Skip to main content

tv   Tucker Carlson Tonight  FOX News  February 11, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm PST

5:00 pm
barack obama brought the military in and when he advocated and embraced the whole notion -- >> martha: i got to go. thanks, geraldo, thanks mari. have a good night. tucker is up next.
5:01 pm
l the clip you just saw went viral over the weekend. and this show had been duped and then spanked by someone delivering the facts. alexandria cosio-cortez greed time warner cable sports channel. turns out, they were all lying. casio cortez, she knew and we can prove t. first, president trump will make the case for a border wall and really in el paso, texas tonight n. washington, talks to avert a second government shutdown have fallen apart tonight. administration.s to increase i.c.e. capacity to hold illegal immigrants. democrats want to keep a cap on
5:02 pm
how many i.c.e. detain. so criminal records can be released into the united states. he ran customs and border patrol under president obama. thank you very much for coming on. so democrats are demanding that i.c.e. cap bed space, and interior of the country, not the borders, in the center of the country to, 16,500 a year. if that were to happen, what would it mean? >> that's a significant step towards really abolishing i.c.e., vee at checkbook. there are two element to the plan. they want to actually reduce overall bed space for i.c.e. and end cap interior enforcement. we already be that if you're a child, a family unit, you're going to be allowed from this c. that's catch release 1 point 0. this is catch and release point 0. if bed space goes down, illegal immigration goes up. border patrol turns everybody we apprehend over torsi's.
5:03 pm
as bed space goes down, they're going to have to release more individuals into the interior of the united states. what that does s from a common sense standpoint, that means that people here, that are here illegally, and have committed an . >> what do the numbers tell us. >> it's completely false. so right now, i.c.e. alone, last year, arrest, i think the number is well in excess of 120,000 individuals that are here illegally, for an additional crime. right now, the 45,000 that i.c.e. has detained right now, 70 to 80% of them, almost, i think about 85% of them have been convicted and or charged with another crime besides
5:04 pm
entering illegal least so that's a complete false narrative. >> i think the numbers are 88%. that would mean, just to be completely clear. so a math question f. you capped bed space at the threshold they're calling for. by definition, you'd be releasing criminals into the population. >> immediately if this bill passed, they would have to probably release about 8,000 individuals, criminal aliens and it's not the crime of illegally entering. this is crimes in addition to that. >> tucker: so what percentage should the show back up for their hearings, should say. >> miniscule. >> tucker: none. the number is 3 percent. we checked and i think those people wandered in by m. so basically, you're suspending the rule of law for a large group of people who have been charged with or convicted of crimes. >> you're reducing a bed space. illegal immigration is increased, and number has shown that. more people going to be released into the interior united states. what we have created here is a
5:05 pm
sanctuary country. that's where we're headed. >> tucker: so is there any sheriffs organization, border patrol organization, law enforcement organization that support this is idea? >> i don't know of one. >> tucker: so where did this come from and what's the point of it? what would be the goal of this? >> the goal, and this has been tough for me to get to, and i don't say this with ease, but this is pure identity politics. i can draw no other conclusion from this last-minute stunt. it's insane, tucker, so it's got to be driven by identity politics and i think the ultimate goal is open boards. >> tucker: seems that way.
5:06 pm
>> illegal immigration is on the rise here, and not according to my opinion, to the own administration's numbers. you look at cdp and what it has reported since 2,000 and we have a dramatic ke crease in the number of undocumented immigrants. >> tucker: how many illegal ail i didn't knows are in the country now. >> there are different estimates. >> tucker: so anywhere between 12 and 22 million. >> the number we have had, we're working for for the last 50 years. >> tucker: but hold t before we progress into the details, just them attically, why, if it's a good idea to cooperate number of illegals you can hold, and dhs number had been charged with a different crime.
5:07 pm
not re-entering. why shouldn't we do the same for american citizens. >> those who are proposing this idea. i think it's important to realize what i.c.e. does and what it doesn't. it's not border patrol. it's not in charge of border enforcement. i.c.e. mission is to fight dangerous criminal in the u.s. like gangs, ms-13 and many other gangs. their job is not to go to court houses, for example, like they have been going to in new york. a 1700 percent increase since 2016 to, prosecute and go after families that are trying to -- >> tucker: i'm sorry. you start by the sighing -- nobody's entitled to his own facts. i asked you two questions. you didn't answer either. but i want to press you on this fact that 88% of the illegal alien that is i.c.e. is currently holding of course charged with or convicted of a separate criminal act.
5:08 pm
not entering the country -- >> the vast majority of them -- >> tucker: i don't know if that's true. but -- [overlapping speakers] is that okay. >> licenses to undocumented immigrants. >> tucker: so we're not going to punish people for dui now because it's racist. what are you saying this. >> are you arguing that dui is not a serious offense. people die from d.u.i.s all the time. we're not talking without a license. no no. that's not true. hold on. that's not true. address the fact that the overwhelming majority of people held by i.c.e. right now of course convicted of or charged with an actual crime as you would say. why would we let them out? does r. >> tucker: would you characterize those as violent, dangerous -- >> tucker: i would characterize d.u.i. as a very serious crime o. common for people here illegally, to be arrested. we hold americans but we shouldn't hold illegals. why? it's a simple question. >> i'm not saying we should not
5:09 pm
hold illegals like you're saying, tucker. i.c.e. should go back and focus on the original mission. go after dangerous criminals. immigrants are going to court and going throughout process and trying to legalize their stay in this country. they are the last people to do at this time right way when they show up in court, have you i.c.e. agents, dressedad civilians, going after them. >> tucker: hold on. you're ignoring that if this were to become the law,ing if the bed space were interior i.c.e. detainees,amentured 16,500. we would, over time, release thousands of people, convicted or charged with real crimes. why would we want that? >> your guest said the vast majority never show up to their court dates. do you ever actual number? >> tucker: actually, i'm glad you asked. neck% do not show up for their court dates. >> that's not true. just last week, i.c.e. was --
5:10 pm
>> tucker: not according to what? >> there were lines outside of court houses of people who'd court dates. and there was no appointment. >> tucker: i'm giving the freshest number we have, which is neck%. and because there are illegals. it's like, it's immoral to be upset about t. but i am an american, and i am upset about it and i think that's fair. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: l the democrats were writing the green new deal and don't seem ton what's in t. we pointed out what they said was in it. and they called us li asker. but who was lie something we'll have the tape after the break. i. go to the pharmacy counter for powerful claritin-d. while the leading allergy spray only relieves 6 symptoms, claritin-d relieves 8, including sinus congestion and pressure. claritin-d relieves more.
5:11 pm
5:12 pm
5:13 pm
5:14 pm
what's a gig of data? well, it's a whole day's worth of love songs. [ baby crying ] or 300 minutes of baby videos. a gig goes a long way. that's why xfinity mobile lets you for data one gig at a time. and with millions of wifi hotspots included, you'll pay even less for data. or if you need a lot, we have unlimited, too. you could save hundreds of dollars when you switch to xfinity mobile. it's simple, easy, awesome. click, call or visit a store today.
5:15 pm
>> tucker: you know, fact sheet, describing her proposed green, casio cortez's office, said her plan would send federal money to people who were unquote, unwilling to work. some drew some critics, suddenning tax dollars to people who don't feel like working. but there's a difference between supporting something and state together clearly out loud and that was the casio-cortez. she said it out loud. and immediate began pretending that it never happened. fast forward to last friday. robert hawk inhas been advising her on the green deal. hawkins is a professor who occupies an endowed chair at
5:16 pm
cornell law school. seems like a reasonable job description. he's an ivy league law professor. that's the kind of guy who would tell obvious lies on live television. that was our thinking any way. so we asked him, why is the u.s. government thinking about members of congress are pushing to send money to people who don't want to work. here is his response. >> we never would, right. and i think you're referring to some kind of document that i think some doctor's document that, someone has been circulating . >> no. no. >> what document. >> it's not embarrassing. no, we're not embarrass by the what's not ours. so that exchange is easier. the professor's position was
5:17 pm
simple. a casio-cortez, never suggested that the government out to pay people who don't want to work. various progressive news organizations picked up that interview. fox news got fact checked. even a cosineio-cortez, suggesting on time warner cable sports channel. professor hawkins wasn't lawing. so acasio-cortez. we did not make that up. we didn't make any of it up. including banning fossil fuels in 12 years. let's go back to another exchange. ph with the professor stylized. >> it's about expanding menu options. there are things we want to be able to do. in addition to what we already do. >> so what you're saying is we're not getting rid of fossil fuels actually. >> no, we're rendering them
5:18 pm
obsolete for most purposes that they're used for now. >> tucker: but air travel is a huge source. >> but it has the word most. >> tucker: the staff has since removed the fact sheet from the website and are telling the rest of us to read the actual resolution. so we did that. turns out, there's no difference between the two. acasio-cortez, says the official one, guarantees economic security to all the people of the united states end quote. whether they want to work or not. it also calls for free education, and all existing buildings in the country and a lot of other things. now, under normal circumstances, sober people would laugh at a proposal like this. they would also, by the way, question herrityness for moral judgment of any kind. she won the primary with an openly racist campaign, and
5:19 pm
attacked her oh, points for the color of her skin. that's the definition of a racist campaign. but whatever. she is three million twitter followers now. democrats have to take her seriously. chris murphy, the senator from con. pretend these ideas make sense. >> i think it's absolutely realistic and i think we need to set our sights high. i think there are a lot of people who said, it wasn't realistic to get a man on the moon, when president kennedy initially outlined that goal. but we did it. >> tucker: realistic. thanks very much for coming on. so why, so it's pretty clear, it's not prettily, it's absolutely clear that cortez's office said this the green new deal out to provide for people, whether or not they are willing to work. why do they lie about it? why not say, this is what we
5:20 pm
believe? >> i think a mistake happened here and you're not telling the full story. the full story, according from report of her office and others, this was a published document. it was not a fraudulent document, but a published document, that should have never been out there, and they retracted the document immediately. major presidential candidate, they have not endorse that would provision in a document. they said, basically, we didn't know about that part. and this is the green new deal. not the green new build. this is not a policy. this is more of a conversation starter. not a deal or a law proposal. >> tucker: part television is absolutely right. i mean, i like conversations, even if they're far out. i don't know why they're trying to run from the conversation, which is what they're doing. here's what the new version referred to, so you you have to pay attention to this. that it will provide all the people of the united states, high quality healthcare,
5:21 pm
adequate housing, economic security, clean water. there's no caveat in there you would have to work for what you get so they're endorsing the same idea. so i'm missing it here. >> first of all, i would challenge them to define economic security. i don't take the terminology economic security, to mean if you don't work, you still get paid the same as someone who does work. you might have a different standard definition than i v. >> tucker: but it's money from the government. you're getting money from the government, even if you don't feel like working and i think even for example under the remember new deal, f.d.r. no one thought was a right winger. you don't get going for nothing. conservation corps people worked for the money they got. f.d.r. believed work and reward.
5:22 pm
and it was definite and destructive, giving people stuff for nothing. but -- >> we're talking about folks that are able. folks that have the means to do so. so i agree with you on that point. but at the same time, tucker, the terminology economic security mostly defined before we can properly debate t. >> tucker: so they're touch oat question of the illuminating fossil fuels. the energy sector is the smartest part of our economy. and if you got rid of that overnight, it would be really disruptive. so here's what a casio-cortez says. there's no debate we should not, she said, it's clear, she said that in october. why are they running from that? >> she didn't run from t. i think it's a good conversation
5:23 pm
to have. here's the bottom line, tucker. fossil fuels burn and pretty carbon. carbon is bad for the atmosphere, bad for the water and bad for our breathing. every single scientist on this planet would agreement so any conversation, that suggests implementation to lower carbon emissions is a good conversation to have. there is there's no indication that she, represents a more progressive wing of the democratic movement, but it is a legitimate conversation -- >> tucker: i'm sorry for the last word. but i don't think it's progressive to tell me i can't have cars and airplanes. >> that's not what's being said here, tucker. it is a conversation starter. >> tucker: all right. thank you. rashad, i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> tucker: so what is in the green new deal or do we have to pass it to find out. mark, what do you make of the green new deal?
5:24 pm
>> well, actually, if you accept that carbon is bad, and i don't particularly, there's a contradiction between the green new deal, and open borders, which the democrats are also committed t. the average person in the western world have a carbon footprint, 30 times the size of everyone, of somebody in say, somalia. we bring everyone from somalia to minnesota, we would be better off in minnesota to somalia. and i hope that is alexandria casio cortez's -- stereo. >> tucker: i just. to point out to the viers. what you are watching on the screen, is the president arriving in el paso, texas for an event scheduled, i think at the bottom of this hour. but that's, i mean, you just pointed out, mark steiner, i think a really important contradiction in this whole world view which is, you're not
5:25 pm
going to have a cleaner country with open borders, not because imover crowded countries are dirty countries, period. >> and they don't think about the way these things piece together. so the disappointment for me, with what happened with your guests on friday night, example, i disagree with alander dray casio-cortez. but i thought she was sincere and honest. shebean in washington for two weeks and took her seat a couple of weeks ago and she's already become one of the shedy creatures, finding out, and denying reality, and she deplores this campaign spreading false stories. and the governor of --
5:26 pm
withdrawing things he said. this drop sat on her website for two days, i believe. obviously, when she says she's in favor of remaking every building in america, that's the first round. the second round says that while every building in america is being remodeled, we're all going to be moved into tent cities in californian towns to live in while she's remodeling all our homes. i'm disappointed, that she's not sufficiently idealistic, to stand by the plain utaupian non-ence. >> ingoing it's a really fair point, and i would respect that. she should be more direct. people get offended for that. mark stein, thank you very much. line up to protect jeff bezoses
5:27 pm
on. bezos bear, founder of, and owner of the "washington post." he's being defended. why. tell you after the break. and president speaks at a rally. we'll speak about that in a moment. my experience with usaa s
5:28 pm
woman: my reputation was trashed online,
5:29 pm
i felt completely helpless. my entire career and business were in jeopardy. i called reputation defender.
5:30 pm
they were able to restore my good name. if you're under attack, i recommend calling reputation defender. and consider joining their groundbreaking campaign to give every american the right to remove old, inaccurate search results by going to vo: if you have search results that are wrong or unfair, call reputation defender at 1-877-492-6705.
5:31 pm
>> tucker: the governor of virginia political career, after that famous clan photo in black face discover bod his school book year page, the governor said, he will a tone for what he's done, and. >> hi, tucker, because governor northam has refused to design, he is embarking on antology tour. but the tour is generate controversy. because on cbs this morning
5:32 pm
wgale king, northam said this. watch. >> it has been a difficult week, and you know f you look at virginia's history, we're now at the 400 year anniversary, just 90-miles from here, in 1619, the first indentured servants from africa, landed on our shores. >> also known as slavery. >> yeah. >> yeah, the virginiaan republican party, criticized the governor's comments. the governor is so tone deaf that he can't even use the word slaves. was quick to passwords like indentured servant is how people try to erase the pains of slavery and ralph northam is done. others defended him saying folks, learn your damn history. northam is correct. first black africans brought to
5:33 pm
virginia in 1619 were indentured servants. gale king is wrong. most agree na northam's statement wasn't totally wrong or offensive. governor northam thought about resigning but now believes he can take his speech to the next level. >> right now, virginia needs someone that can heal, there's no better person to do that, than a doctor. virginia also needs someone who is strong, who has empathy, who has courage and who has a moral compass. that's why i'm not going away. >> tucker: if the sexual assault allegations against his hutenant governor, justin fairfax are true, fairfax would have no option. seize imagine you're a successful public figure. age of 5, you hit a mid-life
5:34 pm
crisis, so severe, you decide to leave your wife and four kids for another woman. you get so carried away with your new misstress and you text her pictures of your genitals and those pictures end up in a tabloid. what happens next? does the media attack you as a pathetic old creep or do journalists, instead, rally to your defense? well, that all depends on how rich you are. luckily, jeff bezossosis is very rich. the richest man in the world. when you're as itch as jeff bezoses on, there's no such thing as bad press coverage. bob woodward is the most famous journalist in america. he once took down a president with the unsparing toughness of his reporting. here's what bob woodward wrote to jeff bezoses on, after his croach shots became public. jeff, proud of you for stepping forward in such a difficult situation. very gutsy and definitely right. this period reminds me of 1972
5:35 pm
to 1974. perhaps watergate reducks. so many assaults on constitutional government. let's hope we all get it right. aggressive, but careful and fair. cheers and best. bob woodward. if you criticize jeff bezoses on, you're like richard nixon during watergate. an assault on our constitutional government. you're unamerican, in fact. boone wrote a column, defending the selfies. the had the line was "jeff bezoses on stands his ground." stands his ground, like joshua chamberlain. there are grandchildren that revere his memory and speak his name. but no one went further than new york times technology columnist, kara switcher -- if flattering
5:36 pm
the powerful was an olympic event, kara swishier would be mark spitz. admirable. quote, relic moment, from quote, the most important visionary since steve jobs. it goes on like this pornographically at one point, this is the best. swishier says, jeff bezos os's privacy has been vibrate national enquirer, which is true. but she didn't spend a lot of time worrying about whether america's privacy was violated by jeff bezoses on. think being it a lot. so that was the first thing, i meant to say clearly, i totally disapprove of what the national enquirer did to jeff bezoses on. i d. but it does raise the question, what is amazon doing to the rest of us.
5:37 pm
>> yes, i wish we were a society that had no interest. and let that be between the spouses. but that's all the reason why we should value privacy. i spent a lot of years as a journalist, defending that value and one of the companies that poses the greatest threat to it is amazon. it's a major source of jeff bezos os's wealth and power, and you know, we think of amazon and do their branding, that is a place we buy our books from. and download e-mail from. in fact, the main business is working with the security straight agencies to build huge apparatuses of the surveillance state that invade our privacy in ways far more severe than what the national enquirer did to jeff bezoses on. and that's a part of the story that is so ironic, beyond the fact that amazon is notorious for abusing its workers and all that people
5:38 pm
you just named, you would find quite upsetting. so will you quickly summarize a big part of their business is not selling toothpaste, which is what i use it for, but helping the national security state, gather information on citizens. >> amazon had a $500 million contract with the c.i.a. to provide cloud services. they are now using artificial intelligence to build a product called "recognition" that's designed to use facial recognition software to identify by the thousands, so wherever you go, you can be identified by software that the government is using. that amazon is ago. they are using security systems around people's perimeters of their houses and making it available so they can see who's coming and leaving your house, who's inside of your house. but let's go on and on of the products that amazon is building and profiting from, way more than books, that are direct reps to our privacy and critical comtonights.
5:39 pm
92 why do i never read that story? >> because silicon valley is more powerful in washington than wall street is. it's because silicon valley now controls huge parts of the media and the last thing people in the media want to do is cover silicon valley critically. so the power of google and facebook and amazon is probably one of the most important stories in the world and also one of the most undercover because of how powerful they are in the immediate media world. >> tucker: thank you for that. i appreciate it. >> >> hollywood actor, caught on camera for berating his personal driver. compassion, and bark at those beneath them. what's that about? we'll explain. we're working together to do just that.
5:40 pm
bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. more beverage choices, smaller portions, less sugar. you should be mad they gave this guy a promotion. you should be mad at forced camaraderie.
5:41 pm
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.
5:42 pm
5:43 pm
5:44 pm
>> a announced her candidacy for president at a rally over the weekend. the media gushed over the process. seemed a little les excited is her former staff, they described -- she publicly berates and uses epithets to describe them, asking them to perform bizarre personal duties like wash herring dishes or picking up her dry cleaning. the representation for mistreating staff is so widespread another least three perspective campaign managers refused to work for her confronted her, she essentially admit today. she said, "d." i am tough. i push people. that's true. huh.
5:45 pm
so, he have you a person who routinely claims to care far more than you do than other people and yet, the people she's actually in charge of, she mistreats. sounds like everyone you know? does. sounds just like every progressive activists. robert de niro was caught berating his driver outside a court house in manhattan. >> where are you. [bleep] where the on [bleep] are you? i don't care if they chase you away. you tell them [bleep]. what's the matter with you? where are you? you're not in front. you're not where you dropped us off. >> tucker: everybody has a bad day. but let's be honest. that's pretty strange behavior for someone who's entire political philosophy is built on the idea that he's a decent person and you're not.
5:46 pm
but also, as we note, it's very common, it's not universal on the activist left. progressives volunteer less, give less money to charity, leave smaller tips and yell at people that work for them. maybe that's why they are lecturing you about your official morals of capitol hill tonight. shut down negotiateers say they have an agreement on capitol hill that will avoid shutting down the federal government once more and hopefully, senator shelby, of alabama has said, they have an agreement he believes the president will sign. that's all we know at this hour. 8:46 p.m. but of course, we will report the news the second it reaches us. president delivering a speech tonight at the border in el paso.
5:47 pm
that's the backdrop in which these negotiations are unfolding. we'll bring utilization latest when we come back. little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ready to treat differently with a pill? otezla. show more of you.
5:48 pm
5:49 pm
5:50 pm
5:51 pm
>> tucker: this is a fox news alert. you are looking at live pictures from el paso, texas, on the border. the president will take the stage there any moment. immigration will be a major focus of the speech. in the "state of the union" last week the president suggested there ought to be more legal immigration to this country, a shift from the campaign speeches. he said afterwards we need more workers and immigration is a way to get this. orin cass studies this and author of "the once and the future worker" and a smart man and he joins us tonight. does the united states need more guest workers? >> i don't think we do. >> tucker: everyone in washington thinks we do. >> chamber of commerce and the lobbyists for the corporations think we do because it benefits them if they don't make due with the workers we have here.
5:52 pm
>> tucker: we hear about the positive effect to the guest workers. what are the negative effect? >> it relieves the pressure on the labor market. and on the employers to figure out how to build businesses that make due with the workers we have here. if you have an idea for a business and one to rather bring someone else in for, it doesn't have to be a citizen. we'll bring someone in. use them and send them away. we won't worry about the workers no live here. >> tucker: companies used to care about the quality of american schools because that is where the labor force was educated. people care less about schools. is that one of the reason? >> it could be. there is a famous saying from a man in germany that studied this and said we wanted workers but we got people. that we don't think of the economy who live here and support themselves here. we just think of it as a way to make more stuff cheaper.
5:53 pm
it can be a problem long-term. >> has it ever worked well for the country long-term? >> there are times when we had a big prom in the '50s and '20s we tried to bring in mexican farm workers and a lot of people started it back to the illegal immigration problem because we brought folks here and we assumed they would all leave. guess what? some thought they'd rather stay here. >> tucker: yeah. the work they did has since been automated. >> some of it has. there is an idea that it's work that americans won't do. almost every category of work, farm workers included, most of the people doing the work are americans. so i think we need to put more pressure on employers to say you know what? why don't you find a way to make it work with the people we have here. and invest in making americans more productive so it's good for business and good for workers. >> tucker: what you said qualifies as radical in washington but it seems so non-radical and so obvious to
5:54 pm
me. 0reen cass, one of the few people saying that. thank you. the president will take the stage in el paso, texas. the rally is a few blocks from the u.s. mexico border. michael anton served in the white house and author of "flight after the 93 elections." and he is joining us on the set. thank you for joining us. i have to ask about the book i have here. you wrote the famous essay framing the last election of 2016 election in the kind of broad and powerful terms. change people's minds. what is your conclusion on this book? >> my conclusion in this book is people criticize me and said okay, maybe you made a good case for why doom was coming but you never gave us the positive case for the future. what is america supposed to look like? what do you want to see? i said i have that. in a short essay in the middle of a campaign i didn't put everything i know in it. i was asked to republish the flight 93 election and i said i would be happy to do that but i want to add material to say this is what we should be
5:55 pm
fighting for and the america we are at risk of losing we need to fight for. why it's good. why the older american principles are sound. we need to return to them as part of going forward toward a better future for our people. some of that also means we need to go back to a better way of understanding politics, common citizenship, and elite that cares about the people that you have criticized. i completely agree with your criticism they are mercenaries and they don't really care about what is happening to the people in the country as much as they should, if at all. we need to go back to that. in some ways the way forward is a way back. tried to stretch that in the new material. >> tucker: in 2019, anything back is immoral. right? so why do the people in charge tell us constantly that anything that happened before is wrong and we shouldn't learn from it or know about it, all we should do is be ashame of it? why do they say that? >> they don't want to change course. they benefit from the current system. they like it. they know people are unhappy
5:56 pm
with it and they want to tamp down the justified -- some of it is anger or uneasiness. whatever you call it there is justified discontent. they want to tamp that down and say illegitimate, if you disagree or you don't like any aspect of the current system it means you are bad, racist and evil and you want to go back to segregation and so on. only way to do it is keep doing what we are doing now. if you disagree we are bad. >> how long do you think they think you can -- >> you can yell at your kids and boss them around but then they turn 18 and they do whatever they want and they hate you. do the leaders understand that or do they think it can go on forever? >> they believe it will go on forever. i don't believe it will go on forever. i believe there is nature. nature poses limits to human beings and what we can accomplish. what we see now is project is bumping up against the natural limits and they are starting to find they can't do everything they want to do. a great example which you talked about a lot in the last couple of days is the green new deal program. leave aside everything else you want to say about the green new deal program i don't think it's within the realm of
5:57 pm
possibility and the laws of physics they can find some way to get rid of all fossil fuels and not make the country -- >> tucker: you know how you know they are a bit in -- bigot in 2019? appeal to the physics. i don't believe in that spooky stuff. it's great to see you and congrats on the book. >> thank you. >> tucker: thank you. so, the congress, democrats in the congress would like to cap the number of all legal immigrants that the government can detain. is that a good idea? we'll ask richard. i tried to get the answer of this from enrique acevedos. he wasn't honest enough to acknowledge it. if we say that the government can only hold so many illegal aliens why not make the same allowance for american citizens? >> i can't address that. the news is there is an agree in the principle and somehow the democrats and republicans had a meeting of the minds on
5:58 pm
this issue, even since you were on the air. the news behind donald trump is "finish the wall." he is a fabulist. there is no wall to finish. there are barriers and we should reinforce them. democrats are for beds to house people who are true national security threats. okay? but not moms and the dads who have been in the community for 30 years go to church, pay taxes, have kids who are americans and those people shouldn't be in the beds -- >> tucker: it depends if they commit crimes or not, right? 88% -- mom and dads commit crimes. a lot of american mom and dad are languishing in jail and separated from the kids but nobody cares. they are just americans so they can shut up and die. but why shouldn't we arrest or detain anyone who commits a crime? >> yeah. >> tucker: do it with americans. >> to the percentage of the people that isis detained to commit crimes i look at the "reason" the libertarian magazine. october of 2018 says 58% have
5:59 pm
not been convicted of -- not basically been convicted of a crime at all. >> tucker: no, no. 88%. according to the d.h.s. numbers that are out today, 88% have been either convicted of or charged with. you typically detain, especially a noncitizen a flight risk you detain people until you convict or acquit them. 88% of crimes not related to immigration status is a lot. >> what the democrats are trying to do and we'll see what comes from the negotiation is say let's go after the national security threats. okay? the mom who basically engaged in some speeding violation is not that and shouldn't be taking up a bed. if we have a shutdown, the border agents are not paid, the d.e.a., those prosecutors ms-13. >> tucker: i'm not arguing. i just want the country to be safe. we're out of time and we will go to the rally. richard, you are pre-empted by the president. >> gosh! >> tucker: that is it for us. we'll be back tomorrow night at 8:00 p.m. the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity,
6:00 pm
snugness and group think. d.v.r. it if you can figure that out. good night from washington. sean is in new york. as we await the rally on the border. >> sean: i can hear you tonight which is an improvement. >> tucker: technology! >> sean: i didn't hear you the other night. a great show. thank you. welcome to "hannity." we start with the fox news awe letter. conference committee has apparently reached an agreement in principle on a budget bill to fund the border wall. it would still need the president's approval. dubious of this based on some details. i'll bring you in a moment. we'll have more details as they become available. as you can see in el paso, texas, president trump only moments away from taking the stage. as this fight over border security appears to be making some progress. we'll take you live to the president's speech as soon as that happens. but first, set the stage with our "hannity" watch on the very wall


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on