tv Tucker Carlson Tonight FOX News October 16, 2019 9:00pm-10:00pm PDT
es 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. see you back here at 7:00. have ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." an awful lot going on in the world and a big show tonight. in a few minutes, megyn kelly joins us on set for her first television interview since she left nbc news last year. a lot has happened at nbc recently. the network was busted covering up for harvey weinstein. megyn saw all of it. fascinating conversation, stay tuned. nba legend dennis rodman joins us to weigh in on the league's subservience to the dictatorship in china. tulsi gabbard, attacked by "the new york times" and cnn, joins us for a postdebate recap.
first it's fair to say a brand-new democratic field. for the better part of a year, former vice president joe biden dominated the polls and the other candidates in the race attacked him from the left which is weird to see. biden still believed inei law enforcement andat international borders and he opposed forced busing along with virtually every other american, so he was obviously and one ofer those right wing extremist from the obama administration. that's what they were telling you on the debate stage.e. it was bizarre. thankfully that line of attack is over because joe biden's presidential campaign itself is in effect over. nobody thinks biden is going to be the democratic nominee. elizabeth warren is the front runner now. that's not contested. the race is hers to lose. so during n last night's debate, her rivals on the stage decided to help her do just that. lose. watch. >> your signature, senator, is to have a plan for everything. except this. >> atto least bernie's being honest in saying how he's going to pay for this and that taxes are going to go up, and i'm sorry, elizabeth, but you have not saidd that.
>> i'm going to say something's probably going to offend some people here, but i'm the only one on the stage that's gotten anything really big done. >> i appreciate elizabeth's work, but again the difference between a plan and a pipe dream is something that you can get done. >> i went on the floor and got you votes. i got votes for that bill. i convinced people to vote for it. >> i want to give a reality check here to elizabeth because no one on the stage wants to protect billionaires, not even the billionaire wants to protect billionaires. >> sometimes i think senator warren is more focusedio on being punitive or pitting a part of the country against another. >> tucker: she is punitive? when beto o'rourke, "mr. armedhe federal agents coming to your house," calls you out for divisive attacks, it's time to pay attention. in fact he makes a fair point. the main reason warren has surpassed bernie sanders in the hearts of primary voters despite close economic programs is that she's the one far more willing
to descend into the filth of identity politics. bernie is an ideologue. there are some things he just won't say. elizabeth warren will say anything.t minutes ago she tweeted this "every person deserves to be treated with dignity and respect and that starts with using correct pronouns. i'm elizabeth. my pronouns are she, her, hers." in case you're wondering, in case there was any question at all. that kind of posturing is central to elizabeth warren's campaign. she's happy to tell you and often does that you're worth less oror you're worth more basd on how you were born. unfortunately that works right now in the democratic party. one thing elizabeth warren is not willing to say is how much a single-parent government health care plan will cost. trillions of dollars, nobodydy disputesw that. as a mathematical matter, there's no way to raise that kind of money without hiking taxes on the middle class. simple arithmetic. and yet for some reason, warren refuses to admit it. watch. >> you have not specified how
you're going to pay for the most expensive plan, medicare for all. will you raise taxes on the middle class to pay for it, yes or no? >> i've made clear what my principles are. that is, costs will go up for the wealthy and for big corporations. and for hardworking middle-class families, costs will go down. >> mayor buttigieg, you say senator warren has been "evasive" about. how she's going to pay for medicare for all. what's your response? >> we heard it tonight. d ayes" or "no" question that didn't get a "yes" or "no" answer. >> tucker: save the tape. there are a lot of moments and debates that seem like a huge deal at the time. everyone is yapping about them but in the end, turned out to be completely meaningless. this is not one of those moments. health care is always at the top of voters' concerns and so are taxes, for that matter. if elizabeth warren can't even t explain her own signature plan to rearrange the entire american health care system, she can't swin.
even a postdebate msnbc panel acknowledged as much. >> i thought she seemed a little petulant when she was being challenged. >> a little? >> a little. [laughter] >> as bernie sanders says, she just won't go there and she was pummeled for it. >> they attacked her and she was uncomfortable. she did not handle it very well. >> tucker: was it really that bad for elizabeth warren last night? we'll see. she definitely got better treatment than joe biden got. journalists don't like joe biden. biden has zero allies in america's woke newsrooms. warren has plenty of allies pretending to be journalists. this morning, nyu journalism professor, jay rosen, a guy whose name often pops up despite no talent whatsoever, demanded that reporters stop asking specific questions about warren's policies. again, a journalism professor telling you not to ask questions. the "make elizabeth warren say she would raise taxes on the
middle class" question should be a credibility killer for the journalists who keep asking it." amazingly margaret sullivan of "the washington post" agreed with that. she wrote "journalists are kindly doing president trump's work for him when they insist on trying to pin down senator elizabeth warren declart she would raise taxes to fund medicare for all. it is legitimate to dig into the cost but not in a way that creates a nice g.o.p. campaign ad." did you listen to that? two journalists telling you if the answer hurts democrats, don't ask the question. don't tell your readers or viewers what the truth is if it increases the chances that donald trump could get reelected. is that journalism? no. it is pure propaganda. it is the definition of propaganda. jay rosen, journalism professor telling journalists not to ask questions.
unbelievable. dana perino always asks questions. she is of course our colleague here at fox. she hosts "the daily briefing." she's our go-to person for postdebate analysis. >> that was unbelievable. i hadn't seen the jay rosen and the sullivan piece. it's pretty remarkable. >> tucker: to admit that. i have got certain strong political opinions, very strong. i host a whole show based on them but as a journalist, which i actually am, it's impossible to imagine telling someone don't ask that question because it could help the other side. i mean, who thinks like that? partisans think like that. >> it's t not good. thanks for having me on. i love to talk about the debates. i think that warren found out that she's not the professor anymore. she doesn't like to be challenged. amy klobuchar and pete buttigieg basically said it's not fair for you to say that none ofet us hae courageous ideas. f they really went after her. you don't usually get that at harvard. you are the professor.
it's kind of a scold, like when tulsi gabbard was talking. how dare you. kamala harris, why didn't you sign my letter? my chain letter to get the president off twitter and she was dismissive of it. it kind of came across as it's her way or the wrong way. >> tucker: definitely. it's not an appealing look and i wonder if that posture played any role in what was, i thought, a generally surprising development. bernie sanders gets the endorsement of alexandria ocasio-cortez. i didn't see that coming. is it significant? >> i didn't see it either, and i do think it was the only big surprise of the night. partly because two weeks ago, many people, including the media, were saying wow after the heart attack, bernie sanders, he's done, basically wrapping up his campaign. that didn't happen. he had a ton of energy. he looked d great. the new look at this endorsement. he announces that alexandria ocasio-cortez and the
rest of the squad, they are going to endorse him and they are going to appear at a rally with him. they have cut ads for him. that was a genuine surprise. but i still think that it's a nice get for bernie. but his goose is cooked. he can be very happy that his ideas will live on. but i don't think that elizabeth warren would necessarily even want aoc's endorsement right now if she thinks she's going to go into a general election. >> tucker: that's interesting. what was the significance other than being compelling television of the exchange between beto o'rourke and pete buttigieg on guns?is >> they had a really interesting back-and-forth. they at least faced each other and talked. you could see there was some disdain between the two of them. what beto had tried to do was to take the issue that the left mostly agrees on gun control. he went so far to the left that he pulled everybody basically back to the center and he is the lone person on the left on mandatory gun confiscation. pete buttigieg is saying that's
not going to work. he was saying i am more practical. i want to get a little something. don't have to be so pure. i think beto o'rourke is a zombie candidacy right now. it's dead. he might not know it yet. >> tucker: finally, biden. you and i had a lot of conversations about joe biden, whether or not this is a real campaign. as of now, is it? >> good gets better and bad gets iworse. i think last night was not a great night for him. now, i can say that. i can look at that and say i don't think it was a great debate. however, his base of support has remained pretty strong. keep in mind, he has now spent more money than he has raised. he's been outraised -- four of the other candidates have more cash on hand than he does right now. the other thing that we didn't even talk about, there was a new entrant last night, tom steyer, the billionaire. he spent over $40 million to get
on the debate stage. he wears the same tie every day, though he has five of them, because he's a billionaire and he can afford five ties. if you can afford five ties, i don't know if those would be the five that you bought. >> tucker: you are sweet. that's a nice way to put it. it would definitely not be. speaking of billionaires, i want to tell our audience, dana has an interview with the man who founded facebook, sitting down with mark zuckerberg. i can think of about 100 questions to ask. i know that you will ask. that interview airs friday "the daily briefing" 2:00 p.m. eastern this friday. >> if i see you tomorrow, i will find out what your questions are. >> tucker: we've already talked. great toto see you, dana. thank you so much. elizabeth warren isn't simply wary of telling the truth about her health care plan and what it would cost. pertainingng to her biography. as you know, she lied for years about being anan american india. last night was the one-year anniversary anniversary of her dna test. we celebrated silently onr the show. she lied about getting fired for
getting pregnant. a story about a polio stricken colleague chasing her around the office. it's hard to find an episode from her life that she hasn't spun into a tall tale. tonight we have a new example. the story that warren tells about her parents' marriage. t for details, we go to lisa boothe. >> hi, tucker. it's almost comical. as we saw in the debate last night, she came under scrutiny for her policy positions and not being honest about some, but what was missing and absent from the criticism were all these lies that she's told about her bio and there's this one. listen to this. >> my daddy was in his teens when he fell in love with my mother. she was a beautiful girl who h played the piano. he was head over heels in love with her and wanted to marry her. his family was bitterly opposed to that because she was part native american. eventually my parents eloped.
>> a genealogist, a cherokee genealogist, looked in to it. there's no evidence of cherokee ancestry in her family. what's more, elizabeth warren has been saying these are the stories that my family members have told me. this is why i believe these things. however, this genealogist also looked into the underlying facts that she has said about the story and found them to not be true as well.ts for instance, grant herring, her grandfather, had a great relationship with a guy who was a member of the cherokee nation. they went golfing together. cornell attended her grandparents' 25th anniversary in 1936. additionally her parents' wedding announcement was made in the local newspaper. it seemed like it was a happy event, not something that was shameful to the family. a lot of inconsistencies, and they found nothing about the story was true. >> tucker: nothing about the story was true. i've heard that before.
>> it's a familiar pattern. a little bit. >> tucker: lisa boothe, great to see you tonight. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: america's former ambassador to ukraine may have ordered government personnel to monitor journalists and allies of president trump. chief breaking news correspondent trace gallagher has the latest on the story. >> at the center is marie yovanovitch, former u.s. ambassador to ukraine appointed by obama and ousted by president trump. yovanovitch made headlines last week and she testified before the house intel committee as part of the democrats' impeachment inquiry. two sources with close knowledge of the situation confirmed to "tucker carlson tonight" that in the spring of 2019 the u.s. embassy in ukraine u.s. embassy in ukraine requested that several journalists and people close to president trump have their social media accounts monitored. this happen following news reports that yovanovitch had an anti-trump bias.
the list includes 13 people including our ownou sean hannit, laura ingraham, lou dobbs, as well as fox news contributors sara carter and dan bongino along with rudy giuliani and donald trump jr. according to the sources, the monitoring lasted for at least a few days before stopping because the state department is not allowed to conduct this sort of monitoring of u.s. citizens obviously. the conservative government watchdog judicial watch has now filed a freedom of information act request to the state department seeking "any and all records regarding, concerning, or related to the monitoring of any u.s.-based journalists, reporter, or media commentator by any employee or office of the department of state between january 1, 2019, and the present." judicial watch said they have information that indicates yovanovitch directly ordered subordinates to target this list of people. tucker. >> tucker: shocking story. trace gallagher, thank you. in a few minutes, megyn kelly joins us for her first televised interview since she left nbc. we will ask about harvey
hey. ♪hey. you must be steven's phone. now you can take control of your home wifi and get a notification the instant someone new joins your network... only with xfinity xfi. download the xfi app today. ♪ >> tucker: joe biden's presidential campaign is in lusitania territory. he is still traveling in style. according to recent disclosures, >> tucker: joe biden's presidential campaign is in lusitania territory. he is still traveling in style. according to recent disclosures, biden's campaign spent more than $900,000 on private jets just in the third quarter of this year.
an nationwide campaign for a country of 320 million, one in every $16 from biden's campaignm treasury went to flying private. you can hardly blame joe biden. he has a message he's desperate to disseminate as far andd wide as he can. the message? we must confront the existential threat of global warming. >> can't wait for us to take on what's happening to our climate. it can't wait. >> tucker: it can't wait. you know what can wait? flying in coach like a troll! an existential threat to the entire planet is nothing compared to the comfort of a t presidential candidate. elizabeth warren versus the field isn't the only battle that unfolded last night.as there was tulsi gabbard versus the entire u.s. press corps. unlike virtually everyone else in her party, gabbard believes
in keeping america out of pointless foreign entanglements and for that belief, she has been tarred repeatedly and very aggressively as a foreign agent. last night she hit back. >> "neww york times" and cnn hae also smeared veterans like myself for calling for an end to this regime change war. just two days ago, "the new york times" put out an article saying that i'm a russian asset and an assad apologist and all these different smears. this morning a cnn commentator said on national television that i am an asset of russia. completely despicable. >> tucker: yeah. cnn doesn't care for her either. we know that for a fact because recent footage from project veritas shows a cnn employee m conceding that the network is institutionally hostile to tulsi gabbard. watch this. >> i think the one they don't like, they don't like tulsi gabbard. because she supports assad and she's not taking the conventional route when it comes to foreign policy. she's actually pretty liberal. but when it comes to that one
position. >> tucker: congresswoman gabbard of hawaii joins us. congresswoman, you just heard that, i know you've been on the road. there is a cnn employee saying that for taking an unconventional foreign policy position, you are the one democratic candidate that cnn doesn't like. does that surprise you? >> it doesn't. you know, i think it's kind of absurd actually that as we saw in the days leading up to the debate last night, both "the new york times" and cnn both ran hit pieces. today, the day after the debate, we see more of these hit pieces coming out. for them to sit there and try to portray themselves as neutral arbiters, as objectiveve and independent entities workingnd with the dnc to carry out a legitimate debate is frankly just a a joke. it's one of the reasons why i've been calling for nonprofit
organization like the league of women voters to actually host these debates in a way that actually serves the interests of voters, not the profit, the profit-bearing corporate interests of the corporate media. >> tucker: i couldn't agree more. so just for our viewers who maybe haven't followed this, when wee say you've been attackd by "the new york times" and cnn, it's not attacks like they are saying your health care plan is too expensive. they are saying that you are working for a foreign power against america's interests, that you are a traitor to the country. "the new york times" piece essentially said that. what is this about? >> this is exactly what happens to those like myself who are trying to end this regime change war in syria, who are calling for an end to our country's policy being the world police, bring about an end to these regime change wars.
this is something that's not just happening to me. you know, when they are issuing these smear attacks, really what they are doing is smearing anyone who is calling for an end to these regime change wars, including veterans whoyo i meet almost everything the day all across this country who are not pacifists, who understand and know firsthand the cost of war and who are strongly, strongly calling for our countryy to put an end to these counterproductive regimefi chane wars. so when they are issuing these smears and calling me a traitor to my country, they are essentially issuing these smears and attacks to every veteran who has been willing to lay their lives down in service to our country. >> tucker: you know, there are many things we don't agree on but one of the things i'm so, so sympathetic to what you and what you're doing is because i've been there. i know what you're saying. it's real. the one subject they won't accept any deviation on.ec so you deserve credit i think for your bravery and going forward. thank you. tulsi gabbard, great to see you
>> tucker: megyn kelly was a fixture at fox. in early 2017, she moved to nbc where, among many other things, she anchored the third hour of "the today show." it turned out to be a turbulent year.. executives caught covering up for accused sex criminal harvey weinstein. the network's most famous anchor, matt lauer, fled the building after he was implicated in a laundry list of misdeeds. an awful lot of drama for one network. megyn kelly was right there to see all of it. she left her show last october. she has not done a single televised interview since. we are happy to have her on the set tonight. megyn,on good to see you. >> good to be with you. >> tucker: the ronan farrow
book adds details what we essentially knew which is that nbc executives, particularly head of nbc news, covered up for harvey weinstein. here's what ronan farrow's book says. i want your reaction to this quote. farrow brings a recording by the nypd to nbc and in it, harvey weinstein admits that he abused an italian model. on tape. noah oppenheim responds "my view is that the tape and harvey weinstein grabbing a lady's breasts a couple years ago, that's not national news." does that surprise you, having worked there? >> nothing surprises me anymore. in this industry. as i watched the ronan story n unfold, the one thing i wanted to know is what did they know and when did they know it. i've been reporting on the story even while i was at nbc.
i talked to ronan. i talkedle to his producer. i talked to rose mcgowan. i talked to many harvey weinstein victims and accusers and was getting to the bottom of what nbc knew while i was there. and then just independently. the question is what did they know about matt lauer prior to the time the woman came forward who was ultimately his downfall? she came forward. her name is brooke nevils. made an allegation against matt lauer and the company's wholeam defense to ronan's book essentially has been that's the first we knew about matt lauer. there was no deal between us and harvey weinstein to cover up for harvey weinstein so that he wouldn't report on matt lauer. because we didn't know that matt lauer was doing this. we had no notice of itit whatsoever. >> tucker: is that a plausible claim? >> if they had no settlements of any kind and no complaints about matt lauer prior to brooke nevils coming forward, sure, it might be. but is it true? here is what they are saying. no settlements of any kind. no settlements. that's a legal sleight-of-hand.
you can get paid out as a sexual-harassment victim in something other than a a settlement.xu you can get what's called enhanced severance. that's the situation where the receptionist is suddenly getting a seven-figure goodbye. she was an amazing typist. it is severance. it's not a settlement. by the way, if you could be really quiet about nbc forever more, we would really appreciate it. that's what we need to know. they haven't gotten specific, about what monies were paid out to whom. show us the money. the number one thing that needs to happen now is they need to release any and all matt lauer accusers from their confidentiality agreements. nbc says it has nothing to hide. great. let's not hide anything. show us all of the agreements, the enhanced severance agreements reached or at least the number so we can see which ones pop out and which ones are super high. are they w all women? do they all have a connection with matt lauer? release the women from their
confidentiality obligations. >> tucker: this probably would be known right now if the network had conducted an independent investigation. last september, early september, you, on your show on the air on nbc, called for an independent investigation into these allegations. i think we have the tape of you doing it. >> there's a question about whether there should be an outside investigator to take a hard look at this. between the investigation nbc did internally on matt lauer to now this, there's a question of the faith and confidence of the public and the reporting of nbc on matters involving itself. to me as a lawyer, it's just always better if you send it outside. then people can have more faith in it and if there's nothing to hide, you have no worries about it. you have nothing to worry about.
>> tucker: people's jaws hung open when you said that.me there have been a couple published accounts that say you were fired from nbc a little more than a month later for saying that. with that in mind, without having youou comment on it, i wt to get your response on something that an anchor at msnbc did two nights ago. chris hayes addressed the credibility of the president of nbc news directly in his show. he said this. >> oppenheim and others have maintained the weinstein story was never broadcast because it lacked sufficient on the record sourcing even after nbc supported ronan farrow's assignment. >> ronan farrow walked out of nbc news after working on the weinstein story and within two months published an incredible article at then new yorker. the path of least resistance is always there. beckoning seductively with an entirely plausible cover story. you have bigger fish to fry. the story isn't ready.ly of course it's the ease of the path that makes it the enemy tot the kind of work it we as journalists are supposed to do. >> tucker: he is saying essentially what you said. he doesn't trust the management at nbc news. given your experience, do you think he's in jeopardy of being fired? >> noo comment on that.
i will say the question is open as to whether they put dollars ahead of decency. if they were more interested in protecting their star anchor than protecting the women of the company. there needs to be an outside investigation into this company. they investigated themselves. that doesn't work. fox news had an outside investigator. cbs news had an outside investigator. npr, the nfl. this is how it's done. you get somebody on the outside who can be trusted. what happened here is you've got noah oppenheimer who, now they are pulling his college writings where he said women love to be preyed on. apparently he thinks women love to be preyed upon. noah has said that i deeply regret it. people do write dumb things in college. and they say dumb things. trust me. but that's the person who is investigating. andy lack -- i'm sorry, the reporting that ronan has put out is that there is an accuser, ady woman named jane wallace who
said she was bullied out of a job and working for andy years ago.sa she had a consensual affair with him but then she says she was retaliated against. she says he relentlessly preyed on female underlings. if these are the people overseeing the investigation into nbc. they have the general counsel tl the investigation. how are people supposed to trust it? that's why you've got to get some at any outside.om >> tucker: there's a striking irony. even as the management of nbc clearly ignored sexual misconduct and abuse within their own building, they seemed to pump up and abet wild and unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct against people in politics they don't like. i watched you on a panel at nbc when you worked there last year on kavanaugh, the last story you covered.or savannah guthrie, chuck todd. you were the only person on the panel who held out the possibility that maybe brett kavanaugh was not a rapist. did you feel like the only
person capable of being objective? >> there's no question that the reporting that was done on nbc on someone like julie swetnick, completely discredited alleged third accuser against kavanaugh. a woman whose story had tons of holes in it. there was a date rape and then everybody saw it and nobody saw it. she imploded on the air. they went to air with that story. with far less trepidation than they showed going to air on the harvey weinstein story for which they had tapes. they had tapes. they had witnesses. they had women on the record. rose mcgowan was just one of them. there is a question of why. was it political, as you suggest? was it something else? was it to protect somebody internally? someone who wasn't the women of the company. what ronan is suggesting is they covered up for one sexual predator, harvey weinstein, in order to protect another, matt
lauer.r. they deny all of it and nbc has put out several statement saying that ronan is a conspiracy theorist and this is all nonsense and he's got an ax to grind. but if that's true and there's nothing to hide, then get an outside investigator. >> tucker: yeah, if there's nothing to hide. there's more to talk about. we will take a quick break. we are not finished. up next, we will ask about what appears to be really an epidemic of political journalism in this country and whether the dnc ought to cancel its next debate on msnbc. we'll be right back. ext debate on msnbc. we'll be right back.
nbc executives went to cover up sexual abuse. the details are stunning. even some on the left, presumably nbc viewers themselves, have expressed outrage. the feminist group ultra violet said "the dnc needs to make it e.clear they support survivors f sexual abuse and cancel thee upcoming 2020 democratic president primary debate on msnbc until comcast and nbc news take clear steps to clean up the toxic culture that exist across their networks." megyn kelly, do you think there's any chance the dnc will act on it? >> i do think there's a chance. i do. if this were fox news and fox news were hosting a democratic debate in conjunction with "the washington post," they would be putting on the full-court press to make sure foxgt made some sort of promiseo clean up its act. so i think -- i take it seriously. people are not screwing around anymore when it comes to the treatment of women. what used to be toleratedt will
not be tolerated anymore. it's not that we have a perfect culture like that when we recognize there's a problem. is that companies are given the opportunity to come clean, investigate what the problems are, and come up with resolutions. nbc says it's done that. they say you can trust the internal gc. ronan has given us 400 reasons to doubt it. it's really up to the public. are they going to put the pressure on them to do something, get an outside investigator, or aren't they? es>> tucker: one of the most amazing i think details, maybe surprising, that hillary clinton applied pressure to farrow, he says, not tohi pursue the harvey weinstein story. so i wonder and of course i don't know the truth. that's his claim. why hasn't anyone asked hillary clinton about it? >> maybe eventually they will. there's a lot of fish to fry there. i think hillary's spokesperson has come out and said it was nothing and it's been misrepresented. they are kind of denying it. more needs to happen in order for us to get to the bottom of it. nbc says there is no way for
them to know any of it. because they didn't know anything until brooke nevils came in and only at that point a couplele more women come forward and say me too. the truth is we've seen already there was a woman, i had her on my show when i was at nbc, she had a consensual affair with lauer. he plucked her out of being a p.a. brooke nevils, 30 years old, assistant to meredith vieira, same thing. the multiple ways of -- she says she was raped by him.me he has denied it and said it was consensual. another woman who said he exposed himself to her after a party and that she ultimately left the company.en there's a woman who claimed she had sex with him in his office and she fainted it was so traumatic. the question is if they didn't know, why didn't they know? >> tucker: they are lying. it doesn't diminish the self-righteousness with which they approach other people's sins. to ask you. you worked here at fox news and
you worked at nbc. you've got some perspective. i want to ask about the state of journalism todayyo and i want to start with a clip from last night's debate. this was anderson cooper at cnn asking a question of the former vice president joe biden. watch this. >> the impeachment inquiry centered on president trump's attempts to get political dirt from ukraine on vice president biden and his son, hunter. mr. vice president, president trump has falsely accused your son of doing something wrong while serving on aa company board in ukraine. i want to point out there's no evidence of wrongdoing by either one of you. >> tucker: so what kind of journalist begins a question to a politician by reassuring him that attacks by his opponentsf are false and that he's innocent. is that a question? >> the answer was baked into the question. it's clear you did nothing wrong but did you do anything wrong? that wasn't anderson's best moment. i like anderson. it wasn't his best moment.
it would've been fine if he would've said you didn't do anything illegal. no one has alleged you did anything illegal. because really what the guy did, he sat on the board, and hunter biden has no expertise in ukraine. he has no expertise in natural gas. he takes his job sitting on the board of this ukrainian company 50,000 bucks a month while his dad is the vice president. the reason he got the job is presumably his last name is biden. so they are paying for access. l they are paying for the association. is that corrupt? you can make a very strong argument that it is. is it wrong? that is up to the voters to decide. maybe he could have reworded it. maybe he would like it back. >> tucker: i agree with you, by the way. i know anderson cooper fairly well. i don't think he's the worst offender. but this is part of a larger tapestry here and it adds up to basically partisan interference in an election. you have journalists who feel that their first obligation is to help a candidate or hurt
another candidate. that's not journalism. >> 100%. this goes back to before trump was elected. jorge ramos of univision came on my show and we had a very heartfelt discussion about journalism in america and he made a strong plea for journalists to abandon neutrality. he said it's over. you've t got to come out and you've got to say trump is a racist. trump is a i misogynist. trump is a bigot. whatever your view is, you've got to say it and sell it. the time for neutrality has passed.. i do believe he's persuaded and others have come to their own conclusion that that's the way forward. that's all we had a question -- there was another cnn debate where don lemon specifically said how do you answer voters who prioritize the economy over trump's bigotry. there's a judgment in there. i'm saying fine, many people may agree with that. it is the anchors' subjective judgment and it doesn't belong, in my view, in a debate question. "new york times" is arguing about whether the times should
be "part of the resistance."on >> tucker: the problem i have is not that someone shows an opinion. if that they are lying about what it does and they are sayinv we are journalists. we are objective. why can't they drop the pretense and be honest and say that we are partisan combatants. >> we already know. that's a real joke. we already know. fox news was founded in 1996. they had their birthday.ea the premise that the other side of the stories weren't being told and that half theda country was being ignored and that if you did fair and balanced news, the people would watch.ry there was a premise that the other media, the mainstream media, maybe they weren't far left but that there was a baked in bias against people who believe in homeschooling, who believe in a pro-life position, who might have a gun. so they made a whole empire based on programming to those people. what happened now on the other half of the country, in the mainstream, they have embraced it. it was sort of passive and now
it's active. now it's less work. it is too bad. we have to work together. we'll be judged. history will judge whether we are for or against this man. >> tucker: we were planning to bring a dennis rodman segment.. we'll save it for tomorrow. this is interesting, if you don't mind staying. we'll be right back.
>> tucker: welcome back. we promised you a conversation with dennis rodman on china in this segment. we got carried away talking to megyn kelly, so we're going to continue that. we will bring it to you tomorrow. >> rodman is a great interview. >> tucker: you've taken a year off and you've been thinking, assessing, probably watching news. >> a little. >> tucker: two days ago, this report comes out from project veritas and cnn and in it, whatever you think of their methods, they have the head of cnn, jeff zucker instructing his employees impeachment, impeachment, impeachment. hitting impeachment no matter what.
impeachment is the only story that matters. sounds more like a political campaign than a news judgment. >> impeachment is a big story. if the president of the. united states is going to get impeached and possibly bounced out of office, it's a majorgm story. i think it's defensible on the part of jeff zucker but i think the hyperfocus on it by most media at the expense of all els' is not new. since the day trump got into office, they have been hyperfocused on impeachment. this is one of the problems the democrats andus also to some extent the media is up against. that from the day he took office, it was the 25th amendment, the emoluments clause,ay russia, russia, russi, obstruction of justice. all those things. he has to be impeached. if everything is an 11, nothing is an 11. they have may be stumbled on an 11. they have the transcript. trump said it was a perfect call. you can make an argument. ca one is paying as much
attention as they otherwise would have if we hadn't been told from the beginning that he needs to be bounced out of office. so i don't know. they can ratchet up the coverage all they want. i don't know whether they are convincing everyone on the fence or in the middle. >> tucker: at all. it seems like people are starting to tune out in general from news coverage because, like how longng can you keep -- >> our outrage culture. what am i supposed to be outraged about? i'm going to get outraged. just give me two seconds. ukraine, all right. >> tucker: we talked about this at the time. at trump's election, you heard people say we need to think about who his voters are.. there'srd a whole world we know nothing about. we should be sympathetic to the trump voters. that lasted for about 15 seconds. >> you're wrong. they looked and they were like never mind! i think it was a consciouss decision that we don't want to go into that world. look at them with their guns and their cowboy hats. no. i don't think the mainstream media has any connection to flyover country, and when they
meander through montana, they have never seen such a thing. it's a rodeo and they talk differently. they have different values. >> tucker: shouldn't they want to understand the country they cover? >> i think they think they do. i think they believe they do. but i think most people, for example, take a look atth the gy in washington state who wouldn't bake the cake for the gay couple and they just think bigot. bigot.as >> tucker: the media. >> the problem is it is so much more completed than that. >> tucker: that's for sure. i have to ask you, since you had this very well covered career and you've taken a year to think, what have you learned after all of it? everything that's happened. a >> very little. i don't learn so well. >> tucker: [laughs] >> i am like woody allen. i am 48 years old and i've learned nothing. no. i have learned a thing or two. what comes to mind is the goodness of humanity. the kindness of strangers.
as awful as the media can be, actual humans are awesome and loving and kind and helpful. i think about it because i left fox news in january of '17 and the reason i left is because i wanted to be with my family. i was missing my kids' childhood. they were little. 7, 5, 3. i could still see it and be part of it. now i'm doing it. i've spent the past year in particular but even before that, with them and i am mothering my own kids. there is no substitute for that. i lost my dad when i was 15 years old, and so i know, i know on an inherent basis. you don't get a do over. i'm there and i'm enjoying it. i will get back on the horse soon. this has been fun. i will probably get back out there, but right now i'm still enjoying my day-to-day life with my family and friends. >> tucker: megyn kelly, thank you for the conversation. that's it for us tonight.
we will be back tomorrow. the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, groupthink. sean hannity takes the reins. welcome to "hannity." we have a lot breaking. the president just excoriated the house speaker nancy pelosi right to her face. in a closed-door meeting at the white house, he called her a third-rate politician. the president is right. deranged, psychotic, rage obsessive hate-trump agenda is all that matters in her world. the speaker's sloppy execution leaves a lot to be desired. today we saw it play out in real time. pelosi and her colleagues are attending a meeting surrounding the administration's policy in syria and they say a picture speaks a thousand words. on twitter, the president called it nervous nancy's unhinged meltdown.