tv Tucker Carlson Tonight FOX News September 4, 2017 8:00pm-9:00pm PDT
we are never the establishment media. have a great night. >> tucker: good evening and welcome to a special edition of "tucker carlson tonight" ." we spent a lot of time covering the saga of russia's alleged undermining of our democracy on the show. we frequently pointed out how shaky the election hackingng narrative is at its core and that we have made some peoplele very angry for saying that. consider ralph peters who suggested that our skepticism put us in league with nazi sympathizers.ke hard to see why he is a threat to us. how many people can we be in opposition to at once? why not just except that bad people -- >> it sounds like charles lindbergh saying that hitler hasn't attacked us.
>> tucker: i am not --at you cannot compare me. >> i think putin is. >> tucker: it's a gross overstatement. it's insane. >> you can think it's insane all you want. >> tucker: you just compared me to a nazi apologizer because i asked a simple question. slow down, slow down. common cause with a group trying to kill isis. >> vladimir putin invaded his neighbors, broke the long peace in europe, he assassinates dissidents and journalist, he bombs women and children on purpose in syria.cee he is as bad as hitler and i am sorry if you don't like the charles lindbergh thing, i will retract that. y let's just say, you sounds like someone in 1938 saying, what has hitler done to us? >> tucker: i would hate to go back and read your columns assuring america that taking out saddam hussein will make the region calmer, more peaceful, and america safer. in fact, it has done exactly thl
opposite. it has empowered russia and iran, the two countries you say you fear most. let's just be totally honest. we don't always know the outcomes. they are not entirely predictable. maybe we should lower the moral tone. they were not sure what's going to happen. >> you made your career as an american conservative patriot. now you are suddenly cheering for vladimir putin? >> tucker: i am not in any sense cheering for vladimir putin. y i am cheering for america as always. n our interests ought to come first. to the extent that making temporary alliances with other countries serve our -- comparing people to hitler advances the ball not one inch. >> vladimir putin hates america and he wants to hurt us. i am sorry, all of this -- suddenly vladimir putin is a good guy and russia is okay. no, it's not. >> tucker: we cannot in any way do business or make common cause with a country whose leader is "evil," "a bad person." that takes most people off the
table. most countries are run by really bad people. >> you are talking about alliance, an anti-terror alliance. come on. >> tucker: the first step, cheering on any attacks made by russia against our moral enemy, a real enemy, isis. why not say that's great? i don't like putin. i'm not living in russia. i'm not taking money from the guy. a good deed is a good deed no matter who commits that. >> putin isn't killing isis, he's attacking the anti-assad people by letting us fight isist >> tucker: are you convinced -- do you speak arabic, by the way? >> no, i don't.pe >> tucker: oh, you don't. >> how is your russian? >> tucker: it's nonexistent and i would never claim to be a russia expert. we are sitting here talking about -- in syria, saying they are freedom fighters, they are serving the interest of freedom or democracy or americanig interest when in fact, we know very little about these groups and some of them are truly bad people.st >> indeed, we are not backing the truly bad people. >> tucker: how do we know
that? >> is assad a good guy?? >> tucker: i don't know. ask the christians and who live in syria. >> if we align with russia, we are aligning with iran. we are aligning with assad. >> tucker: that's bad for american interests because why? >> do you think iran is good for american interests? >> tucker: i think iran is a bad country and in a lot of ways against american interests. but within the context of syria, assad was much better for americaa than the people i believe you hope to replace it with. >> the kurds? >> tucker: the kurds are going to run syria? now we are in fantasyland. >> they are going to have an independent -- i am not going to break it out.i >> tucker: because it worked so well in iraq? >> the problem with iraq was in 2003, when we had the chance, we didn't break it up. >> tucker: we didn't break it up. w last question, and would you -- knowing what you know now -- i hate to revisit this, knowing what you know now, deposing saddam, his subsequent death, empowered iran dramatically and in fact we expressly helped iran gain traction in iraq, i do
think that was a wise idea? do you think there are any lessons going forward that when you take out a secular leader, the vacuum is filled by even worse people? >> i think that is a valid point, in 2003, we did a great a great staying inexcusably badly. we believed any iraqi emigre who spoke english with an oxford accented more a well tailored i suit -- our intentions are great but if i had to do it over again, no, i would not get ridit of saddam hussein because we hadn't thought it through. i >> tucker: this wasn't the only russia hawk who became extremely agitated when asked obvious questions. just a day later, we had on max exceeded him have in affected outrage. watch. let me ask you a question. if we were to follow the course of action you are suggesting wem follow, you are demanding we follow on moral grounds, having --i >> what course of action is
that? w >> tucker: get rid of the assad regime because you fear his presence will empower iran, a major problem. what would happen? who would run that country? i asked ralph peters he said the kurds. you think the kurds will runy? syria once we depose bashar al-assad?s >> i think it will be very difficult to do in any case. i think it should have been done in 2011, 2012, free syrian army. >> tucker: just sorry we didn't follow your advice. >> what is your advice, tucker? should we collaborate with russia in committing war crimes inin syria? is that your advice at the moment? >> tucker: i think you are not choosing -- >> i am very opposed to the trump policy. >> tucker: you specialize in moral outrage. since you are an expert. "i am a cheerleader for russia and iran." this is exactly the style of debate that prevents people from taking you seriously. >> am i wrong?
>> tucker: cheerleading for iran and russia? of course i'm not. i wouldn't live in -- >> you don't think we should make common cause with russia in syria? >> tucker: that's very different. let me ask you this, since i think you are also historian. the congress in 1941 voted for something that sent billions and billions of dollars to joseph stalin in armaments and food because the congress of the b united states believed hitler was a greater threat. were they stalinists when they did that? >> you know, tucker, this is solipsistic...s -- will you let me finish? will you let me answer your question, tucker? i will be the first to admit that sometimes you have to make common cause with repugnant regimes and that's what franklin delano roosevelt did with joseph stalin. >> tucker: that is the case i am making now. >> we did not share common goals with russia. >> tucker: old. >> because russia is trying to further the murderous
bashar al-assad regime, they are trying to -- that is not our goal. iran believes in death to israel, death to america. we should not be cooperating.r >> tucker: let me just ask you a factual question. >> russia, by the way, has been undermining our electoral process, which you don't seem to care aboutr -- >> the moral preening is tiresome. >> your lack of judgment is tiresome to me. i find it to be offensive.t >> tucker: this is why no one takes you seriously. i'm giving you a chance to redeem yourself. you say iran is a primaryl threat -- tell me how many americans in the united states have been murdered by terrorists backed by iran since 9/11. >> so you are taking the pro-iranian line essentially? >> tucker: is it pro irani and to askat a question you are humiliating yourself, max.. >> hundreds of american troops have been murdered in in iran -- >> tucker: how did iran get so powerful in iraq?
because they followed your advice -- >> do not care about the deaths, tucker?? >> tucker: do i not care about the deaths? it's almost impossible to have a conversation with you because your responses are so childish. of course i care about the deaths. >> your responses are ridiculous. we don't need to be worried about iran? a >> tucker: i am not -- i'm not arguing a pro-iranian line. i'm not pro-iran, i am not pro-russia, i'm not arguing that iran is a good place or doesn't pose a threat the united states. i'm merely saying -- >> what are you arguing? >> tucker: in a world of threats, you create a hierarchy, you decide what is worst and you go down the list. >> and russia is right up there? do you agree?ou do you agree russia is a threat to us? >> tucker: to think russia is in the top five is absurd and it makes me wonder about your judgment. i'm giving you a chance to answer the question, which is -- >> that's absurd to say they are not in the top five. they are the only country that can destroy us with a
nuclear strike. >> tucker: i'm beginning to think that your judgment has been clouded by ideology. i don't fully understand where it's coming from but i will let our viewers decide. >> your judgment has been clouded by ratings. h you feel compelled to be a spokesman forgm donald trump in order to win ratings on the fox news channel. >> tucker: that's pretty funny. v i vehemently disagree with the air strikes in syria -- the president called for them and i'm against them. i'm arguing principle. more than anything, i'm arguing for the right --he >> stay out of syria and allowing this bloodbath to continue? >> tucker: you are incapable of giving a factual answer. attack the character of the person who asked the question. i think our viewers can see that. >> i did not attack -- >> tucker: i gave you a chance and you did not turn in, in any sense, an impressive performance. thanks for joining us anyway. i thought it was interesting. left-wing groups across theor country are tearing down and vandalizing statues while some city governments are covering them up with burqas to save our sensitivety eyes. and up next, we'll talk to someone who supports demolishing history.ti n stay tuned. demolishing
history. stay tuned. ♪ i'm val. the orange money retirement squirrel from voya. i represent the money you save for the future. who's he? he's the green money you can spend now. what's up? gonna pay some bills, maybe buy a new tennis racket. he's got a killer backhand. when it's time to get organized for retirement, it's time to get voya. ♪ hey grandpa. hey, kid. really good to see you. you too.
you tell grandma you were going fishing again? maybe. (vo) the best things in life keep going. that's why i got a subaru, too. introducing the all-new crosstrek. love is out there. find it in a subaru crosstrek. does it look like i'm done?yet? shouldn't you be at work? [ mockingly ] "shouldn't you be at work?" todd. hold on. [ engine revs ] arcade game: fist pump! your real bike's all fixed. man, you guys are good! well, we are the number-one motorcycle insurer in the country. -wait. you have a real motorcycle? and real insurance, with 24-hour customer support. arcade game: wipeout! oh! well... i retire as champion. game hog! champion.
>> tucker: the spasm of maoist cultural violence continues. recently we talked to someone who supports tearing down statues that offend delicate modern sensibilities. here's what happened. >> tucker: let me just say at the outset that i am kind of sympathetic to your point of view. i wouldn't want to see something that offended me every day, ifkm there was an al sharpton monument on my street, a marion barry monument. i wouldn't like it. if you are offended by these
monuments, i get that. here is my --ld >> it's not that i'm offended, it's an offense --et to the united states of america, to honor war criminals, to honor those -- traitors to our country. >> tucker: they certainly weree traitors to our country, they started their own country. >> traitors and human rights violators. there is no country on then planet, no society that would honor those. people with credentials like that. >> tucker: except ours because it was a civil war.it i agree with your definition. they were traitors to america but then they came backck into america, they reintegrated into america, and then it came back -- absolutely. >> they lost the war. >> tucker: thank god they w did. it was a civil war. it does a little more complicated than that. here is my question.is does your view of this apply to all slaveholders or just civil war figures? >> it is not just civil war figures but civil war
confederate heroes, leaders are not to be honored in any shape, manner, or form as a societal imperative. the fact that we are coming to our senses with the statues and with the stars and bars, the american swastika, they almost fell. s we thought we had resolved this in charlotte a couple of years ago. it is still not resolved. we are moving expeditiously in every form and fashion to complete the task of eradicating these symbols of hatred and division. now, the issue of slaveholders -- the issue of slaveholders -- >> tucker: can i say one thing? just so you know, i am not even arguing, i'm just saying one of the reasons it hasn't been resolved is because the public is not for doing this. only a small minority, only about a quarter of a people dpolled yesterday in the united states that these monument should come down. over 60% said they should remain as historical remnants of an earlier age. like, you need to get the public on board before you do this,
do you agree?or >> at the height of the civil rights movement, a lot of people said we need to go slow and take our time. now the people who they werepe saying that to our american heroes. sometimes heroes, just like the people at the boston tea party, if you had polled boston, there would've been people who said, why are you throwing our tea in the harbor? >> tucker: because it was -- wasn't a democracy then. hold on. no, no. h you have given up on the idea of representative government? >> i haven't given up on anything. >> tucker: sounds like you have. >> what i am saying is, i understand that some people who champion social justice get it before the main society gets it. just as some people in the republican party were slow to get that their president is dysfunctional. >> tucker: okay. yeah, let's go back to the question of slaveholders, though. i think this is meaningful. you make a more defensible point on the civil war question. but what bothers me about thebl idea that all slaveholders need to be erased from american history --
>> it's not an issue of them being erased from history. it's being not celebrated. if you put your name on a building you are being: celebrated. >> tucker: if you live in washington -- okay. the city i live in is named after the founder of the country, the first president, whose plantation, which was populated by slaves, is right on the road at mount vernon.mo so this is not a rhetorical question, the real question. should we change the name of the capital of the country? what should we do about george washington?e >> george washington is not a confederate general. george washington is the founder of a country and put his life on the line in order to do so.ed he was a flawed human being but he created a great thing. he was part of a great creation that is self perpetuating and self-correcting. that is what the process is about. c so the fact is that right now we can get to george washington in washington, d.c., but we need to take care of these confederate statues right now. >> tucker: let me just -- i don't want to get to
washington or washington, d.c.ig i don't want to rewrite history of our country. i like where you left off the last time. reverend, thanks a lot for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: the left isn't just going after statues. they are trying to fleece our local governments, too. we recently talked to someone who supports an illegal immigrant who collected $200,000 from taxpayers after the city attempted to enforce the law. watch. >> tucker: so, here is someone who is in this country illegally, sues because a country enforced its own laws against him legally, and gets paid by the taxpayers of this country. is there another place in the world where this happens? >> well, first of all, a let's talk about the failure of this country to do immigration reform. >> tucker: no, no. let's talk about -- hold on, slow down. i don't want a lecture
on immigration. does that happen anywhere else? >> no. san francisco had to create its own sanctuary law because of the failure of the federal government. so can you imagine that a law is passed and for two months, you get incarcerated for showing up to the police department to reclaim your stolen car? because that is what he did. correct? >> tucker: he was in the country illegally. the theft of his car was onene crime but he had committed a crime himself by being here illegally. the police turned him over to the feds who wanted him and now the city is paying him for enforcing american law. i'm just noting the obvious, which is that is insane. you shouldn't pay a criminal for breaking the law and that is what san francisco is doing. >> but san francisco has a sanctuary law, correct? that law was enacted because the federal government failed to do reform for immigration.
congress failed, the senate failed, clinton failed, bush failed, obama failed. san francisco, being san francisco, made sure that it protected those immigrant populations. >> tucker: okay, just so you know, they failed to pass laws that you like, but our current immigration laws were passed by democrats and republicans in tho congress of the united states in washington, the system worked as it is supposed to work, people voted in public on these laws. the republicans didn't do it, democrats did it, too.. it's the law. if you don't like it, you elect people who will change it. but until you do that, you can't ignore the law. that is how the system works. why do you think that other countries don't do that? so if i go to mexico, for example, illegally, i get put in jail for a longer term than an illegal would here, why can't i sue the mexican government for being mean to me and expect mexican taxpayers to pay me for the indignity of having mexican law enforced? >> you want to go to mexico? how many people live in mexico
that are not legal citizens that are white that come fromop the united states? check out those statistics. >> tucker: probably not very many. they actually believe in their own country. >> when they go to mexico. >> tucker: right. okay, roberto, good luck out there. >> thank you. >> tucker: up next, we'll revisit our interview with bill nye, the television personality guy, the one where he said people who have questions about global warming are mentally ill. stay tuned. tuned. ♪
>> here's what's going on. texas recovers from hurricane harvey, a new threat approaches in the far eastern horizon. this is hurricane irma, now a category 4 storm. she is closing in on the caribbean with 130-mile-per-hour winds. irma is expected to gain more strength as she moves westward. forecasters say a u.s. impacted likely. the wagons being circled over president trump's announcement
over the announcement to cancel daca. daca grants work permits to undocumented immigrants who came to the u.s. as minors. that's a look at news. >> tucker: bill nye's new show on netflix may be the worst cultural atrocity since the visigoths sacked rome 2,000 years ago. before that show launched, wee had the so-called science guy on to discuss his claim that anyone who has questions about global warming must suffer from the psychological delusion of cognitive dissonance. it was a pretty interesting exchange. watch. >> tucker: that does not sound like science to me, bill nye the science guy. that sounds like something very different.
>> cognitive dissonance is not a delusion, it's a feature, it's human nature.g we in the science community are looking for an explanation why climate change deniers or extreme skeptics do not accept the overwhelming scientific evidence for climate change. the most reasonable explanation is that you have a worldview and then you have evidence, and the evidence disagrees with your worldview so you deny the evidence and along with that, you deny the authorities that are providing the evidence. if you have a better hypothesis for whyy climate deniers denying the overwhelming scientific evidence, bring it on. >> tucker: i think most people d are open to the idea that the climate is changing, it has always changed, by the way, as you know. >> it's the rate, mr. carlson. >> tucker: hold on, slow down. the core question from what i can tell is why the change.ar is it part of the endless cycle of climate change or does human activity causing it? that seems to be the debate to me and it seems an open question, not a settled question, to what degree human activity is causing it. >> it's not an open question. it's a settled question. human activity is causing climate change. >> tucker: to what degree? >> to the degree that it's very serious problem in the next few decades --
>> tucker: no, no, stop. you said it's a settled point. i am asking you a precise a question. to what degree is climate change caused by human activity? 100%? 74.3%? if it is settled science, please tell us what percentage. >> the word degree is a word that you chose. the speed that climate change is happening is caused by humans. instead of happening on timescales of millions of years or let's say 15,000 years, it is happening on a timescale of decades and now years. >> tucker: without human activity, how long would it have taken for us to reach this level of warmth in our climate? >> it's not clear that it would have happened. in other words, humans have changed the climate so drastically that we almost certainly would have avoided another ice age. there would have been another ice age,
ain't going to happen because of you and me. >> tucker: do we know that -- when would it have happened? >> when would the next ice age have happened? is that your question? >> tucker: what would -- here is the point that i hope our viewers can understand. i'm not in any way denying that climate is changing, immoderately open to the i am open to the possibility possibility that the changes that the changes caused by man. i merely calling into question your claim that all of this is settled. that we know precisely what is happening and why and that anyone who asks pointed questions about it isb a denier who ought to be in prison or shouted off the stage. >> that is your word. that is not my claim.uo >> tucker: would you like me to read your quote? people who disagree with you all to potentially go to jail? you said that. >> i'm not sure that's what i said, mr. carlson. we can talk about that shortly.s >> tucker: it is appropriate to jail the guys from enron? the cigarette industry who promised it wasn't addictive? my only point is, shouldn't we
be encouraging people to ask honest questions, which i am doing, and you don't seem to have the answers to those questions? >> i got to disagree with you. i claim i do have the answers. okay. let me ask you this. why aren't you concerned about it? don't you have four children?? why aren't you concerned about it? >> tucker: i am concerned. that is why i'm having you on. you don't reach correct conclusions in science or politics or any other fieldyo unless you can ask honest answers without being shouted down by people like you. >> you asked how long it would be before -- what the climate would be like if humans weren't involved right now. is that right? >> tucker: yeah. l that's exactly right. i am just saying, you don't actually know because it's unknowable. why aren't you open to questions? >> takes you quite a bit less than six seconds to interrupt me. the climate will be likeke it ws in 1750 and the economics would be that you could not grow wine worthy grapes in britain as you can today because the climate is changing. the use of pesticides in the
midwest would not be increasing because the parasites are showing up sooner, or the pests are showing up sooner andca hanging around longer. >> tucker: i think that's probably all true -- >> the forests would not be overwhelmed by pine bark beetles as it is because of climate change.ly that is -- >> tucker: so much of this you b don't know, you pretend that you know, but you don't know. >> i really have to disagree with you. i have spent a lot of time with this topic. >> tucker: i am open minded. you are not. we are out of time, unfortunately. >> you guys are the mainstream media and i can tell you why they are leaks because the president has created two factions in his administration. they don't like each other. so they leak. it is not from the outside. it's from the inside. e carry on, mr. carlson. i'm sure we'll cross paths again. >> tucker: [laughs] that is a very ominous thing to say. i don't know what it means.. come back anytime. we are 17 years into a new century, so of course it is time to put primitive assumptions about sex, gender, and science aside and raise our kids gender
neutral. that is what a guest we are about to talk to thinks. stay tuned for that.e stay tuned for that. constipated? trust #1 doctor recommended dulcolax. use dulcolax tablets for gentle dependable relief. suppositories for relief in minutes. and dulcoease for comfortable relief of hard stools. dulcolax. designed for dependable relief. [bullfighting music] [burke] billy-goat ruffians. seen it. covered it. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪
ostriches don't really stick their heads in the sand. a peanut is not a nut. and a real john deere... is actually real affordable. you learn something new every day. the surprisingly affordable john deere e series tractors. now you can own america's tractor for just $99 a month. learn more at your john deere dealer. so we sent that sample i doff to ancestry. i was from ethnically. my ancestry dna results are that i am 26% nigerian. i am just trying to learn as much as i can about my culture. i put the gele on my head and i looked
into the mirror and i was trying not to cry. because it's a hat, but it's like the most important hat i've ever owned. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. ♪ >> tucker: it's a boy. it's a girl. actually, it's neither. it's 2017, the year of the gender-neutral baby. if you disagree, you are a bad person. listen to this. these are questions that didn't exist, like, 18 months ago.st homo sapiens have been around 300,000 years and for the most part, it was kind of obvious who the boys and girls were, but we've decided in a very short period of time that i know that yet none of that is real and we are changing it. >> to be honest with you, we believe that people who are considered intersex, people who are born with both sets of genitalia, have existed throughout human history. >> tucker: for sure. >> so the federal government
released a study in 2016 that 1.4 million people now identify themselves as transgendered ande canada isn't the only place thai is doing this. legislation was just introduceda in washington, d.c., and in new york over the past couple of months to also have people, to have parents have the right on a child's birthth certificate. not to sayy that child is male r female but also x or on identified. >> tucker: this case is about the idea that you can choose what your sex is, which is a denial of biology and it's also, i think is a psychotherapist, you'd agree, a cost to a child. if you say to a little kid, i don't know if you are male or female, you decide, i don't think you're going to get a good outcome a lot of the time at all. that's why people have never done that in human history. >> the couple that -- the person who is deciding to do this with their child in canada, the point -- i spoke to them on the phone -- the point they are making is that this child is aa, spiritual being having human experience. not a human being having a spiritual experience.
it's actually a very spiritual endeavor. what it is saying, let's just let the child be a child and eventually, the child will decide what it wants to be. how much it wants to identify as a boy or how much it wants to identify as a girl. >> tucker: but you can't actually decide. i'm for choice and there's a lot of biological realities that i am sad about, that i would change about myself. i am not attacking anybody. but don't you think that biological reality matters andam lying to kids and telling them, actually, you could be 6'7" or you could have blue eyes instead of brown, or whatever, those are lies. it's never a good idea to lie to kids, is it? >> i don't think it's a lie. i think it's actually given children more information at a younger age than we traditionally have. it is like -- i will give a comparison. it is like raising a child to not assume that they are heterosexual. the way i raise my children is to say, i don't know what they are going to be, i'm not going to assume that they are gay oror straight. i just give them lots of information. t >> tucker: there's a difference here because whereas,
we don't know a lot about the biology of homosexuality, we know a lot about the biology of sex because we know that it begins at the chromosomal level. there is a science piece to that is being ignored by people it thought believed in science by that is why i'm a little bit confused. >> i don't think it's being ignored. i think what we are seeing, and the federal study, what has come out in terms of the census bureau, 1.4 million people don'e identify with a gender marker that they were given at birth, we have to take note of that and say, what's going on? there is a fluidity about gender and it's not necessarily rooted in biology. >> tucker: why does it not extend to race? >> tell me what you mean by that. you will have to be -- >> tucker: if i can say that i am a woman, why can't i say that i'm a chinese woman? i am not mocking you. i'm making a sincere question. what is the difference? >> it's a great question. i think, as we progress in society, some of these labels that we are putting on things, and i can't necessarily go to the race question, although, one
of the things that i loved about your program as of late is that you are really into this idea of having a more inclusive societyy and being less separatist, in terms of race, that we should be more inclusive. i think that is what we are saying, we are creating a space the table for people to be, toin have optionality in terms of how they want identify themselves. >> tucker: okay. as long as we are still science-based -- >> it's not taking science off the table. it is just looking at it fromm another perspective. >> tucker: okay. thanks for coming on.. >> thank you so much for having me. i appreciate it. >> tucker: a park bench mentioned the word god on it, so a national atheist group singled out that bench for annihilationd up next, our discussion with a group dedicated to purging god from the public square, literally from the public square. stay tuned.pe the public square. stay tuned. ♪ for my constipation, my doctor recommended i switch laxatives.
stimulant laxatives make your body go by forcefully stimulating the nerves in your colon. miralax is different. it works with the water in your body to hydrate and soften. unblocking your system naturally. miralax. which saves money. insurance a smarter way. they offer paperless billing and automatic payments. which saves paper. which saves money. they offer home and auto coverage, so you can bundle your policies. which saves hassle. which saves money. and they offer a single deductible. which means you only pay once when something like this happens. which saves money. esurance was born online and built to save. and when they save, you save. that's home and auto insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call.
♪ >> tucker: safe spaces are required on campus these days but some people still don't feel safe coming out until they haves purged theel word god from the public square entirely. in this case, literally. we recently talked to an atheist group that went to war with s a simple park bench because it had the word god on it. watch. a public park in oil city features a bench which was donated in 2003 by the local branch of the vfw. the bench bears the phrase "men who aren't governed by god will be governed by the tyrants." aren't you the tyrant of the story? >> i think we are the folks that fight for equality for everyone. when this bench was put in the veterans memorial, it was demeaning to anyone who is a non-christian veteran. >> tucker: it's not just christians who believe in god. virtually everyone but you and buddhists believe in god. >> about 25% of militaryn-
enlistment either claim no religious preference or atheist or agnostic. >> tucker: the idea that the word god is offensive, the appearance of the word god -- >> not the word god but assuming that if you are not a religious person or a christian judeo person that you are going to be governed by tyrants dismisses the morality and compassion that many of our veterans and soldiers have. just because they don't believe in god doesn't mean that they are not good people. >> tucker: no one is suggestings this. this is a park bench on a town that is down on its luck, it is not a rich place at all and you come in with a well-funded group and say, do what we want or we will crush you in court. >> that is not what we did. if you look at the first letter we sent, first of all, we got a complaint. it wasn't like we went looking for it. s >> tucker: who was the complaint from? >> it was from a resident in the city.it >> tucker: who? >> i am not going to say his name. >> tucker: on the basis of an anonymous complaint, someone can
come forward without saying your name -- >> we know their name. if we had gone with't litigation, they would have come forward. >> tucker: one guy who doesn't even have the courage to stand up and reveal his identity gets to control the entire existence of this park bench and the city of 10,000? >> the constitution covers it. it's the one that has nothing to do with it. >> this bench had nothing to do with veterans, either. >> tucker: was the benchch establishing a state of religion? c >> because it was on the city park and the city had put it in there and they were saying that anyone who is a veteran but doesn't believe in god's is ruled by tyrants, again, dismissing the compassion and the morality that comes -- >> tucker: this is something that you don't agree with, which is okay. a lot of things that the government says, i don't agree with. this is not an establishment of a state religion. >> according to thegr supreme court, when you don't open it up to all points of view -- >> tucker: the supreme courto didn't say that and that is why our currency continues to have "in god we trust" on it,
that is where the president, members of congress, federal judges are all sworn in invoking god. i'm just saying. we live in a country where the u.s. government uses the word god all the time. >> the supreme court has said that is ceremonial deism. we still fight that. we still think it is wrong because it dismisses -- a >> tucker: why not pick on the currency? >> we have. >> tucker: no but basically, the point is, you come here and you crush the little guy. >> we are not crushing the little guy.po >> tucker:le of course you are. what about the people who want to sit on the bench? >> we offered to pay for a brand-new bench. we told them that if the vfw pick out another quote that was appropriate to veterans, we would pay for a brand-new bench. >> tucker: you wanted to put from american atheists on it? >> a little plaque that said, paid for by american atheists. >> tucker: you are putting your religion on the bench. isn't that offensive? >> we weren't making any kind of statement. >> tucker: they had the word god and the word god was offensive. not the word. it was the phrasing.
you are talking about ideas and things. you may feel that. but you are christian. people who aren't christian look at that and don't feel the same way.re >> tucker: i get your point but you are violating your own principles. because you are saying you wanted to replace a bench that was a representative of christianity with a bench that has -- you said you wanted it donated by the american atheists.at >> that says where it's from. we wouldn't have a problem with the vfw or someone else saying we paid for it. >> tucker: your name itself is a statement. what about the declaration of independence? it contains the word god.s >> no, it does not. o it says creator. >> tucker: okay, that is a synonym for god. >> in your mind. >> tucker: in the minds of the people -- okay. it is a founding document that is part of our secular religion here in the united states. the declaration of independence is central to our history, something that all school children learn about showed. and yet, it's got god all over it.
why hassle people? let's just be real. in a country where every senator swears in on the bible, you are hassling some little town in pennsylvania -- >> not all members of congress swear on the bible. many use the constitution. >> tucker: okay.r religious documents. why are you bothering these people in this little town? >> because someone came to us and we thought they were the constitutional issue -- the city agreed because he removed it. >> tucker: i think it's awful people anonymously can hurt other people without standing up and saying who they are and what they believe. >> the threats that we got when we did this -- >> tucker: whatever. you are coming on here and t saying what you think but you are claiming that some anonymous guy hassled this little town and doesn't even have the courage to say it to the face of his neighbors. you think california is a badly run state and it is, what kind of country would it be? that is a question we may need to consider fairly soon. up next, we revisit our discussion with a california independence activist. stay tuned. stay tuned.
when it comes to heartburn, trust the brand doctors trust. nexium 24hr is the number one choice of doctors and pharmacists for their own frequent heartburn. and all day, all night protection. when it comes to heartburn, trust nexium 24hr. just turn on cars.coms on tprice dropswant? and get real-time notifications that could help save you money. use cars.com and save.
>> a lot of her weird stories come out of the state of it's nota so maybe surprisingha that one of our strongest conversations ever took place at the corner of california independence. he was honest, he admitted first move, drive the middle class out of california. watched us. >>lr it sounds like you don't think people are partf united states. >> this is california, tucker. we are not the united states. our values are different, we are fundamentally different in the way we act and how we think about the world globally whether it has to do with war, the climate, environment., we are just a different state. i know you can understand it, you being from california. i'mu not sure how long you
haven't been here. we are going to do things that are going to be beneficial forat our state and we disregard with the united states thinks or even their laws. forr example, our marijuana, sanctuaryua cities. ifs it's good for the state we areor going to do it regardlessf what the federal law is. >> there's been a massive exodus of middle-class californians to neighboringe- states. the numbers are there. you've lost hundreds of thousands of people making between $10,200,000 over the past ten years and they've enriched idaho and montana and even wyoming and washington state. if it's such a well-run place, why is the middle-class leaving? >> you have to look at the bigger picture here. fifth largest economy in the world. if you have to repeat that, say itga again. >> is basically the economy of mexico. if at a small number of rich people to tax people and a ton of poor people in the middle
class is leaving. that's ag. recipe for instabili, you are aware of that, right? >> in regards to middle-class leaving, it's a good thing. we need these spots opened up for the new wave of immigrants to come up. it's what we do, we are exporting our middle class to the united states, you should be thanking us for that. what are middle-class does move out to texas and colorado they are taking our values out the united states and the texas. if you look to texas, all the major cities that californians are going to, they are turning blue. soon enough texas will be able tos stay. >> dude, i don't know -- i've never met you, i've never heard of you, i don't know if this is a parody segment or you are really high and you're just telling the truth because high people do, but you just said you are happy to be exporting the middle-class of your stay. i happen to think your policymakers are happy that they are leaving but the fact that you are admitting this on my cv. bottom line, are you being serious? >> i'm only admitting the truth,
there's a middle class of people that are leaving california and they are going to oregon and colorado and texas. yes, there is. >> you are happy about that. >> if they want to move, does nothing for me to stop them. i'm sure they will find out how boring it is and they will come back. because i don't think so. i don't think so. okay. what an amazing interview, thank you, and sincerely, thank you for telling the truth, i appreciate ng it. >> we want to noteke that in the original version ofri that segmt frequently showed mislabeled footage suggesting that an opposing group supported them. they do not supported and we regret saying they did. they don't want to be falsely affiliated with that last guy we talked to. tucker takes on. itit was fun. hope it was for you, good night from washington, see you tomorrow. ♪
♪ >> juan: happy labor day, everyone. i'm juan williams. along with kimberly guilfoyle, jesse watters, dana perino, and yes, it's greg gutfeld. it's 9:00 in new york city and this is "the five." ♪ >> juan: it's labor day, the unofficial end to summer. it has been quite a busy one for us in the news business. usually, summers are a slow season. but.his one was anything so, as summer winds down, we thought we would have some fun tonight and turn the show over to you, again this holiday, with another facebook free-for-all. we'll answer questions you have for us throughout the hour.