tv Tucker Carlson Tonight FOX News January 29, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm PST
ready to go in washington, d.c., cold nights out across the midwt and a cold night in a lot of places. to stay warm, bundle up, stick around and watch more fox news throughout the night. good night, everybody. ♪ >> tucker: good evening, welcome to "tucker carlson tonight," one of the great secrets of washington, something we don't tell anybody outside the city is that the only people who really benefit from the presidential primaries are the political consultants who work in them. the candidates themselves almost always finish the experience sadder, poirier, and humiliated. the public it's a whole thing, they get to spend half a year tormented by the white noise of 32nd attack ads. only the consultants really seemed to enjoy themselves. and why when that day, they walk away rich. it is a great deal. they have every incentive to recruit new suckers to the game. their latest market is a
billionaire called howard schultz, he is a former ceo of starbucks. a pair of slick consultants somehow convinced howard schultz that he could be president. over the weekend he announced that he may get in the brace. here is the twist, scholz, and entirely imaginal affluent liberal says that he is not planning to run as a democrat, but instead as an independent. while, democrats were horrified by this, boycott starbucks started trending on twitter. michael bloomberg denounced scholz, some of the left were so angry that they screamed at howard schultz when he went in public. watch what happened at a book event last night. >> go help elect trump, you egotistical billionaire [bleep]. go back with the other billionaire elite who think that they know how to run the world! that is not what we want.
>> tucker: and fairness, the heckler made some solid points, the last thing we need is another egomaniacal davos running the country into the ground. if you seem barely thought that barack obama did a great job as president, you would probably be perfectly happy with howard schultz at the helm, but nobody really thinks that obama did a great job as president, they just all feel obligated to pretend he did. nobody wants to be rude about it. and yet schultz's problems are not really related to what he believes. his political positions, his views are really indistinguishable from nancy pelosi's views. his sin is running third party. that is a threat to the one thing that democrats actually care about, and no, it is not fighting climate change or preserving a woman's right to choose, or even protecting those noble undocumented migrants that they are always lecturing you about. democrats are flexible on that stuff. they are just talking points, bargaining chips to keep their
coalition together, whatever. what democrats really want, what they are not kidding about at all is political power. the right to run things. the right to be in charge. power. and they want it so bad that they can taste it. poor hapless howard schultz and his huber funded midlife crisis just got in their way. so they have to crush him. at least one democrat was honest enough to admit this. >> i have a concern that if he did run, that essentially it would provide donald trump with his best hope of getting reelected. i would suggest to mr. schultz to truly think about the negative impact that that might make. >> tucker: the media was watching and taking notes, even now you hear them refer to the press corps as liberal. they are not liberal in any recognizable sense of the word. genuine liberals would welcome howard schultz into the race.
more candidates, more opinions, more diversity of thought. may the best ideas win. that's when in actual liberal would say. that's not what the media is saying. they are not liberals. they are loyalists. they are party people. diligent worker bees, toiling from the benefit of the democratic party masters. so of course they parroted the line precisely. michelle goldberg of "the new york times" who embodies this cold schultz is run "reckless idiocy." she did not even mention his views about anything. it is irrelevant. "the daily beast" accused schultz of racism, because that often works as a line of attack. at the starbucks music storm was painfully white, read a story today. whatever it takes, and of course the dummies on tv news spread their talking points faithfully. watch. >> he may run for president as an independent. a democrats fearing that he could help president trump win the reelection. >> democrats are uneasy.
>> he could take away votes i would go to the democratic nominee. >> democrats warned that he could cost them in the white house. >> democrats we are that there the democratic nominee. >> are freaking out today if he was to split the anti-trump a vote, that is a conceivable path up the middle for donald trump. >> tucker: oh, trump might benefit. another way to look at the democratic hysteria over hard schultz getting under the race, mark cuban summed it up pretty well today. "if 21 months before an election you do not believe they are candidates platform is strong enough to win an election with independent candidates, you might want to rethink who you support." yes, you might want to redo that. maybe get some ideas that appeal to actual voters, something like that. the irony is that the very people who are the most upset about howard schultz entering the presidential race are the very same ones who have been yelling at you about how vital democracy is. and how they are the defenders
of democracy. and yet, somehow, three candidates on a single ballot is just way too many for them. you get the strong feeling they would rather just see one candidates on the ballot, that way they would win every time. voters could not screw it up with dumb opinions. we have seen all of this before, many times. ralph nader went through a 20 ran third party in 2,000, joel stein saw it on the green party ticket, do you remember that? they called or an agent of russia for daring to do that, they did not charge her for the crime, so she is free to join us tonight, dr. jill stein, thank you for coming on. do you think the party of diversity would be for more diverse abuse, but they are not, why is that? >> i'm not sure that it is a party of diversity, we have two parties that are working for corporate masters and the fossil fuel giants in the big banks, wall street, and the war machine. that is not my opinion that to
the democrats is the party of diversity, but ford voters dese more choices. in the last election we saw over 100 million voters, the largest bloc of voters is not to voting, because they are not being represented by the system. we need noncorporate choices and people power choices. and we can have those choices without fear of splitting votes. there is a win-win solution. it is called ranked choice voting. the state of maine just passed it. it is used by millions of voters around the country. so it really makes obsolete this whole issue of the struggle between welcome we have choices? or do we have to force people into two pigeonholes that the majority of voters, almost 60% of voters are saying that we need a new independent political party, because they are tired of being thrown under the bus by the other two. whether we have democrats or republicans. it is not working out so well for everyday working people.
>> tucker: i think that is probably right. >> we need more choices, and we can have it. so let's not keep that a secret. we should require these elected to actually pass a simple reform, the state of maine just stayed in it. it is available to us right now. >> tucker: i wonder -- >> before the 2020 election pretty >> tucker: i follow that closely, because i am interested in maine, i'm not sure that i understand ranked-choice voting for the people i may not understand it. >> they think that they do. >> i may be they do maybe i would if i studied harder. >> i can explain it to your really quick. >> tucker: you could not, trust me, i have tried. here's a broader question, why does the media cooperates with this effort to shut down anybody who offers an actual to what we have? it open minded enough to let the candidates speak of their piece, do they
have to crush people, accuse them of being russian agents if they have a different view? >> if they were doing their job, their job is to educate voters, not to tell voters or to pigeonhole voters or to vilify voters for expressing their discontent with two parties that have thrown them under the bus. in the last election we had two candidates who are the most disliked an untrusted in modern history, and 75% of voters were screaming for open debates. they wanted to hear from the libertarian and the grain. they wanted to hear from a debate about our war machine. which is going full speed ahead, and the last tax day, the average taxpayer paid over $3500, practically to the war machine, and $40 to the epa to give us clean air and water. how's that working out for us? not so well.
>> tucker: everything needs to be debated. that is a place where we agree vehemently, are you going to run again in 2020, do you think? >> i do not have any plans to run at this point. there is plenty to do. and i feel like i've done my duty this time around. and it is time for someone else to carry that banner, but i am certainly fighting for the cause of more voice is more choices on the political system. >> tucker: i agree with that 100%, you are not a russian agent if you think that. dr. jill stein, thank you very much. democratic pollster that worked with bill clinton, and the founder of women insight strategies, think you for coming on. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: i do not understand, and maybe i do understand, and that is why i am offended over howard schultz, who is not what we need, but the idea that anybody who might threaten the party needs to be destroyed strikes me as a stalinist reaction. >> let's call a spade a spade,
howard schultz has no experience, no platform, no constituency, no need for running except for a vanity play. he is really a democrat, she win he should toss his hat in the democratic process and i would welcome him in that debate. everybody else would as well. let's explore why he is not doing that, because there is another guy on their name michael bloomberg who has far more experience and a record of creating constituencies and moving into his work with, the devoted years and years of blood, sweat, tears, and money into climate change and gun control who was a mayor for 12 years of the largest and most diverse united states, and has a lot more money than howard schultz, howard schultz is scared that michael bloomberg would get in the democratic primary and leave no more room for him. >> tucker: he is just the wrong billionaire? okay, so there is not any doubt. i don't think that there is any doubt about howard schultz commitment to fashionable progressive oh politics pretty turn stores into homeless
shelters, that's the most fashionable things to do if you want to prove that you're about to feed use, but him getting in might hurt the party and i think that voters might think who cares about your dumb party, what are the ideas that you are proposing? do you see what i am saying? >> let me explain, i wish of the american political system was different, but it is not. right now there is no viable room for a third-party candidate to run. i studied this in 2012, michael bloomberg said he did in 2016, but the nation is so divided that at this point in time with president trump in office, a vote against president trump needs to go to a candidate that actually has a chance of winning. there is no conceivable place for someone in the middle right now between the two parties. we are so divided that there is no room left, so get in the process and one of the two parties, put your hat in the ring and let's have an honest debate. the reason that this is so important democrats are so upset is the future of the country is at state. the future of, the future of the environment, the future of the
economy. >> tucker: that is all bogus. i mean, it is totally bogus. he just said that democrats are upset that schultz is trying to buy the office. >> no, they are upset because he will be a spoiler. >> tucker: you have heard people attack them, but it would be cool if michael bloomberg goes end. >> i don't mind that he is a billionaire, i think running on the record of business success is perfectly fine, but running in the system that we have, do not try to spoil this on a vanity play. >> tucker: has a system working? people said that it about to -- to play devil's advocate, and i don't think he can win, i agree with you there. but nobody thought that trump code win. unexpected things can happen. >> people are not paying attention and realizing that once he has the chance of winning the republican primary, he has a 50/50 shot at being president. let's do the math. let's say that he runs, schultz runs as an independent. there are at least 100 electoral votes that would go from a liberal states like california, to the democrat.
there are at least 175, 180 electoral votes that would go from hard-core southern states, right wing states in the left on the south, over 280 votes. there is no room in the left, that means nobody gets a majority and there was no majority in the electoral college and there would be passed the house of representatives. it does anybody think that if you democratic house of representatives will elect her child's? there is nothing -- >> tucker: i do have one last math question, the two consultants, one that convinced howard schultz to live out his/her midlife crisis by running for president, how much will they walk away with? conservative estimate? >> i am all for business, i hope that they make as much money as i possibly can make. are the only winners will be steve schmidt and the other -- >> tucker: bill bird end. >> ensure that they are great guys, more success to them. >> tucker: they are rich guys. that's for sure. thank you very much. great to see you.
presidential candidate kamala harris wants to a vastly expanded welfare state, but she also opposes border security. can you have open borders and free stuff? how long will that last? well, that is after the break. ♪ 't. that's why there's ocuvite. screen light... sunlight... longer hours... eyes today are stressed. but ocuvite has vital nutrients... ...to help protect them. ocuvite. eye nutrition for today. coaching means making tough choices. jim! you're in! but when you have high blood pressure and need cold medicine that works fast, the choice is simple. coricidin hbp is the #1 brand that gives powerful cold symptom relief without raising your blood pressure. coricidin hbp.
all, for example. >> i actually feel very strongly is that we need to have medicare for all. that is just the bottom line. access to health care is, it should not be thought of as a privilege. it should be understood to be a right. >> tucker: a right, okay, that is a case that you can make. here's the interesting part, harris also opposes a vote or wall has denounced i.c.e., the border enforcement agents, the government workers as a modern-day kkk. watch. speak of the clan was what we would call today a domestic tert group. >> why? why would we call them domestic terrorist group? >> because they tried to use fear and force her to change political environment. >> and what was the motivation for the use of fear and force? >> it was based on fear and ignite a city. >> are you aware of the perception of money about how the power and the discretion
that i.c.e. is being used to enforce the law? do you see any parallels? >> tucker: so senator harris does not want to vigorously enforce america immigration law, so how does that work? think about it for just one second. harris argues and many democrats agree with her that free medical care for everyone who lives here is a human right. it is mandatory. the government has to provide it. but if you do not control immigration into the country, why one and half of the planet moved to the united states to get free mris, et cetera. why is it to the middle classes burden in the united states to finance a welfare state for the rest of the planet? political commentary, a good man to ask, thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me pay >> tucker: this is a fundamental tension that the left is taking right now. that we need to expand the welfare state, a lot of support for that. medicaid for all, medicare for
all, and universal precare, prekindergarten, et cetera. on the majority democrats, a lot of republicans supported. how can you pay for those programs if you do not close the borders? >> there are various ways that you can pay for it, you can increase taxes, alexandria ocasio-cortez once a 70% tax over 10 million when you make over 10 million, everything after that, not your entire income, you can raise taxes, you can cut spending other places, the military budget is 716 billion? almost $1 trillion? if you can allot that much money into tenured military all over the world but you can't to take care of the health of your citizens it says something about your authority. >> tucker: that is a case you can make it come about what you cannot argue is that a program that generous can be applied to say 50 million or 100 million new people, poor people coming in, so if you say to the rest of the world, we are giving away free medical care to anybody within our borders right now, and we are not enforcing our
borders, which is basically where we are right now. >> i think that's a problem that i have with the argument, there is nothing to say that we are not enforcing our borders. being against a wall which would only take care of a third of our illegal immigration's does not mean that that you do not want to support the borders. >> tucker: we only have 20 million people living here illegally, so they got here a bunch of different ways, some overstayed b visas, some came across the border. but you got it for 20 million of them, so it is clearly pretty easy to get in the country illegally by whatever means, and democrats do not want to make it harder. >> that is the issue, they absolutely want to make it harder. >> tucker: relay, by doing what? >> they have, just saying that you do not want to spend spec limit $6 billion on a wall does not mean -- >> tucker: they talk about ray now that has a democratic bill in the house in the senate, we covered it last week, having no new funding or ideas for restricting immigration into the country. >> but it does fund -- to say that it has no new funding is
different than saying that it does not have any funding. it is billions of dollars of funding, and democrats have talked about ways of doing surveillance on things like that to actually take care of the illegal immigration problem. >> tucker: will you just acknowledge that this is a problem? if you are saying come of the internet now, so the rest of the world knows what your policies are, and you are saying to the rest of the world, we welcoe you, which is what democrats have said explicitly. we welcome you pray to the statue of liberty commands us to welcome you -- >> reagan gave them amnesty. i do not think it was democrats. it cannot remember a democrat giving out amnesty. >> tucker: as long as you are here legally or not, we will give you free health care, which is what gavin newsom and bill de blasio, big estate, biggest city just announced this. >> in california they are giving illegal immigrants health care up to 26. it is not blanket health care. >> do you see the incentive? it is freaking insane, and you know it. >> we are the only industrialized nation in the world that does not offer
universal health care. >> tucker: i got it, i get it. not on a scale that we do. i am not aware of any industrialized country that has over 20 million people within the borders illegally and is asking for more. >> are we uniquely incapable of providing universal health care? >> tucker: to the world? >> kamala harris is advocating for health care for americans. >> tucker: that is not true. she said the universal health care should apply for people here illegally. >> medicare for all his health care for americans. that is what she is saying. >> tucker: that is absolutely not true. >> if we can spend $1 trillion on the military -- >> tucker: maybe you can win me over, thank you very much. great to see see you. tammy bruce is the president of the independent women's voice, she joins us tonight. that is, i don't not think that anybody has explored the tension, two ideas on a collision course, open borders, welfare state. you can have one or the other, you cannot have them both. >> and we have already seen, and we think about what the democrats are planning to do, we have seen this in california
with governor gavin newsom announced some that they already had obamacare open for illegal aliens, and then he announced that it would be applied to everyone in the state to, regardless of whether you are there legally or not, and then of course the mayor of new york. doing the same thing, making the same proposal. that would stretch out a apply of 2021 and apply to everyone, conveniently just after the 2020 election. so they are campaigning on this. it is a campaign dynamic, but it is california new york saying exactly the same thing. that there should be universal health care and it should apply to whoever is in our borders. that is impossible. and it would, you can look at it, we can use this historically, not just venezuela. but you can look at even a controlled socialist framework like this destroys civilizations. it destroys cultures, it destroys countries. and it does so, because it is unsustainable. and yet, the left, has nothing
else to offer, but what they do is a promise free things and they print up more money. you have like in venezuela, the inflation rate at this point is 80000%. and it is unsustainable. so when kamala harris is this, and she is headed in that clip that it is a human right, now, when you are saying that, this then presumes that the supply of it -- the presenting of health care, if it is a human rights, then it means that if you choose to not give people that health care as a doctor, as an individual, you then are violating those people's human rights. it comes down to quite a totalitarian framework about what the government will tell people to do and what it says they deserve. >> tucker: quickly, if you are a democratic candidate, why would you not just say i want to be as generous as we can with our people and american citizens? they come first. i have all kinds of pie in the sky, crazy socialist ideas.
but it will focus on americans paid why would they not do that? >> part of it is the notion of already who is here. they imagine those individuals eventually voting, and they want to encourage the influx income a part of it is political. you have the number of people who are in the house of representatives based on the population of the states. so the more people that move in, whether they be citizens or not, equates to may be more members of the house of representatives. so it has a number of fronts to it, but it appeals to the far left part of the base. and so it is about the politics, abandoning any kind of normal sensibility for the american people, but also most of all what i don't like the most, talker, they are lying to peopl people. >> tucker: they are totally lying. >> on what the end result will be, that's what we should all reject. >> tucker: you are absolutely correct, tammy bruce, good to see you. democratic lawmakers are talking about impeachment, will they do
it after the break. ♪ , i would've gone into aspen dental much sooner. it was a very life changing experience... and it felt like i was me again. that's when i realized i hadn't been for three years. at aspen dental we're all about yes. like yes to flexible hours and payment options. yes to free exam and x-rays for new patients without insurance. and yes whenever you're ready to get started, we are too. call 1-800-aspendental today.
>> tucker: if you have been paying any attention recently, and know that there is a religious revival underway in the democratic party. policy opposes not just unworkable, unwise, stupid, no. they are now immoral, god himself agrees, endorsing the government platform. walls are wrong, democrats tell us. every break as we could put every drop of mortar is fused with evil, building a wall is like robbing a widow or beating a child, it is a mortal sin. >> a wall is an immorality. it is not who we are as a nation. it is an old way of thinking. >> i hate the wall, i think it is immoral, i think it is wasteful. >> are we a country that puts a wall between ourselves and an allied nation? a wall is an immoral symbol for our country. >> tucker: that cannot be clear, but there is a caveat, there always is.
some walls are not evil at all, some are necessary and good. so for those of you keeping track of the theology -- theology at home, we offer you a wall that the democratic party s deemed perfectly moral, walls tt have received an indulgence. we can begin with border barriers, democrats paying for the walls, so they are okay. israel has walls protecting the borders with egypt and gaza and the west bank, democrats will not criticize those walls. pakistan has a massive fence, a wall, really, on the border with afghanistan. it is designed to combat smuggling, terracism, and illegal immigration. but they get plenty of aid, so that is fine too, so peaceful denmark has a wall, 30 miles long, on the german border, meant to keep pigs out, so it passes the morality test. here in the u.s. we have plenty of more walls too. just a sunday kamala harris announced her address for president, to oakland, california, blocked, walled off
with her own security at stake, she had no problem with this. they were moral walls, and there are many more moral walls, benny johnson of the daily carl -- color has set out to find more of them, and the most moral walls that we have protect the homes of democratic donors. here's a selection of them. >> this wall belongs to jimmy kimmel. >> this is magnificent. and it belongs to one of my favorite aunt touch from comedians, chelsea handler. >> we have a barbed wire wall behind us, rob ryan. >> lebron chooses to protect his castle like a king. with a big old wall. >> george soros is own personal great wall. >> tucker: that is quite a list, and there are more, not surprising paid when you think about it there is only one immoral wall on earth. it is not in china. the chinese are highly moral,
ask a dianne feinstein. the immoral wall is the proposed wall on the southern border, the one that might keep future democratic voters out. for that reason alone, it is immoral. since the one big wall is so immoral, democrats badly want to impeach trump for the sin of wanting to build it. billionaire activist tom spired has held a special town hall where he has poked his acolytes. >> never struck most people growing up in the country that the biggest threat to the country would be a 1600 pennsylvania avenue. but it is. this is a dangerous, reckless, and lawless man. we need to start impeachment today, and we need to tell the congress that they need to start impeachment today. >> tucker: another woke billionaire, when the rich people get so radical? i love it. it is hilarious. meanwhile, maxine waters says that she has no actual proof, but she knows in her gut that the president's campaign was run
by russia all along. >> i believe, and i don't have the proof, but i believe that paul manafort was sent to the campaign to be there to ensure that they get to trump elected in every way the possibly could. >> tucker: john summers as a communications director, he joins us. i have to say and be honest, i am for impeachment. it is preferable to this, nobody reads anybody else's house, there are no guns involved. there are no wild unprovable charges. it is a very straightforward process. we can watch it on television. voters can assess whether they agree and are not. why would we not to impeachment at this point? >> does not the priority. we do not have the evidence that we need to have. we need for mueller to complete his investigation and let's get the evidence in and then make an informed decision. impeachment should not be done on the basis of politics. it should not not be done on the basis of politics. it should be based on the evidence and what is best for the country.
>> tucker: first of all i agree with you, being half facetious, but only half. i watch nancy pelosi yesterday say that she knows that russia has something on donald trump. he is upon of a hostile foreign parlor lay manpower. if that is not a high-power and misdemeanor, sure what it is, watching maxine waters saying that president trump is a tool of vladimir putin, why would you not impeach on the basis of that? >> you need evidence, if you compare impeachment to the criminal -- >> tucker: they do not have evidence of the speaker the house does not have evidence, why is she staying at? >> i did not say that we should be going out there propping up conspiracy theories and that thing, that does not add a whole lot to the discourse, the maxine waters clip is not one of my favorite clips at all. we need evidence. we do not need conspiracy theories or gut feelings, we need evidence. and then, if that evidence exists, take that to the house, and then start that impeachment process. >> tucker: wait a second, maxine waters is a bit of a ringer because even though she is a committee chair, she is an
outlier. nobody takes her seriously in washington. nancy pelosi is third in line to the presidency and the speaker of the house of representatives part of the most powerful democrat in the world, and she is accusing trump of being a russian agent commission and other democrats say, wait a minute, that is irresponsible. you do not have evidence paid why does nobody correct her? >> we need to wait for the evidence to come out from the mueller investigation. >> tucker: are you afraid of nancy pelosi? >> no, it does not do a lot of good to prop up conspiracy theories. she has more information, that would be good to have. >> tucker: [laughs] >> i don't know if she has said, let's see what comes out of the mueller investigation. >> tucker: everybody gets to stop posturing and we can watch it on television, it is totally -- >> absolutely no posturing during impeachment, right? i think you might be for impeachment because he was or what they did to the republicans in the '90s. it hurt them very badly. >> tucker: and in the '90s, in the end it is really about a
guy's life, and they were right. and in the end, the russia thing is insane. it is a truth or conspiracy, and that is true. history will show that. and i think that impeachment will hasten the process of making that clear. >> i hope that history shows that there is no collusion. i really do hope that. >> tucker: think you so much for joining us. great to see you. news for you, after more than a year, the fbi has closing investigation into the horrifying shooting in las vegas in 2017, the deadliest killing spree in the history of this country. the findings have said nothing new. the shooter acted alone, has no ties to any extremist group and no clear motive except for a vague desire for infamy. the biggest police wrapped up their investigation a long time ago, we may never know why paddock did what he did, but the fbi has given up, and you cannot blame them, they are much more important things to do like raiding the homes of unarmed perjury defendants in the mueller probe. they know where the real threats
are. well, tom brokaw is being destroyed today by the left for calling on people in this country to speak english. why did he say that? that is after the break. ♪ but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. you should be mad they gave this guy a promotion. you should be mad at forced camaraderie. and you should be mad at tech that makes things worse. but you're not mad, because you have e*trade, who's tech makes life easier by automatically adding technical patterns on charts and helping you understand what they mean. don't get mad. get e*trade's simplified technical analysis.
>> tucker: tom brokaw was long one of the most respected men in america, incorporated or the nbc nightly news for 22 years. he is 78 years old now, onto it be enjoying a happy retirement, fly fishing every morning, instead he just made a terrible mistake. he expressed an on authorized opinion and public. you cannot do that, during a live to live television show he said that a simulation is good and immigrants should try to learn english. >> i also happen to believe that the hispanics to work harder at assimilation. that is one of the things that i've been saying for a long time. not just be quantified in their communities, but make sure that all of their kids are learning to speak english and that they feel comfortable in the communities. >> tucker: not so long ago those words would've passed on notice, democrats like bill clinton and barbara jordan said it all the time, if you don't believe it, go to google right now and look at barbara jordan on immigration. whoa. and they said it for a pretty simple reason, english unites the country, obviously.
and now around the world as is also the language of business, science, culture. it is clearly a good thing for everyone in america, immigrant or not to learn english as quickly as possible. but no, you are not allowed to have that opinion anymore even if you are tom brokaw. so the activist group latino victory, whatever that is, accuse tom brokaw of promoting "white supremacist ideology." ." nyu journalism professor said that actually it is american's job to "try harder to assimilate into a global society." and then some kid at vox called dylan matthews suggested that brokaw was sympathetic to pure racial animus. even after brokaw apologized profusely, the cowards on his old show over on nbc denounced him for his thought crime. watch this. >> a former longtime anchor of this broadcast is in the news for comments he made sunday on "meet the press," the criticism
was widespread and almost immediately immediate. >> spokes person tells me that tom's comments were inaccurate and inappropriate, and we are glad that he apologized. >> tucker: i hope they get paid a lot at nbc to say stuff like that. john daniel davidson is a senior correspondent at the federalist, and he tonight. my bottom line hope is that you could live in a country where you can have a conversation about assimilation and english and whether or not they are important. the response to tom brokaw makes it absolutely impossible for any decent person to have any opinion on this at all and it makes it impossible to solve our problems if we cannot have a conversation about it. >> exactly, it used to be an unremarkable thing to talk about the melting pot as an american ideal, from many we are one, and it comes together from all different countries, all different backgrounds and we become americans, and of course language is one of the things
that binds us together as americans, but there are other things that binds us together as americans too. that's not to say that because we have a melting pot so that you have to abandon all aspects of your own culture. those cultural aspects feed into the american life in the american culture that we have that make it richer and better, and that should not be controversial. and it should not be scandalous to suggest that learning english as part of assimilating and is part of what immigrants should strive for. there is nothing controversial about that. there should've been nothing controversial about what tom brokaw said. >> tucker: of course not, and brokaw, who is a liberal, you would think that he would be given the benefit of the doubt. but he was ceremoniously slayed instead. but i wonder if the people pushing this, and nobody is pushing for anyone to give up their own culture or identity, that is insane. only to participate in a common identity. that is not a racial category, it is a culture that binds us
together as americans from different backgrounds and races, religions, but will be have in common is a question. why is such an organized caucus against having anything in common? what is that? >> for the left, the whole idea of assimilation cuts against the idea of identity politics. identity politics necessitates that everybody kind of stays in their lane and keeps their racial or ethnic identity as the number one, most important thing about them. and to the extent that you view assimilation as a positive thing, as a good thing as something that helps immigrant communities get ahead, economically or achieve more in terms of education. it is to be viewed as a negative thing. they want to hold onto discrete identities, and not assimilate. this is the opposite for example of what we see in europe where you have massive numbers of on
assimilated immigrant communities, especially a muslim community is fared very poorly in european countries, because they do not adopt the cultural norms, languages, they do not achieve highly in education, and a big business in europe, and they stay in the sort of segregated enclaves, that is the opposite of what we want for the country, but that seems to be what the left would like in terms of what to their identity dictates for us. >> tucker: may be keeping people poor and helpless and atomized helps them rule more efficiently. just a thought. just throwing that out there, john. anyway, we are out of time, great to see you. i'm sorry to cut you short. thank you. portnoy, one of the heroes to the show, kicked out of the super bowl media day. expelled, threatened. there he is, right there. he will join us after the break to tell us why. ♪
♪ >> tucker: the past couple of weeks have been pretty awful for american journalists, hundreds of reporters and editors in places like "huffington post" and buzzfeed lost their jobs, victims of systemic changes to their industry. no matter what you think of those sites, sad, knowing that it is very tough. those journalists have many
things in common with other americans, factory loggers, workers, coal miners, all of them, and many more have seen their way of life disappear, thanks to technology or outsourcing or private equity. this kind of thing has been going on a long time. now in previous cycles of what we used to call to creative destruction, they had new advice for blue-collar workers, just learn to code, coding is a future pair to stop whining and embrace it. here's a selection of headlines that you might remember on the subject. this is from npr, from cold to code, new path for layoff workers. can you teach a coal miner to code? from "cbs news," out of work coal miners finding new work in computer industry. and at this from bloomberg, appellation miners are to code. and from the venerable "new york times," the coders of kentucky. you see? it is that simple. let's say that you spent 30 years making a solid middle-class living at a paper mill in northern new hampshire,
then one day the mill spouts down, sold for scrap to china, it happens a lot. by no problem, just learn to code. everybody in brooklyn is doing it. coding was never a real solution to any of this, obviously. but it had the effect of making journalists feel even more self-satisfied. and of course it was the point, it is always a point. actually. fast forward to this month. someone on twitter came up with a pretty brilliant piece of advice for all of those laid off journalists trying to figure out what to do with their lives. learn to code. perfect. suddenly learn to code was everywhere on twitter. but journalists did not see the humor in this at all, a former new yorker employee called tyler lou -- called the phrase far right hate, people went to wesley and should not have to learn to code. so that they complained to the censorship of authority is at twitter who immediately concluded that asking someone to learn to code might be "targeted harassment." but only when it is directed at people who used to work at buzzfeed.
for the paper mill guy in new hampshire, coding is still a future. while, barstool sports is probably the best site on the internet, dave portnoy runs a the, and he has been a scourge of the modern nfl, the nfl does not appreciate that, they banned barstool from all nfl events for years and that includes the super bowl's media day. last night portnoy stuck in any way. and he was spotted and kicked out, and charged with criminal trespassing. dave portnoy, fresh from prison, apparently joining us now. to tell us what it was like. how did you wind up charged with criminal trespassing? i heard that you were a legitimate website our operator? >> yes, we are, but when you challenge authority and roger goodell, it ends up with a lecture, sometimes behind bars, sometimes with police officers. in this case we had ten guys that looked like they work for
the fbi with little nfl lapel pins thinking they were the toughest guys on the universe trying to rough me up. >> tucker: i will ask your two questions, first, why do they hate you so much? >> they hate me because of deflategate, i support tom brady and i challenge roger goodell's power. if you just agree with roger goodell, it is like the old gestapo, he tries to shut us down. >> tucker: so you are disobedient, that is her crime. the second question, how dumb is roger goodell? if you're going to arrest somebody, hassle somebody, you probably should not make that person the head of barstool sports, it is not smart p.r., is it? >> he is one of the dumbest humans that ever lived. he has a rocket, he has no brain. it is like an atari game bouncing back and forth. there is no win for when you hassle us. if you put cuffs on us, we go to
jail, it is a national media story. they knew that. once they escorted us out, they were like what are we going to do with this guy? he probably wants to go to jail because he will be on every newspaper in the cover, the police officers that are down there and the s.w.a.t. teams when they hear why i'm being detained, they cannot believe it. they are talking to the nfl, you are really wasting our time with this guy and the nfl and all of the suits, and saying that they have to prosecute them. so roger goodell, if you just said, here are the credentials, it is a nonstory. but he is so stupid. he is just the stupidest leader that we have ever encountered. it is really embarrassing. >> tucker: so roger goodell is a mouth breather, you made a compelling case for that. and this is a serious economic question, how much does he make? >> $40 million a year. >> tucker: so how can an economy support, how can and can't be be so vibrant to that a dumb person makes 40 million a year? how does that work, dave portnoy? >> the owners, all of the
owners, he was brought up through the system, his father and he was in the nfl system forever, so we got this cushy job that probably 50% of americans can do. he has the least skills for the highest paying job of any human who ever lived. but the owners do not want to screw up the money train. the money is, and despite this guy, because we love football. but he -- all he does is cause controversy. and a ant could do his job, literally. >> tucker: not only president of barstool sports, but now a freedom fighter. i am so glad that you are breathing fresh air tonight. dave portnoy, good to see you put >> summit he has to fight for the little people, talk or pray >> tucker: that. what a fun hour that was, we will be back tomorrow night at 8:00 p.m., unchanged, the mandate. the sworn enemy of flying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. if you don't watch it live, at
an inconvenient hour, we dare you to figure out your dvr. good luck with that. we have some good news, one small piece of breaking good news at the end of the show. sean hannity's study standing by live in new york. a >> sean: that was very entertaining. thank you, great show, welcome to "hannity," we begin with "hannity watch" and the rise of socialism right here in the united states of america. and what is a new radical and extreme, and frankly dangerous to social democratic party. that is pretty much declaring war on the american dream. and freedom, and they are vilifying wealth and success, and penalizing innovation, stopping all over the principles that made this the greatest place on earth, the envy of the free world. the goals are simple, they want the government to control your property, your businesses, your health care, your money, your self-defense, scary. don't be foole