE WILL RESCHEDULE THIS
SEVEN DAY EXCURSION WHEN THE
SHUTDOWN IS OVER."
AMONG THE GROUNDED WAS ADAM
SCHIFF, WHO WAS SUPPOSED TO
BE ON THE TRIP WITH PELOSI
AND COMPLAINED THIS WAS WHAT
HE CALLED FIFTH GRADE
CONDUCT BY THE PRESIDENT.
WHITE HOUSE AIDES SAID THIS
WAS NOT A TIT-FOR-TAT.
THE PRESIDENT THINKS PELOSI
SHOULD STAY IN WASHINGTON TO
NEGOTIATE, OH, AND THEYAY SAY
WHILE THE MILITARY AIRCRAFT A
HAS BEEN PUT ON HOLD, IT IS
PELOSI'S PREROGATIVE TO FLY
COMMERCIAL IF SHE WANTS TO.
TUCKER?
>> Tucker: HIGHLY AMUSING.
ED HENRY, THANK YOU VERYCK
MUCH.
MICHELLE RICHIE IS A FORMER
PRESS SECRETARY FOR THE
HOUSE DEMOCRATIC POLICY AND
COMMUNICATIONSIG COMMITTEE.
SHE JOINS US TONIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR COMING ON.
>> THANKS, TUCKER, THANKS FOR
HAVING ME.
>> Tucker: SO THE PRESIDENT
DESCRIBED THE SPEAKER'S
PLANNED TRIP TO AFGHANISTAN
AND BRUSSELS AND EGYPT AS A
PUBLICITY STUNT, A P.R. MOVE.
SHE REACTED ANGRY AND SAID,
NO, IT WAS NOT.
IF IT WASN'T, WHAT WAS IT?
WHAT IS HER POSITION ON OUR
CONTINUED PRESENCE IN
AFGHANISTAN?
>> I THINK HER MISSION WAS
QUITE CLEAR FROM WHAT CAMESI
FROM HER STAFF.
THEY WERE GOING TO MEET WITH
NATO OFFICIALS IN BRUSSELS
AND THEY WERE GOING TO MEET
WITH OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN
UNIFORM AND, LOOK, IT SEEMS
LIKE THIS
FIGHT BETWEEN
GODZILLA AND KING KONG IS
JUST GOING TO GO ON FOR
QUITE SOME TIME NOW.
BUT I DO THINK THAT IT IS A
TIT-FOR-TAT AND I THINK THAT
THIS JUST EXPOSES THE
WHEN IT COMES TO RUNNING OUR
PRESIDENT'S LACK OF MATURITY L
GOVERNMENT.
>> Tucker: OF COURSE IT WAS
A TIT-FOR-TAT.NT
OBVIOUSLY.
>> RIGHT.OR
>> Tucker: IT DOES RAISE, I
THINK -- A HIGHLY AMUSING ONE
-- BUT IT ALSO RAISES A COUPLE
OF REAL QUESTIONS AND I K
THINK IT'S WORTH TALKING
ABOUT.
WHAT IS THE SPEAKER'S
POSITION ON KEEPING TROOPS IN
AFGHANISTAN?
>> I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT
HER MISSION IS AS FAR AS
KEEPING TROOPS IN
AFGHANISTAN.
>> Tucker: ISN'T THAT A KEY
QUESTION?
>> THAT'S MORE THE
PRESIDENT'S DECISION MORE
THAN THE SPEAKER'S DECISION
ON WHETHER --
>> Tucker: WHY IS SHE -- YOU
MAKE A SOLID POINT IT IS HIS
DECISION.
THE CONGRESS REALLY DOESN'T
MANAGE OUR FOREIGN POLICY AT
ALL THESE DAYS.
SO, IF IT'S HIS DECISION,
WHY IS SHE GOING TO
AFGHANISTAN AT PUBLIC EXPENSE?
>> UM, I DON'T THINK THAT IT
WAS AT THE PUBLIC EXPENSE.
I REALLY DISAGREE.
>> Tucker: IT WAS AT PUBLIC
EXPENSE.
>> I DISAGREE THIS WAS A
PUBLIC RELATIONS MOVE.
FIRST OF ALL, I WORKED IN PUBLIC
RELATIONS FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
>> Tucker: I UNDERSTAND.
WHETHER YOU HAVE A P.R. EVENT,
THE ONE THING YOU DON'T DO IS
KEEP IT A SECRET.
THIS IS NOT A P.R. STUNT.
>> Tucker: OKAY.
LEAVING THAT
CHARACTERIZATION ASIDE, YOU
JUST SAID THAT SHE DOESN'T S
HAVE A ROLE IN DECIDING
WHETHER OR NOT OUR TROOPS
REMAIN IN AFGHANISTAN.
SO WHY WAS SHE GOING THERE?
>> WHY CAN'T SHE GO THERE?
>> Tucker: I'M NOT SAYING
THAT SHE SHOULDN'T.
IN UNIFORM?
>> THANK OUR MEN AND WOMEN
WHY CAN'T SHE GO THERE AND
MEET ON THE GROUND WITH SOME
OUR OFFICIALS?
>> Tucker: I'M NOT PROPOSING
THAT WE BAR HER FROM DOING
IT AND SHE IS NOT BARRED.
SHE CAN FLY ON AN AIR FORCE
PLANE AFTER THEHU SHUTDOWN.
>> THE BIGGER QUESTION HERE,
TUCKER, IS WHAT DOES THIS
REALLY DO FOR THE PRESIDENT?
I THINK HIS DECISION --
>> Tucker: THAT'S NOTS THE
BIGGER QUESTION, ACTUALLY.
THE BIGGER QUESTION IS,
SHOULD WE KEEP TROOPS IN
AFGHANISTAN?
AND NO ONE SEEMS INTERESTEDDD
IN THAT.
IF THAT IS AN ACTUAL
QUESTION. A
SPEAK OF THE PRESIDENT IS MORE
INTERESTED IN KEEPING OUR FELLOW
WORKERS FROM GETTING PAID.
THAT'S WHAT HE IS
INTERESTED IN.
>> Tucker: RIGHT.
I'M SURERD THAT'S HIS GOAL.
LET ME ASK YOU THOUGH, WHY
SHOULDN'T -- STRAIGHTFORWARD
QUESTION ONCE MORE.
WHY SHOULDN'T SHE STAY IN
WASHINGTON UNTIL THIS CRISIS
IS RESOLVED?
YOU JUST SAID IT'S VERY
IMPORTANT THAT OUR FEDERAL
WORKERS GET THE SALARY THEY
ARE DUE.
SO WHY SHOULDN'T SHE STAY
HERERE AND WORK ON IT UNTIL
THAT HAPPENS?
>> WELL, IT SEEMS LIKE
CONSERVATIVES ARE ACTING LIKE
NANCY PELOSI WAS GOING OVER
THERE FOR TWO WEEKS TO LAY ON A
BEACH.
THAT'S NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING.
>> Tucker: YOU ALREADY
COULDN'T TELL ME WHY SHE WAS
GOING THERE.
WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHY SHE
WAS GOING.
>> ONE, I DON'T WORK FOR
NANCY PELOSI, BUT I CAN TELL
YOU THEHE REASON WHY HER TEAM
SAYS SHE WAS GOING WAS TO
THANK OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN
UNIFORM.
THAT'S WHAT I KNOW AND THAT'S
WHAT YOU KNOW.
>> Tucker: RIGHT, OKAY.HT
BUT YOU ARE NOT ANSWERING MY
QUESTION WHICH IS, IF ITIT IS
SO IMPORTANT TO END THE
SHUTDOWN, AND I THINK IT
PROBABLY IS, THEN WHY WOULDN'T
SHE STAY HERE UNTIL SHE
NEGOTIATES THE END OF A
SHUTDOWN?
>> I THINK THAT PELOSI, AS WELL
AS SCHUMER, HAVE HAD
THREE OPPORTUNITIES PUT IN
FRONT OF THE PRESIDENT FOR
HIM TO HAVE FUNDING FOR HIS
WALL.
YOU REMEMBER IN JANUARY OF
2018, THEY OFFERED HIM
$25 BILLION, IN FEBRUARY OF
2018 --
>> Tucker: I'VE FOLLOWED IT.
>> OVER 10 TO 12 YEARS.
THEY GAVE HIM INSTALL THE OF
$2.5 BILLION AND HE STILL
DECIDED TO SHUTDOWN THE
GOVERNMENT.
IT'S ON HIM.
HE WALKED OUT OF THE OFFICE.
HE SAID BYE-BYE.
>> Tucker: WHAT YOU ARE SAY
SOMETHING EITHER HE ACCEPTS
THEIR PREVIOUS OFFERS OR THE
GOVERNMENT REMAINS SHUTDOWN
FOREVER?
I'M CONFUSED AS TO WHAT YOU
ARE SAYING.
THERE IS NO MORE NEGOTIATING
TO DO?
IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?
>> THERE IS ABSOLUTELY MOREY
NEGOTIATING TO DO IT.
>> Tucker: WHY WAS SHE
LEAVE?
>> SHE WAS LEAVING, TUCKER,
AS YOU KNOW, AS HAVE YOU
REPORTED, BECAUSE SHE WAS
GOING TO BRUSSELS TO MEET
WITH NATO OFFICIALS AND
AFGHANISTAN TO THANK OUR MEN
AND WOMEN.
>> Tucker: TO THANK OUR
TROOPS.
T>> I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY
TIMES WE NEED TO SAY IT.
>> Tucker: IN THE MIDDLE OF
A GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN, THAT
YOU SAY IS HURTING PEOPLE,
BUT SHE DOESN'T WANT TO STAY
AND NEGOTIATE IT BECAUSE SHE
NEEDS TO, QUOTE, THANK OUR
TROOPS.
>> SHE HAS ABSOLUTELY STAYED
AND SHE'S WORKED WITH THIS
PRESIDENT ON MULTIPLE
OCCASIONS.
HE GOT UP FROM THE TABLE AND
LEFT THE OFFICE THE LAST
TIME THEY SAT DOWN AND HAD A
DISCUSSION.
>> Tucker: IT'S AN ADULT
QUESTION.
WHY WOULD SHE BE MAD ABOUT THIS?
IT PROBABLY IS FAIR PROBABLY
SHE SHOULD STAY.
THIS ISN'T HELPING ANYBODY
THE SHUTDOWN, I MEAN IT.
WHY NOT STAY AND FIGURE IT OUT?
NOW SHE HAS THIS BAD IDEA TO
GO TOHA T AFGHANISTAN TO THANK
OUR TROOPS WHO ARE SERVING
SURE WHETHER SHE SUPPORTS OR
IN A WAR THAT SHE IS NOT
NOT.
>> THIS IS SO POINTLESS!
>> Tucker: IT'S TOTALLY
REAL.
>> NO, IT IS REAL BUT IT'S
NOANNOYING TO ME, BECAUSE WE'RE
SITTING HERE TALKING ABOUT A
WOMAN TAKING A TRIP.
SHE IS NOT GOING NOW.
WE CAN ALL REALLY JUST GET
OVER IT.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO
KNOW IS WHEN THIS PRESIDENT
IS GOING TO SIT DOWN WITH
THE DEMOCRATS AND REOPEN THE
GOVERNMENT.
>> Tucker: I GUESS, NOW ---
>> PEOPLE ARE NOT GETTING
PAID.
>> Tucker: THAT'S A FAIR
QUESTION.
>> PEOPLE THAT I KNOW
PERSONALLY AND PEOPLE THAT I
CARE ABOUT THAT ARE NOT
GETTING THEIR PAYCHECK.
>> Tucker: I LIVE HERE, TOO.
ISN'T THIS A GOOD THING?
I'M NOT SURE WHY YOU ARE
COMPLAINING ABOUT IT.
NOW HE CAN SIT DOWN WITH
NANCYY PELOSI BECAUSE HE HAS
PREVENTED HER FROM LEAVING
THE COUNTRY.
WHY WOULDN'T YOU APPLAUD THIS?
>> I DON'T APPLAUD IT
BECAUSE HE DID IT AS A
TIT-FOR-TAT.
HE'S IMMATURE.
THAT'S WHY HE DID IT.
>> Tucker: BUT YOU ARE HAPPY
ABOUT THE OUTCOME BUT YOU
DON'T LIKE HIS MOTIVES?
>> NO.
I DEFINITELY DON'T LIKE HIS
MOTIVES AT ALL.
I THINK HIS MOTIVATIONS ARE
TO BUILD A WALL THAT IS
PRETTY MUCH, INSTEAD OF MAKE
AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, HE MIGHT
AS WELL TO SAY TO MEXICO, IF
YOU ARE BROWN TURN AROUND.
THAT'S WHAT THE MESSAGE IS.
>> Tucker: I THINK YOU MAY
HAVE GOTTEN YOUR TALKING
POINTS CONFUSED.
I APPRECIATE YOUR MUSTERING.
>> NO TALKING POINTS.NG
STRAIGHT CONVERSATION.
>> Tucker: NO TALKING POINTS.
YOU JUST MADE THAT UP ON THE
FLY.
BRILLIANT.
[LAUGHS]
ROCHELLE, THANK YOU.
FEDERALOA SHUTDOWN CONTINUES.
DEMOCRATS COALESCE AROUND A
RATIONALE FOR CONTINUED
OPPOSITION TO A BORDER WALL.
THEY ARE NO LONGER TELLING
YOU WALLS ARE TOO EXPENSIVE.
THAT WAS A LAUGHABLE
ARGUMENT COMING FROM THE
LEFT, SO THEY HAVE GIVEN UP.
THEY'RE NOT TELLING YOU WALLS
DON'T WORK BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY
THEY DO.
EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT THE
PROBABLE THEY ARE NOW
TELLING US, YOU JUST HEARD
IT, IS THAT GOD DOESN'T LIKE
WALLS.
THEY ARE IMMORAL.
AS BETO O'ROURKE NOTED THE B
OTHER DAY WALLS, "ENSURE DEATH."
BUILDING THE WALL IS THE
SAME AS COMMITTING MURDER.
DEMOCRAT ILHAN OMAR OF MINNESOTA
HAS BEEN IN CONGRESS A
MATTER OF WEEKS.
ALREADY SHE STRONGLY AGREES
WITH THIS.
>> AND I DEMAND THAT THE
PRESIDENT END HIS TEMPER
TANTRUMS AND QUEST FOR A
RACIST AND SINFUL BIG WALL.
>> Tucker: RACIST AND
XENOPHOBIC, THAT'S WHAT WALLS
ARE.
ONCE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT, IT
DOES MAKE YOU THINK THERE
ARE AN AWFUL LOT OF WALLS INUL
THIS COUNTRY.
NOW WE KNOW THEY ARE AN
OFFENSE AGAINST GOD, HOW CAN
WE LET THEM STAND?
THAT'S A REAL QUESTION FOR?
THE CITY OF EL PASO, TEXAS.
EL PASO IS ON THE BORDER
RIGHT ACROSS FROM JUAREZ,
MEXICO.
EL PASO WAS A CALM AND
PEACEFUL AND GREAT PLACE.
JUAREZ IS VIOLENT AND
CHAOTIC.
ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS
CITIES IN THE WORLD.C.
HOW CAN THESE TWO PLACES
EXIST SIDE BY SIDE?
SIMPLE.
THERE IS A WALL BETWEEN THEM.
CONGRESSWOMAN VERONICA
ESCABAR NOW REPRESENTS THE
CITY OF EL PASO.
SHE JUST REPLACED BETO O'ROURKE.
SHE SAYS IT MAY BE TIME TO
KNOCK DOWN THAT SINFUL WALL.
>> WE KNOW THAT WALLS DON'T
WORK.
THAT THEY DON'T STOP DRUGS,
THAT THEY D DON'T STOP
MIGRATION.
>> EL PASO HAS A WALL.
YOU SAY IT DOESN'T WORK.
WOULD YOU EVER CALL FOR THE
REMOVAL OF THE WALL THERE?
>> YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY
UGLY.
IT IS, I THINK, A MONUMENT
TO DIVISION.
WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD FENCING
ALONG THE U.S.-MEXICO
BORDER.
IT'S EXISTED -- I'M A
LIFELONG RESIDENT.
IT ALWAYS WAS THERE.
BUT THE BIGGER AND
TALLER AND UGLIER
THAT THEY GET, THEY REALLY
JUST BECOME SINFUL.
>> Tucker: A MONUMENT TO
DIVISION, THATG IS WHAT EL PASOS
NEW CONGRESSMAN SAYS ABOUT THE
WALL.
SHE IS RIGHT.
WALL DOES DIVIDE.
THAT'S THE POINT OF HAVING
THEM.
THERE ARE SOME THINGS PEOPLE
WOULD LIKE TO BE DIVIDED
AND MURDEROUS DRUG CARTELS.
FROM, LIKE ENDEMIC CORRUPTION
HOW DO YOU ACCOMPLISH THAT
WITHOUT WALLS?
WELL, NANCY PELOSI HAS BEEN
THINKING ABOUT THIS RECENTLY.
HERE'S HER SOLUTION.
>> AND THEN WE TALK ABOUT
TECHNOLOGY, AS I SAID,
SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION
DOLLARS, RANGES FROM HALF A
BILLION TO $700 MILLION, FOR
THE TECHNOLOGY TO SCAN THE
CARS COMING THROUGH THE
PORTS OF ENTRY AND THAT IS
TO DETECT GUNS.
IT'S LIKE AN ELECTRONIC DOG
ALMOST.
TO DETECT DRUGS, GUNS, AND
OTHER CONTRABAND.
>> Tucker: AN ELECTRONIC DOG.
OF COURSE, HOW OBVIOUS.
IT WAS RIGHT THERE IN PLAIN
SIGHT AND WE MISSED IT.CU
THE REST OF US WERE THINKING
ABOUT SECURITY AND OLD-FASHIONED
MEDIEVAL TERMS, WALLS, FENCES,
ACTUAL LIVINGG DOGS.
BUT LEAVE IT TO THE
CONGRESSWOMAN FROM OUR
TECHNOLOGY CAPITAL OUT IN
CALIFORNIA TO THINK A LOT
BIGGERGG THAN THAT.
YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE SOLUTION
OF THE FUTURE.
AN ELECTRONIC DOG.
BRILLIANT.
THIS SHOW HAS EXCLUSIVELY
OBTAINED A PROTOTYPE OF THE
SPEAKER'S DIGITAL CANINE..
YOU ARE WATCHING IT RIGHT NOW.
JUST KIDDING.AT
WE PULLED THAT OFF THE INTERNET.
PROBABLY NOT SO DIFFERENT
FROM THE REAL THING THOUGH.
WE WILL SEE.
IN THE MEANTIME, LET'S TAKENC
NANCY PELOSI AND BETO O'ROURKE
AND THE ENTIRE EDITORIAL STAFFS
ONFF THE OTHER CABLE CHANNELS
SERIOUSLY FOR A MOMENT.
LET'S CONCEDE THAT WALLS
ARE, IN FACT, INHERENTLY
IMMORAL.
HOW DO WE RESPOND ONCE WE HAVE
ACCEPTED THAT?
WE CAN'T SIMPLY PREVENT
DONALD TRUMP FROM BUILDING A
WALL.
THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.
WE HAVE GOT TO DO SOMETHING
ABOUT THE COUNTLESS WALLS OF
WICKEDNESS THAT DEGRADE AND
POLLUTE AMERICA'S MORAL
LANDSCAPE.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE WALL THAT
KEEPS POOR PEOPLE OUT OF
BARACK OBAMA'S HOME IN
WASHINGTON.
THEGE WALL THAT PROTECTS
GEORGE SOROS' PLACE IN SOUTH
HAMPTON.
THE WALLHE AT THE PELOSI
COMPOUND IN NAPA, NOT TO
MENTION THE WALL AROUND MARK
ZUCKERBERG'S ESTATE IN
HAWAII.
BRENTWOOD, THE WALLED
GARDENS OF BROOKLYN.
LEVEL THEM ALL.
ALL OF THEM.
MAKE THEM FLAT.
IN FACT, DO IT TONIGHT FOR
AN ANGRY GOD TURNS US ALL TO
PILLARS OF SALT FOR
IGNORING ANTI-WALL COMMANDMENT
SPEAKER PELOSI, TEAR DOWN
THESE WALLS.
ONCE HAVE YOU DONE THAT TURN
THE BULLDOZER OF
RIGHTEOUSNESS OUTWARD TO THE
WORLD.
ISRAEL, FOR EXAMPLE,
SURROUNDED BY WALLS ON ALL
SIDES.
DOES NANCY PELOSI KNOW THAT?
IN MILITARY A AID UNTIL THEIR
WOULD SHE WITHHOLD BILLIONS
ARE GONE?
WHAT'S A MORAL QUESTION NOW.
WHAT'S THE ANSWER?
HOW ABOUT TUNISIA AND JORDAN?
WE HELPED PAY FOR THOSE
COUNTRIES' WALLS.
WE ARE IMPLICATED IN THOSE
WALLS.
WILL WE PAY TO TAKE THEM
DOWN?
HOW MUCH DO WE REALLY CARE
ABOUT OUR SOULS?
WE CONTACTED THE SPEAKER
TODAY TO FIND OUT.
SHE DIDN'T REPLY.
NEITHER DID THE OTHER
DEMOCRATS WE CALLED.
IT TURNS OUT THEY HAVE NO
PLAN TO ELIMINATE ANYONE
ELSE'S WALLS AND CERTAINLY
NOT THEIR OWN.
THEY JUST DON'T WANT A WALL
TO PROTECT AMERICA.
THEY DON'T THINK OUR COUNTRY
DESERVES THAT.
JUST YESTERDAY, A
THE "NEW YORK TIMES" RAN A
A PIECE THAT DEMANDED THAT THE
U.S. GET RID OF ITS BORDERS
ENTIRELY, NO BORDERS.
OF 10 MILLION, 100 MILLION,
BILLION PEOPLE WANT TO MOVE
HERE, SO BE IT.
IT'S NOT OUR RIGHT TO KEEP
THEM OUT.
IT'S ONLY OUR OBLIGATION TO
PAY FOR IT.
THAT'S THE DEMOCRATS' POSITION.
THEY ARE TELLING US THAT GOD
AGREES WITH THEM.
MARK MORGAN, THE HEAD OF THE
BORDER PATROL UNDER
PRESIDENT OBAMA, AND HE JOINS
US TONIGHT.
MR.
MORGAN, THANKS VERY MUCH
FOR COMING ON.
SO TO THE NEW CONGRESSWOMAN,
CONGRESSWOMAN ESCOBAR FROM
EL PASO, I THINK IT'S A FAIR
QUESTION.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, SINCE
WALLS ARE IMMORAL, IF WE
REMOVED THE WALL THAT
SEPARATES EL PASO, A GREAT
CITY, FROM JUAREZ, MEXICO?
>> WE WOULD TAKE A HUGE STEP
BACKWARDS.
AGAIN, I LIVED AND WORKED IN
EL PASO FOR TWO YEARS.OR
>> Tucker: YES.
>> THE DRUG CARTELS, WE WERE
ABLE TO ALMOSTAB ELIMINATE THE
AVENUES THAT THEY HAVE FOR
ALL THE THINGS WE HAVE
TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, DRUGS,BO
HUMAN TRAFFICKING, ILLEGAL
TRAFFICKING AS WELL.
AND BY DOING THAT, BY
BUILDING WALLS, WE INCREASED
THE BORDER PATROL'S
OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY AND
STANCE TO MORE EFFECTIVELY
RESPOND AND STOP BAD THINGS
AND BAD PEOPLE FROM COMING IN.
NANCY PELOSI, I AGREE
WITH HER, THE PORTS OF
ENTRY, ABSOLUTELY.
BY BUILDING A WALL, FOR
EXAMPLE, IN EL PASO, WHAT
THEY DID WAS INCREASE THE
BORDER PATROL'S OPERATIONAL
CAPABILITY AND CUT OFF THAT
AVENUE AND IT FUNNELED
PEOPLE TO THE S PORTS OF ENTRY,
WHERE WE STAND A BETTER
CHANCE OF INTERDICTING.
>> Tucker: WHAT'S SO
INTERESTING ABOUT EL PASO,
YOU LIVED THERE, DEMOCRATS
WANT TO MAKE EVERYTHING
ABOUT BORDER SECURITY A
RACIAL QUESTION.
YOU HEARD A GUEST WE JUST
HAD SAYING, YOU ARE RACIST IF
YOU ARE FOR A WALL.
THERE IS A WALL SEPARATING EL
PASO FROM THE DISASTER RIGHT
ACROSS THE BORDER.
EL PASO IS 80% HISPANIC.R.
IT'S NOT A CITY.
I HAVE BEEN THERE MANY TIMES.
IT'S NOTED FOR RACIAL TENSION.
SO PEOPLE OF THEHE SAME
ETHNICITY LIVING IN THE
UNITED STATES ARE SUPPORTING
A WALL AND THEY ARE SORT OF
HAPPYY T TO LIVE THERE.
SO, LIKE, THERE'S NO
INHERENT RACIAL COMPONENT TO
ANY OF THIS.
UNLESS I'M MISSING
SOMETHING, IS THERE?
>> IT'S EVEN MORE OUTRAGEOUS
FROM THAT IN MY OPINION.
INSTEAD OF OPINION, LET'S
LOOK ATEA FACT.
THE FACT IS, YUMA COUNTY
SHERIFF JUST GOT ON THIS
WEEK AND HE TALKED ABOUT
DURING HIS TIME THERE, HIS
DEPUTIES FOUND AND RECOVERED
IEOVER 100 BODIES OF PEOPLE
TRYING TO ILLEGALLY ENTER THE
COUNTRY THAT DIED OF EXPOSURE
AND OTHER ISSUES.
WE JUST HEARD TRAGIC DEATHS
OF TWO KIDS, TWO CHILDREN
THAT DIED.
THEY DIDN'T DIE FROM THE
HANDS OF AMERICANS.
LAW ENFORCEMENT.
THEY DIED AT THE HANDS OF
THE COYOTE MAKING M THE PERILOUS
TREK WITHOUT MEDICAL ATTENTION
AND NUTRITION.
THE UNITED STATES BORDER
PATROL, NOT HUNDREDS, BUT THEY
EXECUTE THOUSANDS OF RESCUES
EVERY YEAR OF ILLEGAL ALIENS
TRYING TO ENTER THE COUNTRY
IN BETWEEN POINTS OF ENTRY.
THE WALL TAKES THAT AVENUE
THE WAY.
THE VERY PEOPLE SAYING THE
RHETORIC OUT THERE IS
TREMENDOUSLY STRENGTHENING
THE CARGO HOLD HOLD ON THE
SOUTHERN BORDER AND EXPLOITING
HARM IN DOING HARM TO THE PEOPLE
THEY SAY THEY WANT TO PROTECT.
>> Tucker: BAD PEOPLE THRIVE
IN CHAOS.
WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS CHAOS.
WHEN YOU HEAR BETO O'ROURKE
SAY, CONSTRUCTING A WALL WILL
CAUSE PEOPLE TOE DIE, IT'S AN
ACT OF MURDER TO CONSTRUCT A
WALL, HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO
THAT?
>> IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO
RESPOND TO THAT BECAUSE IT'S
NOT BASED IN REALITY.
IT'S NOT BASED IN. FACT.
AGAIN, THEY ARE NOT
LISTENING TO THE EXPERTS.
THEY JUST TOTALLY DISCOUNT
WHEN THE SHERIFF OF YUMA COUNTY
THAT'S DONE THIS HIS
ENTIRE LIFE SAID WE
RECOVERED 100 DEAD BODIES.
HOW DOES BETO THEN SAY THAT
THE WALL KILLS PEOPLE?
THAT'S ABSOLUTELY FALSE.PL
>> Tucker: THAT WE KILL PEOPLE.
AMAZING.
MARK MORGAN, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR JOINING US TONIGHT.
>> ABSOLUTELY.HT
>> Tucker: WELL, MAGAZINE
HERE INRE WASHINGTON SAYS IT
IS TIME TO IMPEACH THE
PRESIDENT FOR GENERAL
BADNESS, CALLED UPON THE
CONGRESS TO DO IT.
MARK STEYN READ THE PIECE.
HE SUGGESTED IT AND HE WILL
RESPONDND AFTER THE BREAK.
♪ ♪
♪
♪ ♪
>> Tucker: WELL, "THE ATLANTIC"
MAGAZINE, WHICH USED TO BE
GOOD BEFORE IT BECAME RIGID
AND INFLEXIBLE AND
HUMORLESS AND STUPID AND
UNINTERESTING,
IS LEADING THE
LATEST MARCH ISSUE WITH A
PIECE CALLING ON THE
CONGRESS TO IMPEACH THE
PRESIDENT BECAUSE IS HE A
BAD GUY.
PLENTY OF DEMOCRATS ALREADY
AGREE WITH THIS.
THEY HAVE BEEN DEMANDING
IMPEACHMENT FOR QUITE A WHILE
NOW.
>> DO YOU STILL THINK THE
PRESIDENT SHOULD BE I
IMPEACHED? T
>> ABSOLUTELY.
>> IMPEACHMENT IS NOT DEAD.
ONE STEP CLOSER TO
IMPEACHMENT.'S
US ONE STEPP CLOSER.
YESTERDAY'S RESOLUTION BROUGHT
>> I WILL BE DEDICATING
100 PERCENT OF MY TIME,
EFFORT, AND RESOURCES TO ONE
CAUSE.
WORKING FOR MR. TRUMP'S
IMPEACHMENT AND REMOVAL FROM
OFFICE.
>> Tucker: TOM STEYER,
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, HE'S
A MUCH BETTER PERSON THAN
YOU ARE.
HE HAS BEEN CALLING FOR
IMPEACHMENT FOR LONG TIME.
BUT DURING THE 2018 MIDTERM
CAMPAIGN, DEMOCRATS TRIED
THEIR BEST TO MUTE THAT MESSAGE.
THEIR LEADERS TOLD THE BASE
BE QUIET, SHHH, YOU DON'T
WANT TO SCARE PEOPLE.
NO MORE TALKING ABOUT
IMPEACHMENT.
WE BELIEVE IN DEMOCRATIC
SOLUTIONS TO LEADERS WE
DON'T LIKE.
THEY ARE STILL SAYING THAT SORT
OF IN PUBLIC, BUT WILL THEY BE
ABLE TO KEEP THE IMPEACHMENT
ENTHUSIASTS IN THEIR PARTY
UNDER CONTROL?
THAT'S THEHE QUESTION.
MARK STEYN HAS BEEN THINKING
ABOUT THIS QUITE A BIT AND
HE JOINS US TONIGHT.
NCMARK, WHAT DID YOU MAKE,
SINCE YOU ARE A LONG-TIME,
LONG-TIME MAGAZINE WRITER,
YOU READ THIS PIECE WHAT
DID YOU MAKE OF THE ARGUMENT
IT MADE FOR IMPEACHMENT?
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I
AGREE WITH YOUR ASSESSMENT OF
THE DIMINISHED STATEMENT OF
"THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY."
I USED TO WRITE FOR "THE
ATLANTIC" A DECADE OR SO
BACK.
I'M NOT SAYING I'M ONE OF
THEIR GIANTS, BUT GO BACK
THROUGH THE YEARS MARK TWAIN AND
LORD MOLTEN AND ALL KINDS OF
GREAT PEOPLE WRITING FOR
THEM.TI
THIS THING GOES WRONG RIGHT
FROM UNDER THE SUBHEADLINE,
STARTING, "THE PROCESS OF
IMPEACHMENTND WILL REIGN IN A
PRESIDENT WITH AMERICAN
IDEALS AND DEBATE INTO
CONGRESS WHERE IT BELONGS."
ACTUALLY AMERICAN IDEALS,
AMERICAN VALUES, HOWEVER YOUT,
WANT TO PHRASE IT, THOSE
TRANSCENDENTAL VALUES, THEY ARE
THE PROVINCE OF THE PEOPLE
AND THAT IS THE PREROGATIVE
OF THE PEOPLE, NOT OF
BUREAUCRATS, ADMINISTRATORS
AND PSEUDO-JUDICIAL PROCESS
IN WASHINGTON.
AS FOROR THE DEBATE ABOUT HIS
FITNESS, BRINGING IT INTO IN
CONGRESS WHERE IT BELONGS,
NO, THAT TOO, HIS FITNESS FOR
OFFICE, THAT, TOO, IS IN THE
GIFT OF THE PEOPLE AND WE'RE
TEACHING A VERY DANGEROUS
LESSON HERE.
BASICALLY, THEY ARE NOT
DISPUTING THAT TRUMP WAS
ELECTED ACCORDING TO THE
LAWFUL MECHANISMS OF
WHAT THEY ARE SAY SAYING IS THEY
DON'T LIKE THE RESULT OF THAT
ELECTION.
YOU ARE TEACHING THE PEOPLE
A VERY DANGEROUS LESSON THERE.
YOU ARE SAYING THAT VOTING
DOESN'T MATTER.
AND, IN ESSENCE, THEREBY,
SETTING IN MOTION ESSENTIALLY
REVOLUTIONARY CONDITIONS.
IF YOU TELL PEOPLE IN A FREE
SOCIETY THAT YOUR VOTE
DOESN'T MATTER.
>> Tucker: I THINK YOU ARE
ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
I THINK THERE ARE LEADERS ON
THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE WHO
SENSE THAT WHAT YOU ARE
SAYING IS RIGHT. Y
AND THERE COULD -- THEY
COULD BE UNLEASHING FORCES
THEY CAN'T CONTROL AND MIGHT
BE HURTING THEMSELVES.
WHAT DO YOUMS THINK WOULD
HAPPEN POLITICALLY IF
IMPEACHMEN COMMENCED?
>> OH, I THINK IT WOULD BE
AN ABSOLUTE FIASCO.
ONE OF THE MOST DEPLORABLE
TRENDS IN THIS COUNTRY IN
THE LAST FEW YEARS IS THE
ATTEMPT TO ACTUALLY
CRIMINALIZE OPPOSITION.
BASICALLY THIS GUY'S PIECE
IS WRITTEN IN A
PSEUDO-SCHOLARLY,
PSEUDO-JUDICIAL FORM.
BUT IT'S FULL OF WHAT
LAWYERS WOULD CALL CONCLUSORY
ALLEGATIONS THAT YOU ARE NOT
ALLOWED TO MAKE IN A LEGAL
COMPLAINT.
HE USED -- YOU CALLED IT
GENERAL BADNESS.
HE ACCUSES TRUMP OF ATTACKING
THE BEDROCK OF AMERICAN
DEMOCRACY.
WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S
THE -- THAT'S KIND OF FANCY
WRITING.
BUT WHAT DOES THAT ACTUALLY
MEAN?
THERE T IS NOT A -- THERE IS
NO BEDROCK OF AMERICAN
DEMOCRACY.
IT'S NOT DOWN THERE BY THE
FENCE IN EL PASO AND YOU
TAKE A PICK AX TO IT.
YOU CAN'T ACTUALLY LITIGATE
YOU CAN REVILE THIS
PRESIDENT.N
YOU CAN LOATHE THIS
PRESIDENT.
>> Tucker: RIGHT.
>> ROBERT MUELLER HAS BEEN
INVESTIGATING HIM FOR TWO
YEARS AND HAS COME UP EMPTY,
EXCEPT FOR PAPADOPOULOS
LYING ABOUT A COCKTAIL HE
HAD WITH THE AUSTRALIAN HIGH
COMMISSIONER TO THE UNITED
KINGDOM IN A BAR IN LONDON.
THAT'S AFTER TWO YEARS OFF
THIS RUBBISH.
>> Tucker: IT WAS A VERY
DANGEROUS COCKTAIL, THOUGH.
MARK STEYN PUT IT BETTER
THAN ANYONE I KNOW.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, TUCKER.
>> Tucker: SYRIA ISN'T THE
ONLY MILITARY COMMITMENT
AMERICA HAS ABROAD RIGHT
NOW.
OR OUR LARGEST.
14,000 TROOPS REMAIN IN
AFGHANISTAN.
THERE AREFG REPORTS THE
PRESIDENT IS CONSIDERING
WITHDRAWING SOME OR ALL OF
IS THAT WISE?
WHAT SHOULD OUR POLICY TOWARD
AFGHANISTAN BE?
HOW DOES IT EFFECT OUR
CONTEST WITH CHINA?
OUR BIGGEST RIVAL?
ROBERT CAPLIN HAS BEEN MORE
PLACES THAN ANYONE I'M AWARE OF.
HE'S A SENIOR FELLOW AT THE
CENTER FOR NEW AMERICAN
SECURITY AND HE U JOINS US
TONIGHT.
MR. CAPLIN, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR COMING ON.
BEIT'S MY PLEASURE TO
HERE.
>> Tucker: SO YOU HAVE
WRITTEN ABOUT AFGHANISTAN,
THOUGHT ABOUT AFGHANISTAN A
LOT ABOUT AFGHANISTAN.
IN YOURY JUDGMENT, WHAT'S THE
RIGHT COURSE GOING FORWARD?
AFGHANISTAN?
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, LET'SEE
LAY OUT SOME FACTS.
THE UNITED STATES HAS BEEN
IN AFGHANISTAN FOR 17 YEARS.
THE TROOPS BEING DEPLOYED
THERE NOW WERE IN DIAPERS,
LITERALLY, WHEN WE FIRST
WENT IN OCTOBER 2001.
WE HAVE NO CHANCE TO MILITARILY
DEFEAT THE TALIBAN.
AND WE HAVE LITTLE CHANCE TO
LEAVE BEHIND EITHER A
SELF-SUSTAINING DEMOCRACY OR
EVEN A SELF-SUSTAINING, VERY
WELL-FUNCTIONING ENLIGHTENED
DICTATORSHIP.
ALL THE TREND LINES ARE BAD,
IT SEEMS, UNFORTUNATELY.
AND WHAT WE'RE SUSTAINING AT
THE MOMENT IS A MODERATE
LEVEL OF CHAOS, WHERE WAR
LORDS, ETHNIC GROUPS
COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER AND
IF WE PULLED OUT,
UNFORTUNATELY, THERE WOULD
BE A MUCH GREATER LEVEL OF
CHAOS AND, IN FACT, THE
REGIME MIGHT ACTUALLY
COLLAPSE IN THE WAY THAT THE
SAIGON REGIME COLLAPSED IN
1975.
THEREFORE, EITHER THIS
PRESIDENT OR THE NEXT
PRESIDENT, WHOEVER, IS GOING
TO FACE THE CHOICE OF HOW TO
PULL OUT OF AFGHANISTAN.
BECAUSE THE TERRORIST THREAT
IS STILL THERE, BUT THE
QUESTION BECOMES, IS SPENDING
$45 BILLION A YEAR THERE THE
RIGHT WAY TO DEAL WITH
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM?
BECAUSE THE IRANIANS, THE
INDIANS, THEHE PAKISTANIS,
THE CHINESE ALL HAVE
STRONG, STRATEGIC INTEREST IN
AFGHANISTAN.
WE DO NOT.
OUR STRATEGIC INTEREST
THERE, AND IT'S COMPLICATED
TO EXPLAIN, WE DON'T HAVE
TIME NOW, ARE MUCH, MUCH
LESS.
SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO
PULL OUT UNDER THIS
PRESIDENT OR THE NEXT ONE.
>> Tucker: SO WHAT YOU JUST
SAID SOUNDS RIGHT, AND IT
SOUNDS LIKE IT'S PROBABLY A
CONCLUSION THAT'S BEEN CLEAR
FOR A WHILE.
WHAT DOES IT SAY ABOUT OUR
POLICYMAKERS HERE IN
WASHINGTON THAT NOBODY, THATSH
I'M AWARE OF,, IS DEBATING
THIS AT A HIGH LEVEL IN
PUBLIC ANYWAY AND THAT THISIS
HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO PERSIST
IN THIS KIND OF COUNTER
PRODUCTIVE LIMBO FOR SO
LONG?
>> YES.
THIS IS A CLASSIC CASE OF
WHERE MANY PEOPLE IN
WASHINGTON, MANY THOUGHTFUL
PEOPLE, KNOW WHAT NEEDS TO BE
DONE, BUT NOBODY DARES UTTER
IT.
REMEMBER, AFGHANISTAN IS NOT
SYRIA.
SYRIA, YOU DON'T HAVE GOLD
STAR FAMILIES WHERE WE HAVE
HAD 2300 SOLDIERS KILLED AS
WE HAVE HADD IN AFGHANISTAN.
YOU DON'T HAVE VERY ESTEEMED
GENERALS' REPUTATIONS BUILT
AROUND SYRIA, WHEREAS IN
AFGHANISTAN WE HAVE HAD A
NUMBER OF VERY SENIOR,
ESTEEMED, FAMOUS GENERALS WHO
HAVE BEEN COMMANDERS THERE.
PULLING OUT OF AFGHANISTANAN
WOULD BE POLITICALLY MUCH
MORE DIFFICULT, I BELIEVE,
FOR THIS PRESIDENT OR ANY
PRESIDENT THAN PULLING OUT
OF SYRIA.
PULLING OUT OF SYRIA
DOMESTICALLY, POLITICALLY,
IS A WASHINGTON DEBATE MORE
PULLING OUT OF AFGHANISTAN
OR LESS.
MAY BECOME A NATIONAL
DEBATE.
>> Tucker: I THINK THAT'S
RIGHT.
MR. KAPLAN, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR COMING ON TONIGHT
AND EXPLAINING THAT.
I APPRECIATE IT.
>> MY PLEASURE.
>> Tucker: WELL, A PROMINENT
HOUSE DEMOCRAT, IT'S HARD TO
BELIEVE THIS, BUT IS ACCUSED
TONIGHT OF FIRING A STAFF
MEMBER AFTER THAT STAFF
MEMBER MADE AN ALLEGATION OFOF
RAPE.
AMAZING.
WE HAVE GOT DETAILS AFTER
THE BREAK.
>> PRETTY AMAZING STORY NOT
>> Tucker: PRETTY AMAZING STORYT
NOT GETTING ENOUGH ATTENTION
TONIGHT.
A HOUSE DEMOCRATIC STAFF ISBE
SUING A DEMOCRATIC MEMBER OF
CONGRESS.
THE STAFF SAYS SHE WAS FIRED
FOR MAKING AN ALLEGATION OF
RAPE.
FOXX CORRESPONDENT DAVID WAS
ON THIS STORY TONIGHT FOR
US.
DAVID?
>> TUCKER, AS YOU WERE
SAYING, DISTURBING
ALLEGATIONS COMING FROM A
FORMER EMPLOYEE OF LONG TIME
TEXAS CONGRESSWOMAN SHEILA
JACKSON LEE.
THIS FORMER EMPLOYEE CLAIMS SHE
WAS RAPED BY A FORMER BLACK
CAUCUS FOUNDATION EMPLOYEE AND
FIRED BY JACKSON LEE'S
OFFICE A AFTER THE EMPLOYEE
PLANNED TO SUE.
THE FORMER JACKSON LEE STAFFER
NAMED JANE DOE IN A LAWSUIT
FILED LAST FRIDAY SAID A FORMER
INTERN COORDINATOR FOR THE
CAUCUS FOUNDATION NAMED, A
MAN NAMED DAMIAN JONES.
SHE IS SAYING HE RAPED HER
IN 2015.
JONES WAS SUPERVISOR AT THE
TIME.
DOE REPORTED THE ALLEGED
RAPE TO AUTHORITIES BUT THE
INVESTIGATION WAS
INCONCLUSIVE WHEN IT CAME TO
EVIDENCE.
WELL, WHEN SHE WENT TO TELL
AUTHORITIES, FAST FORWARD TO
2017, JANE DOE TOOK A JOBWA
WITH CONGRESSWOMAN JACKSON LEE
OUT OF TEXAS, WHO BECAME
CHAIR OF THE CONGRESSIONAL
BLACK CAUCUS FOUNDATION.
JANE DOE FOUND OUT THAT
DAMION JONES WAS ALSO GOING
TO BE WORKING WITH HER AGAIN
AND SHEE REPORTED TO
AUTHORITIES THAT SHE HAD A
PRIOR SITUATION WITH HIM.
NOW JANE DOE SAYS THAT SHE
REPEATEDLY REACHED OUT TO
CONGRESSWOMAN JACKSON LEE,
WHO WOULD NOT MEET HER.
TO BE CLEAR, WE HAVE REACHED
OUT TO DAMIEN JONES,
MENTIONED IN THIS LAWSUIT,
FOR COMMENT.
WE DO HAVE A STATEMENT FROM
WE HAVE NOT HEARD BACK.
CONGRESSWOMAN JACKSON LEE'S
OFFICE.
I WANT TO READ IT.
IN PART IT, "THE OFFICE
ADAMANTLY DENIES THE
ALLEGATIONS THAT RETALIATED
AGAINST HER OTHERWISE
IMPROPERLY TREATED THE
PLAINTIFF.
IT IS AGAINST OFFICE POLICY
TO DISCUSS SPECIFIC DETAILS
ABOUT INTERNAL PERSONNEL
MATTERS.
CONGRESSWOMAN SHEILA JACKSON
LEE HAS AN OUTSTANDING RECORDD
OF SUPPORTING CIVIL RIGHTS
AND NONDISCRIMINATION BOTH
IN LEGISLATION AND IN HER
OFFICE."
WHEN SHE CAME TO CONGRESS, SHE
WAS A STRONG PROPONENT OF THE
CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY
ACT, WHICH PROTECTS
CONGRESSIONAL EMPLOYEES.
THE STATEMENT SAYS JACKSON LEE
IS CONFIDENT WHEN THE
FACTS COME TO LIGHT HER
OFFICE WILL BE EXONERATED
AND THE MATTER WILL BE PUT
TOER REST.
TUCKER?
>> Tucker: HER DEFENSE, I'M
A GOOD PERSON.
DAVID SPENT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR THAT.
>> YOU BET.
THANK YOU.
>> Tucker: WELL, AS
AMERICA'S OPIOID EPIDEMIC
CONTINUES, IN SOME WAYS
WORSENS, A NEW FEATURE IS
COMING TO A DECAYING
METROPOLITAN NEAR YOU, IT'S
CALLED A SAFE INJECTION SITE.
RATHERGS THAN HELP ADDICTS GET
OFF DRUGS, MANY CITIES ARE
TRYING TO CREATE PUBLICLY
FUNDED AREAS WHERE ADDICTS
CAN SHOOT DRUGS
INTRAVENOUSLY LEGALLY.
DENVER JUST APPROVED ONE.
De BLASIO WOULD LIKE ONE IN
NEW YORK, SEATTLE HAS BEEN
FIGHTING TO OPEN ONE FOR YEARS.
THE QUESTION IS WILL ANY OF
THESE SITES, IF THEY'RE
OPENED, OPEN UP ANYWHERE
NEAR THE HOMES OF THE PEOPLE
WHO WANT TO BUILD THEM?
THE ANSWER IS, OF COURSE, NO.
WHAT IS IT LIKE WHEN ONE
OPENS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD?R
A RADIO HOST JOINS US TONIGHT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
COMING ON.
SO THIS IS ONE OF THOSE
IDEAS THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED
FOR MANY YEARS.
IT EXISTED MOSTLY IN THE
REALM W OF THE THEORETICAL.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT BECOMES
WHAT'S THE EFFECT OF ONE OF
REAL??
ESTHESE SITES?
>> THE EFFECT IS EXACTLY
WHAT YOU PROBABLY THINK IT
IS.
IT HAS THE CAPACITY TO RUIN
WENT UP TO
I WENT UP TO VANCOUVER AND
BRITISH COLUMBIA.
I HAPPENED TO BE THERE ON
VACATION.
I DECIDED LET ME GO TO THE
HEROIN INJECTION SITE AREA.
AND IT'S DEVASTATING.
YOU SEE LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO
ARE LIVING OUT ON THE
STREETS WITH ADDICTION
THAT'S CLEARLY NOT BEING
TREATED.
I SAW, YOU KNOW, A DRUG DEAL
GOING DOWN WHEN I WAS THERE,E,
WHICH APPARENTLY IS NOT
SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN WHEN YOU
HAVE THESE HEROIN INJECTION
SITES.
AND IT'S JUST SAD.TE
AND THE DEBATE HAS BEEN, AT
LEAST HERE IN SEATTLE, I'M
ASSUMING IN DENVER SOON, WE
DON'T WANT THEM NECESSARILY
IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
>> Tucker: IT ALSO IS SAD --
THIS HAS BEEN TRIED IN
EUROPE.
I BELIEVE THIS WAS TRIED IN
SWITZERLAND 20 YEARS AGO AND
IT WAS STOPPED BECAUSE IT
WAS TOO DEPRESSING.
DOESN'T IT SUGGEST THAT
MUNICIPALITIES ARE GIVING UP
ON THE PEOPLE?
WE'RE NOT GOING TO TRY TO
HEROIN AND GIVE YOU TREATMENT,
WE WILL LET YOU DO IT UNTIL
I GUESS YOU DIE?
IS THAT THEY ARE SAYING?
WHAT ARE THEY SAYING?
>> IT'S AN UNFORTUNATE
REALITY.
WHEN THEY FIRST STARTED TO
TALKING ABOUT IT IN SEATTLE
IT WAS ABOUT SAVING PEOPLE,
RIGHT?
IT WAS ABOUT HELPING PEOPLE
WHO WERE ADDICTED TO HEROIN.
AND THEN IT STARTED OF TO
BECOME OKAY, WELL, NOW IT'S
JUST ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT
WHEN THEY DO INJECT
THEMSELVES WITH THIS DEADLY
DRUG, THEY DON'T DIE OF AN
OVERDOSE WHICH IS SOMETHING,
YOU KNOW, NO ONE WANTS TO
SEE OVERDOSE DEATHS.
I THINK --
>> Tucker: OF COURSE NOT.
>> IN SOME CASES, A LOT OF
THESE PEOPLE'S HEARTS ARE IN
THE RIGHT PLACE.
A REALLY SAFE WAY TO DEAL
WITH THIS IS TO GET THERS
PERSON OFF OF HEROIN.
WE CAN OFFER TREATMENT ON
DEMAND, WHICH IS SOMETHING
THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE
MONEY FOR, IN A STATE
WHERE THE GOVERNOR, WHO
PRESIDENT -- HE'S NOT GOING TO
BE.
HE SUGGESTED $1.1 BILLION TO
SAVE THE ORCAS IN THE PUGET
SOUND, AND SAVING THE ORCAS
VERY IMPORTANT.
BUT HE OFFERED 30 MILLION TO
DEAL WITH THE OPIOID CRISIS.
AND IT WOULD FEEL MORE
APPROPRIATE IF MAYBE YOU
SWITCHED THOSE NUMBERS
AROUND.
>> Tucker: RIGHT.
THAT'S FOR SURE.E.
>> HUMAN LIFE IS A LITTLE
MORE VALUABLE HERE.
>> Tucker: LEADERS ARE
SUPPOSED TO, NEED TO, CARE
ABOUT THE PEOPLE THEY LEAD
OR ELSE THEY CAN'T LEAD
EFFECTIVELY.
ISPO THERE A PARENT IN THE
WORLD WHO,AT UPON FINDING OUT
THAT HIS KID WAS USING
HEROIN, DO YOU THINK, WOULD
SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT?
I'M GOING TO GET YOU CLEAN
NEEDLES, YOU CAN SHOOT UP ININ
YOUR BEDROOM.
I CAN'T STOP YOU, BUT I WANT
YOU TO INJECT SAFELY AT
HOME.
WOULD ANY PARENT SAY THAT OR
WOULD A PARENT SAY I WILL DO
WHATEVER I CAN TO HELP GET
YOU OFF IT.
>> PARENTS WHO SUPPORT IT SAYPE
THEY WERE A PARENT IN THAT
CIRCUMSTANCE THEY WOULD.
WHEN YOU TALK TO NORMAL
PEOPLE AND TALK TO THE
AVERAGE EVERYDAY PERSON, OF
COURSE THEY DON'T WANT THAT
TO HAPPEN.
I FEEL LIKE IF WE'RE NOT
GOING TO DO THAT WITH OUR
OWN KIDS, PERHAPS WE SHOULD
NOT DO THAT WITH OTHER
PEOPLE'S KIDS.
I KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT.
I KNOW THAT IT IS EXPENSIVE.
AND I KNOW THAT WHEN PEOPLE
ARE ADDICTED TO HEROIN, YOU
KNOW, THEY HAVE TO BE IN A
PLACE WHERE THEY FEEL READY
TO OVERCOME THAT ADDICTION.
SOMETHING THAT GETS IN THE WAY
OF THEM GETTING READY, IS
HANDING THEM A NEEDLE AND SAY,
SHOOT UP.
IT'S SEATTLE, IT WILL BE
CRAZY.
WE WILL SET THE MOOD LIGHT
RIGHT.
WE HAVE SMOOTH JAZZ IN THE
BACKGROUND.BO
THAT'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE
WAY TO GO ABOUT THIS.
I WOULD RATHER WE SPEND,
FOCUS OUR ENERGY ON ACTUAL
SERVICES TO SAVE THEM, TO
GET THEM OFF OF THIS DRUG.
>> Tucker: EXACTLY.
SO NICELY PUT.
IT IS DIFFICULT.
IT IS COMPLICATED.
BUT THAT'S WHAT YOU DO WHEN
YOU CARE..
AND WHEN YOU DON'T CARE, YOU
DO EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE
DOING NOW.
THEY DON'T CARE, DO THEY?
>> IT'S -- I DON'T WANT TO
SAY NONE OF THEM CARE.
RIGHT?
I THINK THERE ARE SOME
PEOPLE WHOSE HEARTS ARE IN
THE RIGHT PLACE --
>> Tucker: YES, I BET THAT
TRUE. A
>> IT DOES SEEM TO BE A LAZY
WAY.THHY
IT'S JUST LAZIER.
AND I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO
THINK ABOUT WHY SOME PEOPLE
SUPPORT THIS AND I HAVEN'T
REALLY GOTTEN A
STRAIGHT ANSWER.
SOME PEOPLE WHO BASICALLY
WANT A TO LEGALIZE HEROIN.
THERE IS A SMALL GROUP OFSI
PEOPLE BUT THERE ARE FOLKS
IN THIS COMMUNITY WHO ARE
FIGHTING FOR HEROIN
INJECTION SITES WHO ARE OF
THE OPINION THAT YOU CAN
LIVE A NORMAL LIFE AND HAVE
NORMAL RELATIONSHIPS AND BE
BASICALLY A FUNCTIONING
ADDICT.
AND I SUPPOSE THAT'S
CERTAINLY POSSIBLE WITH SOME
CASES.
BUT I DON'T THINK THE RISK
IS WORTH IT AND SO YOU START
TALKING TO PEOPLE, AND THEY JUST
FEEL LIKE IT SEEMS
LIKE THEY DON'T WANT TO
OFFEND SOMEONE WHO IS
ADDICTED AND THEY WANT TO BE
THERE WHEN YOU ARE READY AND
IT'S A VERYK. EMOTIONAL
APPROACH.
AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE
EMOTION BEHIND IT, IT'S JUST
DOESN'T WORK.
THAT'S HOW THE CONVERSATION
APPARENTLY, AGAIN, STARTED
WE ARE SAVING PEOPLE.
OKAY.
WELL, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE
ACTUALLY GETTING OFF OF
THEIR ADDICTION, AND
MAGICALLY THERE IS NO DATA
THAT THEY CAN CITE.
>> Tucker: EXACTLY.
JUNKIES DON'T FEEL ANYTHING.
YOU CAN'TOU BE ALIVE IF YOU
DON'T FEEL THINGS.
JASON, THANK YOU.
IT WAS REALLY SMART AND
INTERESTING AND HELPFUL.
APPRECIATE IT.
>> M IT THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> Tucker: TIME FOR "FINAL
EXAM."
WE HAVE A PRETTY DIFFERENT
KIND OF ARRANGEMENT TONIGHT.
A SPECIAL HUSBAND VS. WIFE
EDITION.
WHICH MEMBER OF THE DUFFY
FAMILY WILL TAKE HOME THE
COMMEMORATIVE ERIC WEMPLE
FIND OUT AFTER THE BREAK
♪ ♪
♪
♪ ♪
>> Tucker: TIME NOW FOR "FINAL
EXAM" WHERE WE PUT CONTESTANTS
WHO FOLLOW THE NEWS IT COMES TO
AN HOUR TO SEE WHO'S BEEN PAYING
CLOSER ATTENTION.
WE'VE GOT A DOUBLE SPECIAL
EDITION OF "FINAL EXAM."
TWO CONTENDERS THIS EVENING,
HAVE MARRIED EACH OTHER, NOT
TONIGHT, YEARS AGO.
RACHEL CAMPOS-DUFFY IS
REGULARLY HERE ON FOX.
HER HUSBAND IS A MEMBER OF
CONGRESS FROM WISCONSIN,
CONGRESSMAN SEAN DUFFY, AND
HOPEFULLY THIS WILL
STRENGTHEN RATHER THAN
DIVIDE THEIR UNION.
IT'S GREAT TO SEE YOU!
>> THANK YOU.
>> GREAT TO SEE YOU, TOO.
GROUND HERE.
>> Tucker: PLOWING NEW
>> I'M EXCITED TO BE PART OF
THAT.
>> Tucker: WE'RE EXCITED
TOO.
YOU KNOW THE RULES BUT I WILL
REPEAT THEM FOR THE SAKE OF
PEOPLE WATCHING ATO HOME.
FIRST CONTESTANT TO BUZZ
GETS TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
YOU MUST WAIT UNTIL FINISH
ASKING IT IN ORDER TO
ANSWER.
YOU CAN ANSWER ONCE I
ACKNOWLEDGE PRICING YOUR NAME.
EACH CORRECT ANSWER IS WORTH ONE
POINT.
IF YOU GET IT WRONG, WE DETECTED
...
THE ACCRUAL METHOD OF "FINAL
EXAM."
THE BEST OF FIVE WINS.
>> Tucker: RATING DOES NOT GET
YOU A VICTORY.
THAT'S ANOTHER SHOW ENTIRELY.
[LAUGHTER]
ACCORDING TO THE RULES LAIDTO OT
BY THE NATIONAL GAME SHOW
COMMISSION, ALL OF TODAY'S
QUESTIONS MUST BE EITHER ABOUT
FOOD OR ANIMALS.ST
WE WENT WITH FOOD.
SO THE FIRST QUESTION IS,
MULTIPLE CHOICE, PLEASE LISTEN
CLOSELY.
SAYS HE DOESN'TE
CARE WHAT LAWMAKERS CALL THE
BORDER WALL AND ORDERED --
OFFERED A FOOD-RELATED
SUGGESTION, WHICH NAME DID HE
SUGGEST?
WAS IT A: QUARTER POUNDER WITH
CHEESE?
B: PANCAKES?
C: CHEESECAKE?
THE JUDGES HAVE WEIGHED IN ON
THAT.
>> I WILL GO WITH C.
>> Tucker: IS IT PEACHES?
>> WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT,
IT'S OKAY.
THEY CAN NAME IT WHATEVER.
NAME IT PEACHES.
I DON'T CARE WHAT THEY NAME IT.
WE NEED MONEY.
PEACHES.
>> B PEACHES.
>> Tucker: YOU BOTH KNEW THAT.
>> I DID.
I THOUGHT THE QUESTION --
>> Tucker: YOU KNEW IT TOO
WELL.
>> ALL MULTIPLE CHOICE, HAVE TO
BE --
>> Tucker: YOU HAVE TO WAIT
UNTIL WE FINISH ASKING THE
QUESTION.
WE CAN DO AT THIS TIME.
COSTCO, THE STORE, SAYS IT HAS
SOLD OUT OF A 27 TYPE OF FOOD
THAT IS A SHELF LIFE OF 20
YEARS.
WHAT TYPE OF FOOD WAS IT?
>> OH, --
'S I HIT IT FIRST.
>> MACARONI AND CHEESE.
>> Tucker: YOU HAVE TO HOLD IT
DOWN.
>> I HIT IT FIRST.
>> Tucker: MACARONI AND
CHEESE?
IS IT?
>> EVERYBODY LOVES MACARONI AND
CHEESE.
BUT NOW YOU CAN GET 27 POUNDS.
THAT'S APPARENTLY --
>> Tucker: YOU NEED TO INVEST
IN THAT.
THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD DEAL.
I'M GETTING ONE MYSELF.
>> I'M KIND OF A PROPER MYSELF.
>> Tucker: DON'T ADMIT THAT ON
TV.
YOUR OFFICIAL POSITION ON
PREPPING IS, OH THAT'S CRAZY.
QUESTION THREE, AND OTHER
MULTIPLE CHOICE.
A WORLD RECORD WAS AT THIS WEEK
FOR THE MOST LIKED INSTAGRAM
PHOTO EVER.
THE PICTURE DOES NOT FEATURE A
FAMOUS PERSON OR AN EXOTIC
PLACE, OR THE NEARLY 50 MILLION
LIKES.
IT'S A PLAIN, BORING PHOTOGRAPH
OF WHAT?
A: A BANANA.
B: A LEMON.
C: EGG.
CONGRESSMAN?
>> I WILL GO WITH KYLIE JENNER
AND EGG.
DID NOT SHE TWEAK THAT OUT?
>> Tucker: I DON'T KNOW.
I'M NOT A MEMBER OF CONGRESS.
>> WORLD RECORD EGG.
AN ACCOUNT WITH THAT WEARY NAME
POSTED THIS SINGLE PHOTO, A
PICTURE OF A EGG.
THERE EGG CURRENTLY HAS
26 MILLION LIKES.
HOW DOES THAT WORK?
>> Tucker: EITHER YOU LIVE IN TS
WHOLE COUNTRY AND YOU STILL
DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.
>> IS THEREE A EGG COMMISSION
THAT PROVIDES A EGGS?
IS THERE A BONUS ON THIS ONE?
>> Tucker: THE POULTRY LOBBY.
[LAUGHTER]
>> THAT'S PROBABLY TRUE.
[LAUGHTER]
>> Tucker: QUESTION FOUR.
ONE LAST MULTIPLE-CHOICE.
>> AND WHEN YOU COME THOUGH,
RIGHT?
>> Tucker: IT'S NOT FOR ME TO
KEEP SCORE.
THE VIEWERS ARE WATCHING.
CHAOS AT FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA, ON
MONDAY WHEN A TANKER TRUCK FLIPS
OVER, SPELLING
3500 GALLONS OF WHICH A LIQUID
ALL THE HIGHWAY?
A: CHOCOLATE.
B: COFFEE.
C: BEER.
>> Tucker: WAS IT C, B OR?
>> 3500 GALLONS, THAT IS HOW
MUCH LIQUID CHOCOLATE SPILLED.
A CHOCOLATE RIVER, THEY
DESCRIBED IT.
[LAUGHTER]
>> I WAS LOSING.
I FIGURED BEER.
>> Tucker: DOUBLE DOWN.
I ADMIREIR THAT.
>> SHE IS SHE'S FROM WISCONSIN.
OF COURSE SHE SAID BEER.
[LAUGHTER]
>> Tucker: FINAL QUESTION.
THE CLEMSON TIGERS INVITED TO
THE WHITE HOUSE FOR A CANDLELIT
DINNER TO CELEBRATE THE RECENT
VICTORY OVER ALABAMA.
WHAT TYPE OF FOOD TO THE
PRESIDENT SERVE THE TEAM?
CONGRESSMAN DUFFY?
>> I WAS THERE THIS MORNING.
McDONALD'S.
FROM THE McDONALD'S THAT THE
FOOD CAME FROM, I WAS THERE THIS
MORNING.
>> Tucker: WAS AT
McDONALD'S?
>> WE HAVE PIZZAS, 300
HAMBURGERS.
MANY, MANY FRENCH FRIES.
ALL OF OUR FAVORITE FOODS.
I WANT TO SEE WHAT IS HERE IN
RELIEF.
I DON'T THINK THERE WILL BE MUC
MUCH.
>> AND CARLOS OWNS THE STORE.
>> Tucker: I JUST WANT TO SAY.
IT WAS NOT EXCLUSIVELY, WE ARE
HEARING,EP McDONALD'S, BUT
McDONALD'S WAS REPRESENTED.
YOU ARE RIGHT.
YOU STILL WIN BECAUSE
McDONALD'S, WENDY'S, AND WHAT
WAS THE LAST ONE?
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY FAST FOOD.
>> Tucker: BURGER KING.
IT WAS AN ECUMENICAL.
>> CARLOS OWNS THE McDONALD'S
THAT GAVE THE FRUIT OF THE
WHITE HOUSE.
>> Tucker: IMPRESSIVE!
>> AND A SHUTDOWN, HE'S HAD A
LOT OF -- I'VE BEEN HOME WITH
THE KIDS!!
[LAUGHTER]
>> Tucker: IS A SHARED
VICTORY.
REALLY A VICTORY FOR YOUR
FAMILY.
WE ARE PRO-FAMILY ON THE SHOW.
I WILL REWARD THE ERIK WEMPLE
COMMEMORATIVE MUG DO YOU,
RACHEL.
>> THANK YOU, TUCKER.
>> Tucker: CONGRATULATIONS TO
YOU BOTH.
>> I WATCHED THE EPISODE THAT
YOU HAD WITH HIM ON.
IT'S GREAT.
>> Tucker: WHEN I'M FEELING
SAD, SOMETIMES I WATCH IT.
>> OR IF YOU ARE AND THEY SHUT
DOWN --
>> Tucker: EXACTLY.
[LAUGHTER]
IT'S AMAZING.
THAT'S IT FOR THIS WEEK'S
"FINAL THANK YOU.
I APPRECIATE THE INCREASE IN
PUBLIC URINATION SINCE HE HAS
BEEN IN OFFICE.
IT'S GREAT.
YOU PROBABLY KNOW BY NOW
THAT YOUR SMART PHONE HAS A
LOT OF FUNCTIONS AND ONE OF
THEM IS TO SPY ON YOU FULL
TIME ON YOUR PERSONAL LIFE.
IT'S NOTTI JUST TECH COMPANIES
WHO ARE TRACKING YOUR EVERY
MOVE.
IT TURNS OUTUT THEY'RE SELLING
THATTH DATA TO OTHER PEOPLE.
SO NOW IT'S POSSIBLE FOR
VIRTUALLY ANYBODY TO KNOW
EVERYWHERE THAT YOU GO
WITHOUT YOUR
KNOWLEDGE AND
GET RICH FROM IT.
BRETT LARSON IS AN ANCHOR AT
FOX NEWS HEADLINE 24/7 HE HAS
BEEN INVESTIGATING THIS FOR US
AND HE JOINS US TONIGHT.
>> HEY, TUCKER.
IT IS YET ANOTHER TALE OF
THE TECHNOLOGY WE LOVE AND
RELY ON.
TURNING OVER SENSITIVE
INFORMATION WITHOUT OUR CONSENT.
SO, WHEN YOUR CELL PHONE IS
ON, IT IS IN CONSTANT
COMMUNICATION WITH NEARBY
CELL TOWERS.
THAT WAY, WHEN YOU GET A CALL OR
TEXT OR OPEN UP AN EMAIL, THE
SIGNAL YOU NEED IS RIGHT THERE.
ONE SLIGHT ISSUE.
THAT DATA IS COLLECTED BY THE
MOBILE OPERATORS AND IT TURNS
OUT SOME OF THEM HAVE BEEN
SELLING IT, AND NOT TO LAW
ENFORCEMENT, BUT A VARIETY
OF THEM, LIKE BAIL BONDSMEN,
CAR DEALERS AND EMERGENCY
ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE.
SOME OF THESE COMPANIES THAT
GET THE DATA THEY MAY BE
TURNING AROUND AND SELLING
IT AGAIN.
WHICH MEANS IF YOU HAVE GOT
SOMEONE'S CELL NUMBER AND
MONEY CAN YOU FIND OUT IN
REAL TIME WHERE THAT PHONE
IS.
THIS ISN'T ANYTHING NEW.
LAST YEAR THERE WERE
GRUMBLINGS ON CAPITOL HILL.
OREGON SENATOR WIDEN SENT
SUBPOENAS TO THE CELL
PROVIDERS TO T GET THE
SITUATION UNDER CONTROL.
THERE WAS A FLURRY OF PROVIDERS
BUT HERE WE ARE IN 2019 AND IT'S
STILL HAPPENING.
EXAMPLE LAST WEEK FROM
ONLINE SITE, MOTHERBOARD,
THEY FOUND WITH A LITTLE
CASH AND PHONE NUMBER THEY
WERE ABLE TO GET LOCATION
INFORMATION OF A USER'S
PHONE.
REPORT, ALL THE MAJOR
WITHIN A FEW DAYS OF THE
WIRELESS CARRIERS SAID THEY
HAVE STOPPED OR THEY WILL
STOP SELLING YOUR DATA, WITH
A FEW EXCEPTIONS LIKE THOSE
FOR SAFETY REASONS AND
SO PROBABLY NOTHING'S GOING TO
CHANGE FOR NOW.
>> Tucker: YEAH, FALLS TO
RON WIDEN OF ALL PEOPLE AND
GOOD FOR HIM TO KEEP ABREAST
OF THIS.
SO, LET ME ASK A DUMB
QUESTION.EN
WHEN YOU SIGN UP FOR ONE OF
THESE PHONES, BUY IT, GET THE
PLAN, IS THERE ANY
INDICATION -- IS THERE ANY
WAY TO KNOW, IF YOU ARE AN
AVERAGE PERSON WITH BAD
EYESIGHT, THEY ARE GOING TO
BE SELLING YOUR DATA?
>> THERE IS NO WAY TO KNOW.
ALL OF THIS STUFF SO FAR HAS
NOT BEEN AN OPT IN SITUATION.
YOU ARE NOT GETTING A
MESSAGE THAT SAYS, HEY, WE
ARE ABOUT TO TELL SOMEBODY
EXACTLY WHERE YOUR PHONE IS,
ARE YOU OKAY WITH THIS.
ALL THE CARRIERS SAID
YEAH, THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO
BE DOING THAT, IF THEY'RE NOT
DOING THAT, THEY ARE IN
VIOLATION OF OUR AGREEMENT.
BUT THEY ARE STILL
TELLING -- THEY ARE STILL
SELLING THE DATA AND PEOPLE
CAN GET THEIR HANDS ON IT.
>> Tucker: I T DON'T KNOW WHY
I'M LAUGHING.
IT'S HORRIFYING.
>> WE SHOULDN'T BE LAUGHING BUT
IT'S HORRIFYING -- OH, MY GOSH,Y
WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO TO MAKE IT
STOP?
>> Tucker: WORSE THAN YOU
TTHINK IT IS ALWAYS.
THANKS FOR PROVING THAT,
BRETT LARSON, GOOD TO SEE
YOU.
>> THANKS, TUCKER.
>> Tucker: BE BACK TOMORROW
NIGHT 8:00 P.M.
THE SHOW THAT'S THE SW