tv Tucker Carlson Tonight FOX News January 2, 2017 11:00pm-12:01am PST
♪ >> good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." interest two days, newly selected white house press secretary sean spicer will travel west to speak at the university of chicago. one of the nation's most prestigious and expensive colleges. he's coming at the invitation of longtime obama aide david axelrod, the topic of course is politics in the presidential campaign. not everybody on campaign believes he should be allowed to talk in public. they argue that by inviting a trump supporter to campus, the school's quote normalizing the incoming administration. some students are threatening to shut down the event entirely. one of those joins us now. he is university senior, he is also the editor of the weekly paper.
things are coming on tonight. >> thank you for having me, tucker. >> i like your type. >> you wrote on facebook that you wanted to shut this thing down, and you suggested projectile vomiting, i assume it was a joke. you said that sean spicer should not be allowed to speak. i read about what you wrote about it. one of your explanations was, he represents a press operation that is hostile to freedom of speech, to the freedom of the press. therefore, he shouldn't be allowed to talk. there seems an irony in that. he is against freedom of speech, so don't let him talk? how does that work? >> sure. what i was saying, was not that he shouldn't be allowed to talk, rather, what i was saying, i, as a student, yes, it was a joke when i said that. i wouldn't projectile vomit on him. i'm glad that he made it. i get to expand what i meant to you. what i meant was that i am a student and my peers are allowed to respond to his presence on my campus, in ways that aren't just civil or decorative decorate at involve for standing up after
the event and asking him a question. i never said he should be disinvited, i never said he shouldn't be allowed to talk. >> in ways that involve a force? it sounds like. when you say, we should be allowed to respond, how about the traditional path, which is a counter case. you disagree with the stands for, which is fine, and you say, this is what i stand for. you don't believe in that, it seems like. >> sure. sean spicer was hired and was paid to have certain opinions and to support certain policies about the press. he has power, a national platform, he is in the news every day. he has access to policymaking power. if i stand up and ask him a question and say, have you ever considered that, he could give me a smarmy answer, the last 20 seconds, i don't get a follow up. then, what do i do? i would like to raise my ability and voice my frustration in ways that aren't going to die after 20 seconds and he gives me a nonanswer. he's a spin doctor, you know. >> that's a stupid question, though. why are you a fascist? i'm not sure we can agree on what that means. how about, specific, you believe
this, you are in favor of this policy, here is why i think it is wrong or hurts america. make your case. and all the social media that i write today, i haven't seen you doing that. instead, you are clearly smart, i see you calling names, which seems to be the way people respond. wouldn't it be better to make a case? >> sure. i mean, i think that no matter what kind of case i make, no matter how good of a point i make to him, he has no reason to listen to me and no incentive to listen to be. this isn't about who is right. it is about who has power. so, i think that students in the country need to mobilize in ways that would actually get people that we like an office and start up sort of discussing and sanitizing environments, moderated conversations. does that make sense? >> what sort of does. just to help you elucidate it more come i want to put it on the screen something that you wrote in your school newspaper recently, you said this, "now, we are faced with a real crisis with the election of term. we must take real action, the ivy league translation of the vulgar give trump a chance.
real action, human, donating money to the aclu, to standing rock, planned parenthood, call your representatives, protest, flipping cars when trump walks away from the paris climate agreement, attacking racists, attacking people in the supermarket, whatever it takes." i have a bunch of questions. the first is, who's whose carsd you flip? >> i don't know yet. it depends if he walks away from the paris climate accords. if you dwell on the more exaggerated or hyperbolic parts of this article, which is, after all, just an article, you won't get a chance to ask me what i think political action constitutes. all of this is meant to express, tucker -- >> weight. you were just explaining -- first of all, let me say, having read things you've written, going back to high school, you have written a lot, you are pretty articulate what they precise command of the language. in an article this long, you can ask blaine what that action, what form it would take, in this case, you said, it takes flipping cars over. someone paid for those cars. those aren't your cars.
to destroy other peoples property to make your point isn't a valid path, is it? >> first of all, they flipped cars, second of all, tucker, i think that -- yeah, it's an article, i exaggerated. i am trying to explain what i think i actually mean by political action it doesn't consist of moderated q and a sessions or bipartisan roundtables. at the institute of politics. i think that you want to say that this way of engaging in politics is a sort of young, petulant thing among close minded liberals, but really, the ancestry of this kind of action as the tea party. they staged massive demonstrations, they called the representatives incessantly, and they got people that they wanted in office, through a grassroots mobilization. frankly, there is a lot of political participation in that. i don't think that it is fair to say that what i am doing a sort of catastrophic or intolerant, really, what i'm trying to argue is that young people need to be
politically motor boys in ways that don't involve talking and asking questions, and going back and forth. big light, knowing things. what about the paris climate agreements? >> if america were not to participate in this climate accord, carbon levels would rise it so much the world that it would be past the point where we can bring it back down. in a safe or efficient way. >> that's address you know nothing about it. let me ask you this. >> that is because i don't have the numbers on it. >> no, no. here is my point. you are the editor of a weekly paper, people listen to you, and rather than explain, here is why you ought to support the paris climate agreement, your position is, if you don't believe everything that i think i believe, even if i have no details, i'm going to flip your car over. i will vomit on you. i will commit an act of violence, i will beat you up in a supermarket. that is not debate. that is something dumber, no?
>> tucker, how can i possibly make a case to the trump administration that he ought not walk away from the paris climate accords? >> you don't even know what it is. [laughs] >> how could i possibly make a point in a way that would want him listen to me? it's not about who can make better points, this guy has a platform, he has control of the country and can do whatever he wants, no matter what he wants. it's not about whether i can convince him and the administration that it's wrong, it's about whether i can make sure that he feels enough pressure that he won't do it, and doomed the future of our planet. >> so, what you are articulating is in politics, its nihilism. you are saying that none of this matters. whoever has the gun, is the guy in charge. that is what you are saying. >> tucker, that is exactly what i am not saying. i have convictions. i would like to express them on terms that are not set by my opponent. you understand what i mean? >> i think we can all agree on these terms. rational, elucidated fact-based debate. that carries the day. if you don't agree with that, if
you think vandalism carries the day, then, we can't really have a conversation because we are starting from places that are so different that is not even worth it, right? >> right. so, you want to say that i want to hear the other side out and i won participate in rational debate. >> yeah. >> how can i possibly to participate in a rational debate with someone who literally controls the country? think about this for a second. >> i don't think vomiting on him will be the answer to that. >> you establish the segment by telling me that that was a joke and i agreed with you. >> i think -- look -- i will say this last thing. i think you are smart, you probably have valid points, i disagree with them, but it might be better to explain what they are, rather than to start with, hey, i will hit you in the face if you don't like that. that is where you are starting from. >> that's fair, tucker. i think that you have sort of a skirted around or my actual point is. look, you have read my writings in high school. you know that the tradition of hyperbole in writing that goes back. >> i get that.
jake, thanks a lot for joining us. i appreciate it. the president-elect trump is back in new york city after spending christmas down at tomorrow lago palm beach, florida. peter doocy is live outside trump tower in new york city with how the transition is shaping up. peter. >> most offices here in midtown manhattan were empty today for the federal holiday. but mr. trump is on the 26th floor of his manhattan skyscraper, he was working, he was tweeting, most recently, just a few minutes ago, china has been tak amounts of money and wealth from the u.s. in a totally one-sided trade but want help with north korea. nice. that came just a few minutes after he tweeted about north korea, too. he said, "north korea just stated that it is in the fat in all stages of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the new u.s. it won't happen." now, he talked a lot about china and north korea, not so much about crime and chicago, which is something else that caught his attention. he blasted this out a few hours ago. chicago murder rate is
record-setting, 4000, 331 shooting victims with 761 murders in 2016. he must ask for federal help. something that we have heard the president-elect talk during the transition, and probable from don't not come-from-behind victory, he got on the board in 2017 with a pair of tweets, he said, various media outlets and pond and say that i thought i was going to lose the election. wrong. it all came together in the last weekend i thought and felt i would win big, easily over the fabled 270. 306. when they canceled fireworks, they knew, and so did i. today, the transition team was expanding with the president-elect matt on new year's ease when he said that on tuesday or wednesday of this week, the world is going to be privy to information that he knows but we don't to make him skeptical of russian government interference of the u.s. auction process. incoming press secretary sean spicer explained the president-elect gets regular briefings from his national
security team and others, and that is what has been informing his opinion to date. >> he is privy to information that nobody else is. but what i think he is driving at is the fact that there doesn't seem to be conclusive evidence within the intelligence community. there are people who believe certain things, but what we are waiting for is the final report as to whether or not it is conclusive or whether it is just the general belief that that is the direction. >> the highest profile visitor to trump tower was mike pence, he came and went to less than an hour later. it does seem like things are quieting down for the night. we expect the president-elect to have a full schedule at trump tower tomorrow. tucker. >> the great peter doocy, stuck in new york, good to see you anyway. just 18 days left in president obama's term but he is not wasting a single one of them. he is doing whatever he can to protect his political legacy, your number that, the one that was soundly rejected by voters in november. here not to respond as david
goodfrined, an attorney and democratic strategist who served and the bell clinton white house. a very different place. it's good to see you. >> happy new year. >> happy new year to you. >> i have to ask you, it's only probable scenario, is being batted around by the lunatics online, a recess appointment of merrick garland, the speaker gobbles it out, a five minute intercession between the two, the intercession recess at is called come he gobbles. the idea is, in the period, the president could make a recess appointment of supreme court justice, will he do that? >> i don't think so. i think is an interesting theory. it suggests that would president obama exercised every last ounce of executive authority that he has, including during recess appointments. by and large, the president have avoided doing that for good reason. there is a congressional, senate process for reviewing on a nominee, i think that'll happen
here. i will say that i think that it was rather pugnacious of the senate republicans not to hold hearings on the president's nominee, which is part of our constitution. >> it was pugnacious. >> they should have held a vote. >> may be so. yet, voters, with that in mind, voted for the republican anyway and elected him president. i guess that is the point. so, rather than pausing in the aftermath of this amazing election outcome that nobody expected, least of all president obama, asking, what are voters trying to tell us, he is moving forward as if the last election ratified his policies and give him another mandate. he has done all of these things, restricted leasing in the arctic and atlantic oceans, dismantled the tracking system to muslim visitors in our country, protected a million acres of land in the western states against the will of those dates. nobody voted for any of those things. >> unfortunately, tucker, the way these constitutions were, we have one president, and executive actions can be easily undone by and incoming president, does not like you are passing a law that has to be
overturned by another congress. i think what is going on here, frankly, we have, and this country, a system of laws forgetting marketing regulations in place. forgive me for going a law professor on you. it is really important. we have something called the administrative procedures act, which is how regulations are supposedly for related, out for public comment, the public it's your comment, the agency puts out -- someone says he didn't give me enough notice. that is really -- >> i'm starting to get all law professor on you, as a history major, the president doesn't pass laws. neither do the courts. the congress does. you said laws, in fact, they are laws. where we are now, you know as well as i, the executive branch is making the laws and their calling them legislation, ignoring congress, it doing what they want. >> they are acting under statutory authority, they can go beyond that, they can get sued for that, and they have, in any case, it is the president acting in his power as the executive to
implement the law. >> he can do it and i can do a lot of things but i choose not to because i restrained myself because they are bad for me or the people around me. shoot in the president in the interest of democracy pull back a little bit, look at voters and say, what were you trying to say? clearly, he you didn't love my climate policy, if you did, you would have elected my successor, hillary clinton. >> under that election, they should have brought merrick garland up for a vote, why don't you get that message? >> i think that's a fair point. i'm talking about right now. they didn't. >> barack obama is saying, i am still president, this is my authority, whatever under the law i'm authorized -- >> look. what's wrong with it is, it is increasing a trend that has been going on for the last 20 years for the country is becoming less democratic, ordinary people have less control over what happens to them. from governments may have ever had before because more decisions are being made by fewer people, unelected people, and agencies, the courts. it's not good. you know what's not good.
he is meeting at work workers. >> i would say this, tucker. the people who voted for barack obama in overwhelming numbers, overwhelming numbers, got a president for four years, and they got a new president in donald trump for the next four years, who can just as easily, under his executive authority, and do whatever he wants. >> i know. you're right. you're absolutely right. >> we only have one president at a time. >> but we have a congress that is supposed to be doing this! basically, what obama is doing, by acting and in an 4 may, he s guaranteeing that temple do the same plates . >> you are misreading the law. these are regulations under statutory authority. if congress wanted to undo them, tucker, they could pass a law to undo them. they don't. >> because they are cowards. >> okay. >> we can agree on that. >> let's agree on that. >> on that, david, thank you. good to see you. >> you, too. >> now, time for "twitterstorm,"
our nightly forecast of social media's most powerful weather patterns. tonight, mariah carey is getting attention on twitter thanks to her poor lip syncing on new year's eve. she wasn't actually singing the song. she was caught on tape apparently unable to hear the sound track, the whole embarrassing thing is everywhere, televised live on national tv. twitter had a lot to say about it ouch.
>> pithy, as always. nice, "twitterstorm" ." up next, how will our relationship with russia evolves, change, improve, who knows what is going to happen under president trump? that is what we have been thinking a lot about. his ideas on that next. also, where is evidence of a russian hacker? we all agreed happen, right? we all agreed happen, right? where's the proof?
did you know slow internet can actually hold your business back? say goodbye to slow downloads, slow backups, slow everything. comcast business offers blazing fast and reliable internet that's over 6 times faster than slow internet from the phone company. say hello to internet speeds up to 250 mbps. and add phone and tv for only $34.90 more a month. call today. comcast business. built for business. ♪ >> i bet a year ago you didn't think a whole lot about it russia was up to come all of a sudden, it is on the front page of every paper, every day. u.s.-russian relations, and are
considered one of the most important issues in this country, certainly, when traffic comes president. they will be center stage. on his plate. former u.s. and bought ambassador, john bolton, has been making a lot about this. it may change if it has to change. he joins us now. >> glad to be with you. >> you are skeptical that these sanctions are not the same ones, your recommendations, you need to make the russians feel pain. what we the point of that? >> the point of that is to get to the point we want to become of this kind of interference and hacking, with the chinese, this isn't normal activity. to do that, you need to structures of deterrence to tell these foreign intelligence services or their militaries that if you try and do this, it will cause you more trouble than you are going to get benefit from it. otherwise, we face the prospect of this is going to continue, it is going to expand. that is trouble for us.
we aren't ready for it. we don't have adequate defenses, we don't have adequate offenses at the moment. to speak of the north koreans have been under sanctions for 0 years. there are one of the poorest countries for 50 years. what is so interesting, any kind of sanctions, they have no concept of anyone but china, yet, they hacked, they flooded the world with methamphetamine, it cost a lot of mischief, even though they are a pariah. why would it work with russia? >> because the theory is that they need to understand that we are simply not going to sit back and allow this to happen. unfortunately, they are experienced -- their experience over the past years is that will happen. we don't see either evidence or commentary from the administration on what they have done and response, not only to earlier examples of russian hacking, but china stacking tens of millions of personal records from the u.s. government. indeed, what was leaked out of
the administration was a long list of reasons why they can't make up their mind what to do. i think what you fed what happens in cyberspace with the overall obama worldview in foreign policy, it's an approach that very much limits the assertion of american interest. it constantly ties us down in ways that others take advantage of. i don't see cyber as being different from a range of other international threats that we face and adequately for eight years. >> we know that the russians have hacked into all kinds of systems, including the white house computer system a couple of years ago. are we absolute positive that they were working to throw the selection for trump? oh, they do that? trump has promised to make america more assertive. >> i said during the election, if anything, if russia wanted either of the two candidates, they would much rather have hillary clinton because more likely that she would carry forward obama's policies, which
are much -- >> the story line makes no sense. >> unless part of the effort is to diminish overall trust and confidence in american institutions on the part of the american people, which this debate, we have had for the past three months here, i think it is gone a long way to do it. a lot of people think that trump won because of the russians changed the vote. >> isn't paul krugman doing that to single-handedly? >> he would qualify as a useful idiot. in the leninist version of this. it is very important, neither you nor i nor anybody watching this program that doesn't have the appropriate classification, access, knows what the facts are. that does -- so, talk is cheap. that is why this meeting because the president-elect and the intelligence community this week, where they go over the data is going to be so important. i haven't seen it. i have talked to senators who have seen it. i think it is pretty clear that russia was involved. that's who the president will see. >> thanks a lot, ambassador. great to see her. up next, newspaper editorial
says, trump is wrong to shrug off russian cyber attacks. wait, are we sure that that happened? if so, how do we know? if so, how do we know? and editor from that paper is thank you for dining with us. hope to see you again soon. whoa, whoa, i got this. just gotta get the check. almost there. i can't reach it. if you have alligator arms, you avoid picking up the check. what? it's what you do. i got this. thanks, dennis! if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. growwwlph. it's what you do. oh that is good crispy duck.
friend and colleague sean hannity interviewed julian assange, the founder of wikileaks, the interview airs tomorrow at 10:00 p.m. eastern on this channel. here's what he told shawn about the source of those clinton emails. watch. >> can you say to the american people, unequivocally, that you did not get this information about the dnc, john podesta's emails, can you tell the american people 1000% do not get it from russia or anybody associated with russia? >> we can say, we have said come up repeatedly, over the last few months, that our source is not the russian government. it is not state parties. >> interesting. >> that interview will air tomorrow at 10:00 on "hannity." you heard it. wikileaks is not behind all of this. some are not buying that. for "philadelphia inquirer" editorial board asked which side is trump on. here now is paul davies, the editor of that paper. thanks a lot for joining us
today. you all wrote this pretty florid editorial today, excoriating trump are not taking this seriously. this was an attack on our democracy, on a free and fair election. how do you know exactly that russia was behind this? >> the president obama has announced it, the intelligence community's side that was their assessment. >> but they haven't offered any actual proof of it and most of the accounts of we have received about how they know this has been anonymous anonymously sou. as a journalist, are you comfortable taking at face value the assurances of anonymous government officials about something this important? >> it's not just the president and the intelligence community. senator mccain, senator my conical, they have come out, they have heard the briefings, i obviously haven't heard the briefings. i don't think the president would be taking actions or issuing sanctions against russia or kicking russians out of the country if he wasn't sure about
the evidence. >> okay, you have faith that the president would not have a political motivation to do this, nobody involved without any other motive, they all must be telling the truth? >> they talked about this in september. before the election, there was even talk about the russians being involved in the hacking. >> right. they were mad, of course, because of emails from the dnc that were leaked to wikileaks somehow. then, emails from john podesta's personal gmail account. some of those details were embarrassing. i think it is on the basis of that that people are saying this election was hacked. which of those facts that fell into the public view do you think americans shouldn't have known before they voted in november? >> the point of the editorial was that if there is hacking going on, if it is interfering with our elections, and another country is doing that, that is a problem. it is a problem that undermines
our democracy. the point is, if president-elect trump as a shrugging it off and telling everybody to move on, it is not a big issue, that is the troubling aspect. the point is, we should have hearings, we should get to the bottom of what happened. it should be disclosed. >> i agree with you. i still don't understand -- >> the intelligence communities have said that. they have released this information. i don't think that they would just go out and release stuff and provoke a country just over politics. that's very strange. >> that has never happened before. let me ask you this. i agree with you. i want to know more, we all do. you said this affected our election. i'm not sure how. are you suggesting that the voting machines themselves were rigged? are you referring to the emails? if you are referring to the emails, are you saying, we shouldn't have seen them before we voted? >> if they influenced the election, causing people to vote
one way or another, that is their impact on what happened. >> how? how do they influence people to vote? how did that happen? explain how it happened? >> if people think that after they read to those emails that somehow they influence the vote one way or another, it influences their vote. i don't have a document that says, 10% of people voted for trump, or voted against clinton because of that. >> it is speculation. you are saying you wish those emails, as a journalist, this is an important point. the point. you are saying, you wish those emails had not gone into the public sphere, that we hadn't seen those emails, we would have less information? is that what you are saying? >> that is not what we said it all in the editorial. >> what are you saying? >> i'm all for having information out there to find out, the public should be fully informed. >> why are you upset at what happened? we got more information? >> i'm upset that president-elect trump seems to be blowing the whole thing often
telling everybody to move on. >> wait a second. >> relationships and connections to russia, and his friendships and apartments to secretary of state, and other friends, his positive assessment for putin is what is troubling. >> i get that you don't like putin and you don't like trump. you said, i'm reading are editorial, instead of standing up to the bedrock of u.s. democracy, free and fair election, you said, trump is a cavalier attitude regarding russia's efforts to undermine america's democracy. i want to get to the nub of what you are saying. how exactly, specifically, did they get done might prevent that from being a fair and free election? >> if they are hacking into the computer systems and releasing information, that influences our elections, that is troubling. >> let me ask you, last question. if you could go back and undo that, would you do so?
would you make it so american voters didn't know the information i got from the wikileaks emails? >> i don't think that a foreign country should be meddling in our -- >> you are not answering my question. >> regardless of what information is hacking cover that is the point. >> do you think it was a good thing or a bad thing that we knew the information before we voted? >> it depends on where you're coming from. >> how about as a voter? as a voter, is it better or worse to have that information? >> having all the information is what you want from a voter. having it hacked is not what you want. >> you like the ends but not the means? >> i don't want a foreign country hacking into any information on elections and the president-elect blowing it off like it is not a big deal. >> all right. i'm still having trouble understanding your argument. thank you. will we ever be able to see
anything from the russia investigation or will it remain classified? fox news katherine harris is here. >> thank you, tucker. we had the support last week from homeland security and the fbi which was really thin in terms of the data about russia that included. i did identify two computer viruses, schemes to get information. now, that is not a direct link to russia, but these are viruses, if you will come of that are used by the russian intelligence services. my information is that there is a lot more intelligence beyond what was released last week. the question for the intelligence community is how much of that will be declassified in order to make their case more publicly that there is this link, that it was directed by the russian government. now, to answer your first question, in a roundabout way, the president has asked for more extensive reports, our expectation is that a version of that will beat his declassified sometime before the 20th.
what you to watch for they ares that there really is evidence of intent and motivation by the hackers. that is the kind of intelligence that requires a human source, or one is called an electronic intercept, picking up a phone call. this is a very high threshold of information to have, number one, and number two, it would be highly unusual for the u.s. government to declassify that kind of information. to >> and why would they do so? >> if you wanted to make the case that there really is that's all the link to the russian government, and that he was directed by those around putin and putin himself, you have to have very high quality intelligence and that is not always the intelligence that belongs to us, it can belong to our foreign partners, not really ours to disclose.
the russians play a game, we have seen it in the past, they may deny being responsible for something. they do it in an effort to force our hand to release information to satisfy the american people or others, our allies in general. when that happens, he burned the source and you burned the message, and that is really to russia's advantage. it is a real balancing act. a gun, the thing to watch is intent and motivation. that is the kind of intelligence that requires a human force or picking up a phone call and that is very hard to get. you also have to be very reluctant to burn data source for the future. >> this is why the russians are such good chess players. >> yes. [laughter] >> catherine herridge, great to see her. teachers around the country have abused students in appalling ways. they go on to new classrooms and new cities and no one is the wiser. how big is the problem? a big problem, turns out. an investigative reporter spent a year of looking into it and
>> one of those stories that it is hard to believe it is real. aggressive story, teachers take it out of their classrooms, also for abuse of their students, finding the race back into other classrooms and other schools. "usa today" just released the findings of a year-long investigation, an amazing series into education officials putting cards in harm's way by making it easier for abusive teachers to find new jobs. here now is stephen riley, who wrote it. i have to say, where a newspaper series just rivets the reader. this is an amazing series you did. i just want to throw up a couple of examples that you found. the first, a high school football coach from orangefield, texas, kit mcfarlane, tell us about him. >> thank you for having me. >> the issue we looked at it is instances where teachers were disciplined and lost their job. in one school district, where the school district stood often, was secretly pass them along and kept them secret and allow those teachers to move on to other
public school systems or private school systems, and obtain other jobs. in this case of kip mcfarlane in texas, the school district investigated found more than a half-dozen instances where he made inappropriate comments to female high school students and negotiated and the correspondence we looked out, negotiated to a graceful exit for this teacher. >> here is the school district attorney, karen johnson, 2005. "this incident does not have to end mcfarlin's career. unfortunately, didn't end his career." he went on to what? >> he went on to a neighboring school district, where those statements that were inappropriate turned into the school conduct that was inappropriate, he engaged in the sexual misconduct with a student, currently incarcerated. that second school district had no way of knowing what happened in the first school district because the misconduct wasn't reported to state authorities. >> what i find so amazing, that is one part, but you had a couple of instances for the new
employer called the old school and asked specifically, is there anything i should know about this guy, and the teacher, the abuser, with giving a clean her view by the previous school that knew better. why would they lie on behalf of abusers? >> in some cases that we looked at, they are contractually obligated to give a neutral or positive recommendation to the teacher. the shorthand for it is passing the trash. the school district will send an agreement to get rid of the teacher as a expeditiously as possible. in exchange, the school district will agree not to tell prospective future employers what actually happened. one end of the teachers employment of the school district. >> this is unbelievable. a guy in new jersey, he signed a contract stating that only his dates of employment to be given to future employers. then, he went on to a private school and what happened? >> he abused children of the private school he also recently
pled guilty to molesting children once he arrived to the private school. the private school had knowledge of misbehavior, they didn't want that teacher around the students anymore, but they simply made him and other school systems problem. >> i assume he was being protected in this case. >> that plays a part in it. it is incredibly expensive and difficult to go through the proper channels in some cases, to get rid of a problem teacher. that is often why we see some of these agreements. >> that is unbelievable. this is really a great series. i can't recommend a more highly. it lives on the web forever. if you are watching this, you should read this, in case you are a good mood and want to change this. stephen riley, great to talk to you. >> thank you for having me. >> does your boss make you stay on top of work emails from home? in france, there is a new law that you may want to show your boss tomorrow morning. plus, ed henry joins us in "the friend zone." you saw him
when you have digestive sensitivities, life can feel like a never ending search for food that won't cause bloating, gas, or inner turmoil. introducing pronourish. a delicious nutritional drink that makes a great mini meal or snack that has protein and fiber. and pronourish has no gluten or high fructose corn syrup. and is low in fodmap ingredients that can trigger digestive sensitivities. the search is over. new pronourish. nutrition you can feel good about.
♪ >> here is something new. ignoring work emails from home is now the law in france. a country in europe. new legislation lets employees unplug from work emails while off the clock without any fear of losing their jobs or any fire sanctions at all. french lawmakers pointed to a study from the university of british columbia, that shows people who are told to check their emails only three times per day work, not surprisingly, less distressed than their counterparts who are always checking their emails. that is true. another study showed the people who don't work at all are far less stress than people with jobs. there is no word on the effect on productivity, something that is not a concern in france. it is time now for "the friend zone," we are joined by
ed henry. he took over this set all last week. i was with the world leaders, charting a course for the world. we were talking about you in the sauna. when i got back, my producers were so upset by the tiered eu imposed. they said, the whole time, it was. perrier, not pellegrino. >> they are putting us against each other, my friend. this is "the friend zone." they said they were so happy to have me, they can't wait to have me back. i'll tell you, as soon as i got here tonight, i was reminded, i am a mere fill in. as a couple of nights ago and is very studio in new york, i had an entire acre desk. now, as you can see, i'm relegated to a chair. i have just a chair. they told me, tucker, they said, make sure to remind him who is the host of the show. >> [laughs] i heard you were great. they love you. did you like it? >> i enjoyed it. i was trying to take your stuff out to lunch last friday. >> that is nice. >> part of it it's showing you up a little bit, in all seriousness, they were really
nice to me, they made me look really good. i should go out of my way, the end of the year, half the staff got sick, or allegedly state, a three-day weekend for two years. they didn't show up on friday. not trying to get them in trouble. maybe i just did. i think they were all very sick, by the way. >> do you know why? >> we had to cancel. >> they should have been eating your mother's cooking. i was watching "fox & friends," ed's mom was on "fox & friends," there it is. >> we are feeding the ego and operate at this point, she is on facebook telling her friends that she might get a cooking show on fox. abby huntsman is feeding it, now, tucker is endorsing it. i mean, she may have a bigger footprint. there she is on christmas, as well, she may have a bigger footprint at fox then me. >> [laughs] that is so impressive. there she is on christmas, too. is she a good cook? because she's a great cook. for christmas, she made sausage
and meatballs, and italian feast, she is not a drop of italian blood in her. she is irish and german. she makes some of the greatest italian food i've ever had. >> a lot of it is appropriate the cooking of italy. really quickly, your book, which we talked about last time you were on, i was mesmerized, when is it out? >> april 4th, the beginning of the baseball season comments about jackie robinson. in april, the 70th anniversary of his first game. here's the cool thing, we talked about on this very program about two weeks ago, it was number one in baseball books on amazon.com. not to boast, to say, i will tell you, the bottom line truth, all last week, the amount of tweets i got, your show, and a month or so, has gotten so much attention, people were responding. for every time i had got paid, somebody said you're doing a good job, i got two or three or four tweets saying, we've met us tucker. people are responding to you. hats off. >> i was tweeting under an assumed name. [laughs] >> angela and i -- great to see
you. >> i don't know. >> it was wild. thanks a lot. coming up, it's almost time for "news abuse," keep sending examples to twitter at @tuckercarlson. tech: don't let a cracked windshield ruin your plans. trust safelite. with safelite's exclusive "on my way text"... you'll know exactly when we'll be there. giving you more time for what matters most. (team sing) safelite repair, safelite replace.
>> time for "news abuse." we ask you to send us the most egregious examples of media bias and dumbness. you have seen it, much to choose from. we got this headline from "the washington post." "russian operation hacked a vermont utility showing risk to u.s. election security, officials say." it turns out, the whole thing was fake news. not the only fake news in that highly fake newspaper. high energy tweeted this headline from "the huffington post," "donald trump and his cabinet will trade on inside information as president." the first sentence of the pieces said this, "actually, i don't know that donald trump will take
advantage of the inside information he will have access to as president, but no one knows that he won't." [laughs] the new standard, i guess. to do is prove it? must be true. "the most egregious example of dumbness goes to don clement at cnn, a big drunk on new year's eve." let's go to the tape. >> can we please not give him a shot, by the way? >> everything is sterilized and ready to go. >> oh, my gosh, i can't believe i am doing this. >> wow. >> hold on. >> ow. >> i'm a bad person today. >> i'm not selfish. >> are we going there right now? >> i'm not a selfish, but i am self-centered. >> don lemon got drunk on tequila and got his ears pierced live on cnn. [laughs] it is hard not to like don lemon. i like him. so, florid.
tomorrow night, mean tweets are back, send your cruelest @tuckercarlson or email us at firstname.lastname@example.org . that's it for tonight. tune in every night, this welcome to "red eye." hello, everyone. i am tom shillue. >> tom: welcome to "red eye," hello everyone, i am tomhe shil shillue. >> thanks, tom. coming up on the big show, mtv news comes up with new year's resolutions for white men. it's a a big deal, i'm sure thee are things like drink less, stuff like that. >> tom: plus, the british equivalent of the w oscars. bad news for the new movie tom shillue's christmas. b and finally, the world will be out of seafood byse the