tv Tucker Carlson Tonight FOX News October 3, 2017 5:00pm-6:00pm PDT
sit down with a college that came to his aid. a look at the sight of congress that you do not usually see. that is our story for tonight, back at it tomorrow night in new york. tucker carlson is up next. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." two days after the deadliest mass shooting and almost a century, horror is being joined by confusion. stephen paddock shot hundreds of people from his hotel room in las vegas and what was one of the most thoroughly planned rampages we've ever seen. 59 murdered, more than 500 injured. two days later we know a lot about how he committed this atrocity, was, virtually nothing about why paddock left no manifesto, no suicide note that we've seen. his family and friends that he never seemed particularly interested in religion or politics despite the arsenal he had massed in firearms.
he recently converted to islam and decided to convert to gianni, no evidence that is actually true. anything is possible at this point. 5064-year-old retired accountants don't typically becs murderers. we are beginning this hour with review of hope you don't and a look at where this investigation amy headed. for the very latest on all of i it, we go to trace gallagher. >> we can certainly tell you the investigators are doubling back on the girlfriend marilou danley saying she is now definitely a person of interest in this investigation and they are saying she is in the philippines but they are actively working to bring her back from the philippines so they can question her. keep in mind this is a woman who lived with the shooter in the house where they found dozens of weapons along with explosives and a plethora, as the police say, of ammunition. it comes at the same time that we believe that now the shooter sent tens of thousands of
dollars also to the philippines. if the authorities assume it was for the girlfriend but again that has not been confirmed. the sheriff was not happy at all about the pictures being released about the guns being inside the hotel room. the sheriff hopes that does not compromise the investigation. though he did acknowledge that at least one of the guns, and we've heard it's more than one of the guns, was modified with something called a bump stock, something that replaces the shoulder rest that makes the trigger go automatically of the gun can fire anywhere between 400-800 rounds per minute. we also learned there were cameras both inside the room mounted and outside. in fact one of the cameras outside was mounted on a service cart and the police believe it was mounted there so that the shooter could tell when police were coming down the hallway toward the room. we do not yet know exactly what
the cameras inside the room captured or documented. they did find more weapons in the shooter's home up in reno, nevada. that adds to the weapons they found at the home in mesquite nevada. does dozens of weapons he had in the hotel room. they have also taken electronics out of the house in reno, out of the house in mesquite and they are now in the process of scouring the electronics as well as the hard drives of the computers. they are now saying that for the first time in the past three days there is still no motive, but they are very confident that they will soon have a motive. finally, tucker, we're checking out these reports that in the weeks ahead of a separate concert that was in downtown las vegas that the shooter actually rented condominiums that were above that venue. the question now becomes was this the original target, or was it planned for somewhere else and was a plan to be more
elaborate initially than this came out on sunday night? >> tucker: pretty elaborate, thanks a lot for that update. writes for "usa today," he's been taking a close look at his personal history and he joined us tonight to tell us what he is not found. thanks for coming on. going to get to the question of motive, have you seen any indication that paddock had an interest in politics or religion, ideology of any kind? >> i think as your colleague put it really well, we have this patchwork of this portrait of the sky but there isn't any sort of satisfying or definitive answer at this point. and a lot of these instances, we've gone through a lot of these through the years. 48 hours in, it usually not only know a motive but we start developing sort of this narrative about this person got from point a to point b of doing this terrible thing. and we don't have that, we just have these little bits and pieces of information. the money sent to the
philippines, the guns, which are quite a bit, but not -- people own guns in the united states, if not unusual for someone to own that many weapons. he liked to play poker and he had some transfers that were unusually high that automated triggered a currency transfer, a cpr is what the treasury department calls them. not unusual if he is a high-stakes poker player. nothing that his brother, who was spoken over and over about this. they had a somewhat distant relationship, but he also seemed like just a normal guy. >> tucker: that's what everybody said. go back to the wire transfer of $100,000 in the philippines. do we know to whom it was sent or why or anything about it? >> no. we know it's doing account in the philippines and we also know that his girlfriend, who has been -- the authorities are calling a person of interest, happens to be in the philippines
at this moment. >> tucker: do we know where in the philippines? >> i do not. >> tucker: interesting. investigators have said that they have spoken to the girlfriend and as of earlier today they were waiting for her to come back. it does it seem unusual, they are federal agents in manila, there always are, that she hasn't been interviewed in person there? >> i don't know if that's been clear that she hadn't been interviewed. i think it's also interesting, many things -- the feds like to use -- law enforcement in general like to use the term "person of interest," but they are saying two things, one that she is talking, but we want to know more from her. in this hundred thousand dollars that was transferred is intriguing. >> tucker: last question, if any reporter for a while, have you ever covered anybody who had no digital footprint of any
kind, this guy apparently did. >> it's hard to find any american individual at this point that doesn't have a digital footprint. >> tucker: which itself suggested maybe there is something out there. thank you for that, thank you for the latest. the fbi is obviously focused on the motive for this attack, not much has leaked out, catherine herridge has been on it all day and she joins us now in the studio, what are you hearing? >> two of our contacts have seen the inventory of the weapons that were recovered and they're telling us that everything he had between the hotel and the residences was real high end. they told us that they are ar-15s, ar tens, 1500-$3,000. and when you at the scopes and the tripods were looking at an investment of over $100,000. he made a significant financial
investment, much more than what was really necessary, almost an exaggeration or a caricature of what would have been required. >> tucker: that's a number of times what a conventional ar-15 costs. they are very cheap right now. is there any inkling of why he would have wanted high-end weapons? >> there is no inkling of the why, but there is a better sense of the timetable for the purchases. some of these weapons were purchased back in june so if you take that as a data point, it suggests that there was level of premeditation as far back as the summer, if not before and sheriff lombardo said at the news conference today that based on the arsenal that he had it took significant premeditation. you are right to note the fact that it's almost overcompensating, if you will. if there was no way he could have used all these weapons or the ammunition that he had in the hotel and then to make such a significant investment also in the planning. >> tucker: from different
manufacturers, apparently there were nine separate manufacturers, which itself is very odd. finally, i says as reported yesterday had taken credit for this guy, two different press releases, dismissed sort of by federal authorities but they seem to leave a little bit of wiggle room there, do we know anything? >> this a little bit of daylight there. what jumps out to one of my contacts, who does a lot of collection of social media from isis and al qaeda for the government is that it's unusual for them to really double down on a claim. they've made bogus claims in the past, back in june there was the attack on the casino in the philippines and they claim that but in fact it was just a bunch of criminals who were responsible for that. it's unusual to see that kind of doubling down. no obvious proof of contact or evidence or a photo that would allow them to say this is our guy and work this is us scraping with our guys. everything about the case, it's
really squarely, to use a technical term. >> tucker: 64-year-old man, no evidence of digital communication, i i just don't believe that. catherine herridge, thank you for the latest. dozens of guns cashed, no manifest, what should investigators be looking for? terry is a former fbi deputy assistant director who helped lead the hunt for the unabomber between the stomach. explore coming on. what would you be pulling if you are running the investigation? >> i would want to get the girl from the accuracy as possible. i think that's very important because she's the one who's going to going to know what hes doing and how he's been evolving over the last year or however long she's known him so that's very important. also in this case is even more important because quite honestly nothing is making sense based on what we know about prior cases of prior subjects. it's very important that the authorities in las vegas do exactly what they seem to be doing, which is following the
trail. staying on the forensics, the crime scenes, the operational -- doing all the things that you might say our routine but they're really not, finding out where every camera is located, getting all the film, trying to find people and witnesses both inside and outside the perimeter of the crime scene. all those things are the things that are factual. the information -- eventually all of those things and all of those facts at an intersection where you answer the question that everybody is asking, what was the motive. but if you don't stay on that trail, and you get into all kinds of theories because we could sit here and talk for an hour and we could probably come up with 100 theories. everyone of those, if investigators started worrying about them or getting sidetracked, they would end up somewhere in a swamp so they have to be really focused on that trail that i always like to call -- >> tucker: here's an actual fact. obviously no one is farther from
the profile of an islamic state operative as stephen paddock, he doesn't look like the guy. the fact is there press office place laid claim to him so what you make of that? should be dismissed out of hand? should be followed up on? what are federal investigators doing with that? >> i've learned never to dismiss anything out of hand, so have the people that are working the spirit of the way you handle something like that is again you see facts. you go to an entire national security apparatus of people who know isis, people who are following that aspect of things every day to keep us safe. you talk to them about what's going on, you have them on the task force that is working on this every day is different so they will come in every day with updates and information and help you try and figure out and kind of navigate your way through this. in addition to that, all of these search warrants that are being served, this man had multiple pieces of property, cars, all kinds of things. they're going to look for something and again he is not the normal guy but if he is kind of a normal guy, guess what we will find?
the normal shooter, the normal terrorist type loaded, we performed journals, something where at least for himself he was keeping notes and he was kind of telling everybody in the world what was going to happen. so you are always on the lookout for that kind of thing. hopefully we will find those kinds of things that will shed some light on where we are and how we got here. >> tucker: that's right. if you're recorded his murders you can't convince me he didn't leave previous records of what he was thinking. thank you. >> very good point. you're welcome. >> tucker: i appreciated. the last week took no time to cl for new and expenses to gun control, but do they know what they're asking for? plus, stephen paddock took a long time to prepare, what security measures, if any, could have stopped the attack? would any of it have helped? we will talk to somebody who does that for a living just ahead. ♪
nacho? [ train whistle blows ] what?! -stop it! -mm-hmm. we've been saving a lot of money ever since we switched to progressive. this bar is legit. and now we get an even bigger discount from bundling home and auto. i can get used to this. it might take a minute. -swing and a miss! -slam dunk! touchdown! together: sports!
♪ >> i can only say that i'm sorry. i'm sorry that we live in a world where there are people who will put a gun before your live lives. >> you want to make america great again? past any kind of common sense gun gun control legislation. >> the senate of majority leader mitch mcconnell, paul ryan, a number of other lawmakers won't do anything about this because the nra has their [bleep] in a money clip also sent their thoughts and prayers today which is good, they should be praying, they should be praying for god to forgive them for letting the gun lobby run this country.
>> tucker: there you go, everyone is sad about what happened of course but today you saw a parade of figures and politics and entertainment, the media, come out and say we need to do something. strikingly absent from these please list any specific suggestion about what to do. want gun law should we be passing and how would it have prevented what we saw yesterday? we haven't found the answer to that, we will keep pressing. well, we also heard person after person second-guess the security around the event on sunday night in las vegas, you have heard people say we need to do this or that, become much more like this country are that country, more like israel, it all sounds well-meaning, the question is what work? we decided to find someone who would know the answer and we found a former marine special missions officer and he joins us
tonight. kelly, you do this for a living. we were the first person i thought of when i watched others on television say if we had only run the bag through a screen or put the customers through magnetometer, is that a fair assessment of security on sunday night in vegas? >> no, it's a reaction, a pretty predictable reaction. always this urge to answer the void, to answer the question. the problem is outlier incidents are really hard to plan for. ask yourself, if you were traveling with your family, you have a lot of bags, it took a long time to get somewhere, it may be in the 90 days or 120 days after the incident you might put up with waiting in line for 30 minutes waiting for your back to get through the desk, but after that would that be acceptable to you and what's the cost not only to the hotel chain but to everything, you have to have people who know what they're looking at, people trained for tsa to be able to look into a bag through an x-men machine.
in a lot of cases a lot of the ideas are because people want to answer that void but it's not practical and it's not sustainable. >> tucker: it seems to me that if you have someone like stephen paddock, who is unconcerned about his own life, all kinds of suicide attacks you see on the road, somebody who doesn't care about being caught or dying, how do you protect against that? >> it's very difficult, isn't it? if you don't care if you are going to get caught or killed and your targets are unsuspecting people and an event or security is marginal or reasonable, it's exceptionally difficult. this is a byproduct of who we are and how we choose to live. we live in a free society. if we started suddenly having draconian measures, supra draconian measures, if we had an internal police force like east germany, you could certainly stamp some of these incidences from happening but you couldn't guarantee that they won't
happen. you can leave a fit life and do physical therapy and eat well at all that and still get cancer. it's a sad truth but that's just the way it is. >> tucker: specifics of sunday night, one thing that jumped out to me was the response time to police, a two ever second-guess law enforcement because i respect them, but 72 or 74 minutes is a long time. if you are one of the few people i know it was actually heard the nato round fired indoors, describe allow that is. he fired thousands of them. >> there's an overpressure factor, it creates overpressure so it's exceptionally loud. the problem is -- post be what it would have been clear to the people in the hallway that there was gunfire coming from this room, correct? >> absolutely. now ask yourself for the average person on vacation in las vegas, what are you going to do about it? how are you physically going to intervene with somebody was obviously firing rifles out of a window. this is where people -- yes,
people get paid to intervene in these instances, they don't get paid to run foolishly into them to get killed themselves. if there's a lot of things that most people don't consider in these things. just the sheer area, the 30 second-floor, you got to be able to clear your way through there because at that point it's not clear, is he acting alone, is there somebody else who could be intervening, there's a lot of elements that prevent that immediate response that people would like to think and occur. >> tucker: really quickly, this is not an attack on anyone, everyone seems to work on his or her best, but the government didn't actually protect the people at that concert on sunday night and maybe it could impact. so that kind of suggest that people should be thinking about protecting themselves, how do you protect yourself against something like this, is it even possible? >> it's possible to prepare for them. not at the 32nd floor but you should know how to do basic combat, first aid, direct pressure, how to put a tourniquet on. you should know not to second-guess yourself if you
hear gunfire in a place that is public. this is happening all over the place now. you shouldn't second-guess yourself and you should be able to breathe, look, make your own mind up about where safety is and run to that area. understand the difference between cover and concealment. >> tucker: it's not fireworks. >> it's never fireworks. >> tucker: great to see you. a lot of people are calling for gun control measures after the attack but what exactly do they mean by that? does do something! what did they want done? we will talk to one of those people next. ♪ i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424.
mikboth served in the navy.s, i do outrank my husband, not just being in the military, but at home. she thinks she's the boss. she only had me by one grade. we bought our first home together in 2010. his family had used another insurance product but i was like well i've had usaa for a while, why don't we call and check the rates? it was an instant savings and i should've changed a long time ago. there's no point in looking elsewhere really. we're the tenneys and we're usaa members for life. usaa. get your insurance quote today.
find it in a subaru crosstrek. >> tucker: an awful lot of people in the last 24 hours, politicians, late-night talk show host, media folks have responded to the las vegas shooting by demanding new gun-control measures or at least attacking those who aren't demanding new gun control measures. they speak confidently, the weakest of the few if any of them have ever handled or even looked at the gun they want band, but whatever. that has become the rule in 21st century america, and less you know about firearms you are confident and far-reaching national laws about them. he wrote a piece saying the scariest part of the las vegas attack, scarier than the people who were killed is "a pro-gun message that nothing can be done in response to those murders." colby, thanks for coming on. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: you wrote a column that was very outraged, and you dipped deep into the adjective been. he said "it's cowardly, embarrassing, shallow, craven,
irresponsible for tv figures not to offer specific solutions to gun violence." >> that's not what i said. those beautiful adjectives were what i wrote. >> tucker: let me quote you, "to the pond and to say nothing can be done, let's at least try. anything else is cowardly and embarrassing and to suggest such as shallow, craven and responsible use of your broadcast power. >> you're criticizing me for trying to say we should keep the frequency of violent mass shootings happening that i'm guilty as charged. >> tucker: i'm not saying that at all. >> the point of my piece was a critique, a fair critique on pro-gun thought leaders were saying that this is the price of freedom or there are things the government should be able to stop or can't stop, or there's nothing that could have been going to stop this. that all may be through to my true and that mail be to the letter true but the spirit of that idea is defeated, and it's cowardly and irresponsible. >> tucker: i'm not sure i
understand. i understand the point of the piece, which is to put your virtue on display and say i care, i'm a good person. >> that was not -- thank you for telling me what i meant. >> tucker: okay, but it suggests that you have an answer that lesser mortals are ignoring and so let me ask you point-blank, what is the solution to what you call gun violence, to shootings like yesterday? what laws should congress be taking up, should they be advocating for? >> is sort of marked this piece by saying that we should do something. of course we should do something! to suggest that we should do nothing in the face of this is absurd. >> tucker: i'm not suggesting that, and i never would. i don't feel that way and i'm not advocating for it. i'm simply asking you and you made this clear in your piece you are very good person who cares. i'm wondering specifically what we should be doing. what should we do legislatively to prevent this from happening again? >> are not an expert on going, i'm a gun owner, i grew up in a small town in kansas, i owned a shotgun and a rifle that have
been in my family for a long time. used to go hunting, -- and spirit are not asking you what you are not for. i'm asking what you for. what? that's a simple question, what? >> the reasons of violent mass shooting in american history was that this assailant purchased te adaptations, he illegally modified his semiautomatic weapons to shoot 400 rounds a minute. that should be illegal. should make it illegal that you can modify -- it already is illegal but we should create more friction so that more people can't shoot 400 rounds a second. i also think there should be a better background checks. any friction -- i'm not saying -- >> tucker: let's take these one at a time. i want to take you seriously as far as your piece. i want to take it seriously so you are saying that the bone stock, which he apparently attached to one of these rifles. >> are a few of them, we don't know. >> tucker: we don't know, are
you saying that that was legal? i don't have a problem with banning that. i wouldn't put one of my rifle, that's for sure, i think it's silly but are you suggesting if he hadn't had this he wouldn't have killed dozens of people? >> no, i'm not suggesting that, i think it sort of craven for you to play politics by mentioning the obama administration. why do you bring up the obama administration? >> there's nothing craven about it. >> tucker: your piece suggests that there is an nra funded campaign to keep america from getting the solutions it deserves that would save lives. i'm merely pointing out the truth, which is this thing is illegal, i would not have a problem with making it illegal. does that solve -- it's irrelevant and you know it. >> how is that irrelevant? the consistency of these sorts of shooting, is not something everyone can support going forward? >> tucker: how many shootings
have taken place with a bomb stock in them? >> one that we know of and that happened sunday night. >> that's great. what i'm arguing is -- that's fine, ban it but that would not have saved a massive number of lives because it is still possible to pull the trigger awfully quickly on a semiautomatic rifle which gets us -- i'm looking for -- >> i'me things will make it all go away. it is not something we should all be -- what would you do? >> tucker: it happened one time. i'm asking you for the magic solution that the rest of us -- what would have prevented those? >> less vacancy. all these laws, they have prevented things that we don't know that happen. they be better background checks, a lack of selling -- >> tucker: what is a better background check? he had background checks. >> if you are of sound mind then
you can wait two weeks, not seven days. >> tucker: he started buying these rifles in june. >> i never suggested that these worlds would have made this -- >> tucker: you wrote a piece attacking people because they weren't offering solutions and now i'm giving you an opportunity to offer a solution and you don't have one. >> i'm having problems with my earpiece right now but i've got that figured out, i will tell you -- get rid of bomb stocks, make sure they are illegal, lets lose the loopholes in the secondary gun market and let's have more stringent background checks. >> tucker: but this guy did not go to the secondary gun market that we know of are not changing the argument. name a mass shooting that would have been stopped by these new background checks you are talking about? >> i can't name things that didn't happen. theoretically there are lots of shootings that probably didn't happen because of the effects of gun control. you can't prove a negative but think if there weren't
background checks. >> tucker: i'm confused. >> that's just common sense. >> tucker: there have been a number of mass shootings, terrible, people died, they are corrosive of american society, i'm as against them as anybody. i'm horrified by them. you are saying there are legislative solutions out there that will prevent future shootings? i want you to name one. i'm trying to have a conversation but i'm not shrugging my shoulders, i invited you one. i'm finding it totally ignorant of the subject. >> program people that shrugged her shoulders and have the defeat of attitude that's extremely nihilistic and is a dystopian future that i don't want to be a part of. >> tucker: what what i find nihilistic is one summer he jumps up and down about how we can make america better and then when asked how to do that has no answers at all. >> i just told you what i would do. >> tucker: we could have some kind of back and check you can't describe. >> i'm sorry you're mad. >> tucker: i'm not mad, i'm sincere -- i've been getting lectures all day from people. >> did that not suffice to you?
did you not listen? >> tucker: repeat it because i'm not sure i get it. background checks that delay gun purchases for some longer period of time. >> deeper background check, get rid of loopholes at secondary gun market and get rid of bum stocks. >> tucker: a deeper background check that would look at what? what does that mean? >> psychological profiles. digital footprints. >> tucker: that you would have a team of psychiatrists -- you brought it up. assess the person's mental state? >> you asked me what i would do and i told you what i would do. >> tucker: i'm asking you to describe it. >> tucker, you are playing politics with an issue. >> tucker: i'm not playing politics! i'm asking you about policy and you haven't thought about it at all. >> i have! i just told you three things. dude, you're not listening. >> tucker: i'm listening very carefully, i always do. >> why did we outlaw automatic weapons in 1986? >> tucker: i'm sorry, why did we bend them? >> why did we outlaw automatic weapons in 1986? testing with the congress felt that people shouldn't have them, i don't know. >> so why doesn't congress think
that we should have -- still have semiautomatic weapons that could very easily for 50 bucks beacon vertically effectively into automatic weapons and kill more people? >> tucker: how may automatic rifles -- you outlaw bum stocks. i'm sure they will be outlawed next week. >> if we get rid of them and we sell less semiautomatic weapons and that's a start. >> tucker: last question, how many semiautomatic weapons are out there would you say right now? >> too many. >> tucker: rough guess, how many would you say? >> i'm going to guess too many. >> tucker: [laughs] i'm going to guess you literally have no idea what you're talking about and you should write about things that you understand. not patronize the rest of us. probably over -- that 60 million, actually. if there are 200 million high-capacity tactical magazine magazines. >> that's cool. >> tucker: i'm not saying it's cool or not cool, i'm just saying you have to deal with those facts moving forward. >> list with the data side, less people die. >> tucker: okay.
right. just don't know much about stephen paddock, we do know that he was a white male and that's enough for one columnist who says he ought to be profiled on that basis as all white men should be. stay tuned for that conversation. ♪ you too, unnecessary er visits. and hey, unmanaged depression, don't get too comfortable. we're talking to you, cost inefficiencies, and data without insights. and fragmented care, stop getting in the way of patient recovery and pay attention. every single one of you is on our list. at optum, we're partnering across the health system to tackle its biggest challenges. at optum, we're partnering across the health system
>> tucker: we still aren't quite sure, actually we have no idea, what motivated stephen paddock to murder so many people. nevertheless syndicated columnist says he knows what america should do in response to the killings, start profiling white men, all of them. "there's plenty of evidence that law enforcement officers profile african-americans, latinos and muslim americans," he wrote in a recent piece, "how did whiteman get to be so special in an era when so many mass shootings fit the profile"? rubin joins us right now. thanks for coming on. >> longtime friend, first time guest. >> tucker: so you are per profiling l!
i thought you were against racial profiling, i thought it was racist, but now it's not? >> there's two sides that point, the same folks who think it's okay to profile african american motorist on the freeway, look at the numbers. likewise when you're talking about serial killers and mass murderers, it's inescapable that most of those folks are white males. it makes sense to give it all even. >> tucker: just for the record, you are for racial profiling now? so the next time some big city police department says where profiling people outside a mosque you're going to say good job? >> if to finish the quote in the colony right. if the column i just wrote this afternoon. talked about not all white males, who said i want to profile all of them, no. i want to profile white males who by an unusually large number of high-impact powerful weapons and ammunition. if you do that you had that behavior to the characteristic. if those are good people to keep an eye on, keep a list of and keep track of. >> tucker: i guess what i
found so striking but your column was the racial angle. i don't think most people looked, i didn't, i don't look at most shootings to the lens of race and i did look at this one. if i thought striking that he was old, but it was striking was a former art tell mike irs guy, but his race didn't jump out at me but obviously it was a real concern for you. why was this a racial killing? >> it was. it was for me and a lot of tino american friends i talk to. they hold their breath and is a o'jays i hope this wasn't one of ours. i actually heard a christian fundamentalist say he does the same thing, he always felt is not one of his constituents in his community. in terms of latinos and african-americans, they are increasingly afraid of white men with 42 guns and arsenal. they walk around with a grievance if somehow the world has gone, done them wrong. they would've gotten into a better college of some i hadn't already taken her spot.
folks are talk about trade deals who put them out of work. one grievance after another with this bunch. >> tucker: this bunch. we have a driver's license photograph of the shooter on the screen, i don't know if you can see it whatever viewers might be wondering what that is. i wonder if when you go home and replay this tape and you hear yourself making generalizations about an entire racial group if you will think i've become a resist. i wonder if you will come to that realization. >> i've been called every name in the book by the right, left, i just got very unpopular. >> tucker: that's a cured dome don't make sense or question, don't blow it off. you just set about an entire racial group, they do this, they are this way, they have these attitudes. >> right. >> tucker: tested test, textbook definition of racism, i wonder if you know that. >> here's the thing, don't be condescending to me, and remind me of white were liberals, we will find them to be quite annoying. don't say i wonder if you know that. i've been all the races last week when i took a stand against
african-american athletes kneeling during the national anthem. >> tucker: don't dodge the question. i'm being very specific. i'm saying when you, like 30 seconds ago, not last week, said up an entire group of people who share only skin color, that's all they have in common. >> and behavior, the fact that they stockpile weapons. >> tucker: 's that white people do. if you are comfortable with making derogatory statements about a whole group of people based on their race, because i am not comfortable doing that. >> that's fine, let me think about that again. i watch her show and you often do that on the show in fact. >> tucker: give me one example where i have made any generalization about a group on the basis of their race. one time. >> i will give you one example. in the future -- you did this just last week when you talk about immigration you should not rely on people from fair or cis, the center for immigration studies, groups that 20 years ago, when i first met you, were criticized when you wrote for the weekly standard.
>> tucker: give me an example of me deriding an entire group of people on the basis of their race and you can't because i don't, because i don't believe in it and i never have. and you just did and i'm wondering when that became okay. wonder that that become okay to do that? >> let's be clear about this, for the third and fourth time, it's not just the racial characteristic, it says in the column if you are a white male who stuck stockpiles weapons and ammunition. >> tucker: they had these attitudes in the runaround and they are mad because their kids didn't get into college, it's not okay -- >> it has something to do with the shows they watch at night. the grievance mentality is fostered over and over again. >> tucker: you can say something that is the textbook definition of racism and then accuse me of it for calling you out. [laughs] it's like this cool little trick you figured out, i love it! >> it doesn't bother me with somebody calls a racist, they do it all the time, i only care that i make them think. >> tucker: i'm hoping to make you think about what you just said. i'm not saying that you are a
racist. if i'm saying about what you just said. >> if the fbi is saying that the vast majority of serial killers and mass murderers are white males, how do you get away with not profiling the? how did they become so special, some somehow the rules don't ap. >> tucker: i know that you're basically basically a reasonable guy but your dripping with racism all of a sudden and it makes me worry about where this country is going, it really does, i mean that. thanks for coming out tonight. up next brit hume will join us with his take on the vegas attack and how the political and media establishment reacted to it, stay tuned. ay, i think how e i am. i think is today going to be the day, that we find a cure? i think how much i can do to help change people's lives. i may not benefit from those breakthroughs, but i'm sure going to... i'm bringing forward a treatment for alzheimer's disease, yes,
in my lifetime, i will make sure. our guests can earn a free night when they book at choicehotels.com and stay with us just two times? fall time. badda book. badda boom. pumpkin spice cookie? i'm good. book now at choicehotels.com whstuff happens. old shut down cold symptoms fast with maximum strength alka seltzer plus liquid gels.
attack in las vegas to split along political lines. besides calling for gun control in general several media figures responded by specifically vilifying the national rifle association, brit hume joins us tonight. one of the main questions people in washington i think are asking is where the president going to come out on this? he said there will be a time to look at gun laws. any inkling of what that means? >> he's pretty committed to the gun owners and they were clearly very supportive of him. these are people whose passion gives them sort of political power beyond their absolute numbers. i think he would cross them to his parents. at his peril because he's down with those people now. he's not an ideologue, and how deeply believes in the second amendment is anybody's guess but he would be claiming while out on a limb. >> tucker: do you think that's understood at the white house?
>> i don't know the answer to that. he's prokaryote, somewhat unpredictable, but i don't see him going there. what he could do would be to make some kind of deal where he would permit this conversion kits in these other measures you can make a semiautomatic rifle perform like an automatic rifle, i'm not even sure how vigorously the nra would oppose that if at all. >> tucker: i don't think they would. automatic weapons have been basically out of reach for most people since the 1930s. >> you need a special license to own one or even have one. >> tucker: exactly. i'm struck by the repetitive nature on the arguments you hear on the subject. i'm not even taking sides, although i am passionately on one side. you hear the same voices making the same points and you wonder who's benefiting from that exactly? >> we do live in an atmosphere
where everybody is working to appeal to their bases and the bases are hopelessly divided. think of the viewpoints on this issue. part of the problem is that the people on both sides of this issue and many others not only disagree with the other side, they don't see how the people in the other side could possibly hold such views. so for example, you have these hideous episodes of gun violence, how can you be against further gun control? this is what america needs. and you take these polls, majority favor stricter gun laws. if you get down to the particulars of the support melts away but the support for the second amendment and second amendment rights among people who own guns is unwavering. >> tucker: yes. >> that's a big multiplier because they will come out and vote against you on that only. in the meanwhile, people who are second amendment advocates can't imagine how people can look at the history of gun control and work on control has been applied
and where it hasn't come to the conclusion that it works so they think the people on the other side are just liberals who want to regulate everything and everybody. you put people like that in a room together, where will you find common ground? nobody trusts each other's motives. that's a huge part of the divisions in america and what they are about. >> tucker: this seems like one of those issues if there were ever a legislative attempts to take people's guns away -- >> it would be awfully hard to do. people think the supreme court decision, narrowly decided that said the right to keep and bear arms was an individual right. they think that case was wrongly decided but as long as that is the law of the land there's no way you could confiscate. >> tucker: thank you for that. >> you bet. >> tucker: we will be rightes back. my unique needs. my dell small business advisor has gotten to know our business so well, that is feels like he's a part of our team.
but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember. >> tucker: that's it for us tonight. fox news coverage of the las vegas massacre continues right now the "hannity."
we expect a major news conference and updates that can start any minute. good night from washington. see you tomorrow. ♪ >> sean: thanks, tucker. this is a fox news alert. welcome to "hannity." we are reporting live from las vegas near the scene of the most deadly shooting in american history. we are awaiting a police news conference. we will bring it to you. also tonight, we will speak with multiple eyewitnesses, heroes, and we have reporters on the ground. in the wake of this horrific mass shooting, democrats, late-night comedians, celebrities, they are racing to politicize this national tragedy. it's beyond shameful, disturbing, we will have more that just a minute. president trump travel to puerto rico to survey the