>> martha: thought is our story for tonight. we're heading to d.c., we'll be there for day two of the zuckerberg hearing. stick around, we'll see you tomorrow night from d.c. tucker carlson coming up next. ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." robert miller's investigation, you remember, was supposed to be about russian collusion, the hacking of our election. obviously there's a new goal now, what is it? brit hume and jonathan turley will join us to spell that out. mark zuckerberg spent hours on capitol hill today taking questions from senators about facebook's role in the 2016 election in an american society more generally. will talk to one of the senators was there and spoke to zuckerberg and what it meant. but first, brad larsen who covers tech for our show has big moments from today.

>> facebook ceo mark zuckerberg checked in with congress today for day one of hearings. we learned a little bit about the inner workings of the social media giant. one thing we heard repeatedly was exactly what facebook is and is not. >> what you think of is the facebook service. everyone has control every single time they go to share that, they can delete that data anytime they want. full control for the majority of the data. >> sharing everything? not so much. >> mr. zuckerberg, would you be comfortable sharing with us the name of the hotel you stayed in last night? >> [laughs] no. >> i think maybe what this is all about, you're right to privacy, the limits of your rights to privacy, and how much you give away. >> with a 2.2 billion users and in the wake of concerns about more than 80 million users

having their data stolen by political consulting firms, cambridge analytica, is facebook your only choice? >> if i'm buying a ford and it doesn't work well and i don't like it, i can buy a chevy. if i'm upset with facebook, what's the equivalent product that i can go sign up for? >> the second category that i was way to talk about -- >> i'm not talking about categories, is there a real competition? don't you think you have a monopoly? >> it's only doesn't feel like that to me. >> there is also concern about first amendment rights and would control the social media giant has over what you see, say, and share. >> you say you have 15-20,000 people working on security and content review. do you know the political orientation of those people engaged in content review? >> no, senator. we do not generally ask people about their political orientation when they're joining the company.

>> senator ben sasse asked a similar question and ceo mark zuckerberg said any time someone to hurt others. he is also concerned about addiction to the social media site. >> as a dad, do you worry about social media addiction is a problem for america's teens? >> up my is we can be idealistic, but have a broad view of our responsibility. >> we will get more from zuckerberg tomorrow when he sits down for day to go. he's been very frank and his responses and a little obtuse about specifics, which makes the lack of understanding of exactly how facebook works and our understanding of it very clear. >> tucker: thank you, appreciate it. john kennedy of louisiana was one of the senators who spoke to zuckerberg today. >> here's what everybody's been trying to tell you and i say this gently.

your user agreement sucks. [laughter] i'm going to suggest to you that you go back home and rewrite it. tell your lawyers, no disrespect, they're good. tell them you want it written in english. >> tucker: senator kennedy joins us. things were coming on. >> what you bet. >> tucker: what was the point of this hearing? what are you considering with facebook? >> i was mildly disappointed with the hearing. i wanted mr. zuckerberg to step up and say i'm on it. i did it, it can be fixed. i'm going to fix it. we'll do it together. that's not what i heard. i didn't feel like we connected with mr. zuckerberg today. facebook is an extraordinary company. it's done magical things, but it's clear that the digital

promised land has some minefields in it. one is the privacy issue, the other is the propaganda. i don't have to vote to regulate facebook, but we're almost willing to step up to the plate and address those two issues. i think they can, i hope they can. if they can't come out with that a bigger problem than just what we talked about today. >> tucker: here you've got the biggest provider of news in the united states with more power than william randolph the first ever had with a long and proven track record of censorship in this country and other countries with the power to change election results. you don't think that's enough of a threat right there to act? >> i think that's a very important issue. senator cruz and senator sasse made that point. i ran out of time. i wanted to make that point. i think it's true. poison is being spread on social media. okay, what's poison? define poison.

a lot of our democratic friends made a big deal about cambridge analytica may work with president trump, i want to ask mr. zuckerberg today about this statement that was made by somebody come up miss carol davidson from president obama's election campaign 2012. this is what she says. she ran media analytics the president. she said facebook was very candid, that they allowed us to do things they wouldn't have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side. i wanted to ask if there was an accurate statement, but i ran out of time. >> tucker: finally, the congress would have really uniquely the ability to get this under control, too much power is vested in one company and their enemies of the first amendment. i know we public instantly to regular eight things, but do you think we are approaching a point where for the good of the public, that may need to be

done? >> i don't think we're there yet, but a lot of it depends on how mr. zuckerberg reacts to this. i'll say it again. there are two issues. one is a privacy problem, the other is a propaganda problem. the issue there is how do we solve it without impinging on people's first amendment rights? that's a tough one. i want to be assured, didn't get it today, maybe we'll get it in the second round that facebook is not politically biased one way or another. i don't want him pitching for republicans or democrats. >> tucker: senator, thank you. for more discussion of what happened today, roger mack and eight was one of facebook's first investors and now a critic of the company. roger, first to you. the head of facebook mark zuckerberg said today that he and the company are happy to

censor hate speech, but was unclear exactly on what hate speech is and then suggested may be artificial intelligence will settle that question. if you care about freedom of speech, does that make you uncomfortable question works because the whole thing makes me uncomfortable. the fundamental issue is the business model is based on inflammatory emotion. once you build a business model on that, there's no way to put it back in. facebook has shown itself to be less than good at managing the dialogue on its site. as you point out, they are absolutely editing everything. there are a million different things they could show you at any moment in time. quite clearly, they have failed. precisely as it senator kennedy just described. >> tucker: dave, we had a researcher on, a psychologist recently and he's looked at a bunch of different tech companies, if mark zuckerberg

had been a targeted message to people identified on facebook as hillary voters and encourage them to vote, he could have made it will look like 450,000 and change the course of the election. that's a lot of power for one media company to have. even if you are for his political views. should any company have the ability to change election outcomes the way facebook does? >> i think you're giving him too much credit. first of all, i'm not a fan of that political worldview. i am a fan of free enterprise. by that standard, how many people vote does "the new york times" editorial choose a candidate or anybody else make it influence? i'm very wary of the facebook site as a user. this discussion about should be censor them and knock-back their political influence and are they gigantic -- that's crazy, but there are a monopoly. >> tucker: i know the numbers.

speak out there not a monopoly. >> tucker: facebook and google control over 90% of digital ads. that means if you run news or anything else, you're beholden to them. why is that not a monopoly? >> if you want to say at monopoly for digital ads, fine. if it's a monopoly for political content, it's not. >> tucker: digital ads are what supports all online news coverage. >> are you worried about a monopoly in the digital ad business or are you worried about a concentration of political power? >> tucker: i don't think there's a distinction between those two things. i'm worried that the addition to both by the total inability of the congress to respond to a looming threat to its own legitimacy from facebook and google. in my being insane here? i don't think so. >> i'm on your side in this issue. at the end of the day, the

problem we have here is a massive concentration of power and that concentration of power is in the hands of people who preserve the right of the first amendment for their corporations, but they tend to overlook the first amendment rights of the people who are the users of the site. in that process, what we have is these things that are global, they are influence democracy all around the world and we can't find a single example of them influencing it for the better. i'm with the senator kennedy. this thing has gone on both sides, we've seen massive abuses of facebook on both sides of this thing. it doesn't look good either way. we need to reduce facebook's influence so we don't have a determining the outcome of any election whether it's 2012, 2016, 2018, or 2020. >> tucker: at the end of the day, this is not an american company or one that sees itself, but they don't see that. there are companies of the world and yet, they have more influence potentially over our

voting patterns than russia or china or any other government. why wouldn't that be a threat to democracy? >> they behave as though they don't have any influence and as a result, bad actors have been able to manipulative the system. to david, my simple point is having watched this company from its earliest days, it has evolved into something very different and it started out as and i am a believer in free enterprise, but i'm a bigger believer in democracy and i don't believe any company's rights come before the rights of the american people. >> tucker: does any of us bother you? >> are largely stopped using the app in january when it went through their latest news revision to decide what i can see and not see. that doesn't mean that i believe that senator kennedy or those other knuckleheads down there today and that hearing, i say it was a goat rodeo, but that's

unfair to goat rodeos. you can't let those people make those decisions. consumers have to make those decisions. your assertion that it's an unbreakable monopoly, it's not. >> tucker: as not only unbreakable, it's growing. thank you both, we are out of time sadly. appreciate it. tonight and just the past 12 minutes, we've seen evidence that two other cable networks are colluding with "the new york times" to put out negative stories on the trump administration. our proof and brit hume and jonathan turley coming up next. ♪ what are the ingredients of a life well lived? is it the places you go? the things you own? or the people that fill it with meaning? for 150 years, generations of families have chosen pacific life

for retirement and life insurance solutions. protecting what's most important to you. that's the power of pacific. ask a financial advisor about pacific life. so we swapped your car out for the all-new chevy travyes.. do you think it's going to surprise your daughter? absolutely. wait, is mom here yet? where's mom? she's in this car. what the heck? whoa. yo, whose car is this? this is the all-new chevy traverse. this is beautiful. it has apple carplay compatibility. do those apps look familiar? ohhhhh. do you want to hit this button? there's a hidden compartment. uhh, whoa. mom, when i'm older can you buy me this car? i wanna buy me this car. ♪

directv now gives you more for your thing. your letting go thing. your sorry not sorry thing. your out with the old in with the new, onto bigger and better thing. get the live tv you love. no bulky hardware. no satellite. no annual contract. try directv now for $10/mo for 3 months. more for your thing. that's our thing. visit directvnow dot com you won't find relief here. congestion and pressure? go to the pharmacy counter for powerful claritin-d. while the leading allergy spray relieves 6 symptoms... claritin-d relieves 8, including sinus congestion and pressure. claritin-d relieves more.

♪ >> tucker: cnn, msnbc, and "the new york times" are working together to push a false story a spirit of the the hour, each network put on "new york times" reporters. the mueller investigation was officially created to uncover russian hacking and the american democracy, but that's not what it is anymore. it is now an all-purpose probe into the president. his personal and financial life designed to make us feel safer, i hope you feel safer. yesterday, fbi agents raided the office of michael cohen, that's a president's personal lawyer apparently looking for evidence about payments to stormy daniels, the star who is not from russia and did not hack our election in any case. steve schmidt noted that many of the constitution would be thrilled by this. they always hated the

bill of rights, those guys. >> if you listen closely tonigh tonight, you can hear the faint applause from heaven of this country's founding fathers who bequeathed to us a nation or the rule of law is supreme. we are a nation of laws. >> tucker: the founders wanted to know, did the money go to stormy daniels? what happened to stormy daniels? jonathan turley as a professional at george washington university's school of law and he joins us tonight. i think you were one of the trustworthy people in this conversation. i don't know what your politics are. i don't think we agree politically, but i trust her legal views. what do you make of this raid on the president's lawyer's office? >> part of this is of cohen is making. he players his relationship between a lawyer and a business partner. that's dangerous under any circumstances, but particularly

if you're going to evoke client attorney privilege is. he may have trouble with that. when you look at the stormy daniels agreement, it's still not clear what role he's playing there, whether he's trump's lawyer, that's going to come back to haunt him and haunt the president one phase say some of this stuff to remain confidential. i think the president is right in a sense that whenever you have a raid on an attorney's office, it should raise a very troubling concerns for everyone. this is a serious problem when someone can't rely on their attorney. >> tucker: is the core potential violations that the payments to stormy daniels, mise some form of campaign finance violations? >> when the president said i don't know anything about this, it sounds a lot like what's called a campaign contribution.

that's what john edwards was charged with and prosecuted for. he ultimately was not convicted of that. they could make a case for that. supposedly, the warrant covers everything from stormy daniels to taxi medallions. there's a lot in between. >> tucker: was there any indication that stormy daniels was working with russian agencies, that she was herself part of the hacking of our democracy? >> i'm not familiar, but no. >> tucker: i guess we can say that the nature of the investigation has changed profoundly. >> absolutely. there's no question that this is a far off mark. so was manafort. rod rosenstein didn't have a problem when mueller came to him and said i want to expand manafort's investigation. some of this stuff is closer and yet rosenstein said i want the seven district to do this.

>> tucker: couldn't have said this on the point of the investigation? >> he could have. if mueller came to him and that we have evidence of crime that we've uncovered, it's hard not to give that to a prosecutor to look at. we don't know what was shown to rod rosenstein and that's part of the problem. >> tucker: i think what you're saying is he would either have to be dumb or an active drug user to allow an independent counsel investigation to start. >> this is one of those things where it's easy to unleash the dogs of war, it's hard to get them back. the special counsel as a torpedo in the water, to use another metaphor. he's still there. what's interesting about this move is that they haven't just expanded the investigation, they expanded the prosecutors so now, even if the president moved against rosenstein, moved against miller, ed wouldn't stop at the southern district.

>> tucker: thank you for that. appreciate it. democrats are gearing up for an impeachment port for the president. what will the outcome be? brit hume joins us next. ♪ if you feel like you spend too much time in the bathroom

with recurring constipation and belly pain talk to your doctor and say yesss! to linzess. ♪ yesss! linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. linzess can help relieve your belly pain, and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements. linzess is not a laxative. it works differently to help you get ahead of your recurring constipation and belly pain. do not give linzess to children less than 6, and it should not be given to children 6 to less than 18. it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess

and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach area pain, and swelling. so say yesss! to help for recurring constipation. yesss! to help for belly pain. talk to your doctor and say yesss! linzess. are made with smarttrack®igners material to precisely move your teeth to your best smile. see how invisalign® treatment can shape your smile up to 50% faster today at invisalign.com so let's promote our spring travel deal on choicehotels.com like this. earn one free night when you stay just twice this spring. allergies. or, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com you ok there, kurt? we're about to move. karate helps... relieve some of the house-buying... stress. at least you don't have to worry about homeowners insurance. call geico. geico... helps with... homeowners insurance?

been doing it for years. i'm calling geico right now. good idea! get to know geico. and see how easy homeowners and renters insurance can be. give us the work no one else wants to do. we don't just go against the grain. we grow it. give us the frontiers. the places where success is measured in pushed limits. give us the middle of nowhere. where the only map is your buddies' tread marks. this life? no one's born ready for it. ( ♪ )

>> i think that's an absolutely ridiculous question. >> tucker: no one can in the light of day tell you why the stormy daniels story is so significant, but clearly it is judging by the air time it gets. it's more important than syria, more important than the fact that our economy is being eclipsed by china. the fact that it matters so much that president trump should consider leaving office over it. does anyone who doesn't work in the media believe that? brit hume is our senior analyst at fox and he joins us tonight. maybe i'm blinded by my reflexive emulsion of this story, but in the scheme of stories, concerning the world is on fire faster than we can keep up with, is it significant to the airtime it's getting? >> of course it's not. it doesn't tell us anything about donald trump that we didn't already know or should have known.

the story itself that he had this liaison with her came out before the election. americans who voted for and against donald trump knew or should have known that he was a habitual philanderer, he made of public spectacle of it in the past. the story was entirely credible and remain so to this day. the fact that he denied this detail, i don't think most of the people think his denial is true, but it simply doesn't rise to the level you're talking about here. unless you want to take very seriously the possibility that the money paid to keep her from blurting all this out sooner was a campaign contribution that will exceeded campaign contributions. that is about as big as you can get it to be as far as we know.

>> tucker: it seems like a pretty tenuous connection to news. i've covered this exclusively since we started 28 minutes ago. that's all they've covered this hour so far. >> i think there's a lot of excitement, but the question you have to answer here is what really is the underlying crime and doesn't rise to the level of something for purposes of impeachment or what's asked, the possibility that trump would resign? does anything about trumps behavior in reaction to any of this suggests that this is a man contemplating quitting? i would say obviously probably not. >> tucker: i'm not sure that they understand that they take

it this fall. democratic voters want impeachment, do you think democratic members if they take control of the house can do anything to start impeachment? >> i think there'll be moves in that direction. the last time this was done, it was thoroughly documented. he lied to a grand jury. they did it, they impeached him in the house and he was not anywhere near convicted in the senate and he ended up leaving the office in a blaze of glory and it kind of backfired politically on the republicans. democratic politicians might be given some pause by how all that turned out. you're right about the base,

they want him out and they want him impeached and they want their members to be part of the resistance. mr. o'rourke running against ted cruz in texas seems a little confused about how impeachment works because he's running for the senate and the senate doesn't vote to impeach. the senate votes on whether or not to convict. that aside, his sentiments reflect that of many democrats. i think there will be able to do it if, in fact, they get control of the house. >> tucker: brit hume, thanks as always. good to see you. the geniuses in washington are unanimous, we must attack syria and anyone who asks questions about why we must attack syria is obviously by definition working for vladimir putin. how did this happen? how does almost everybody in power line up behind yet another military intervention? is the public crying out for one? glenn greenwald has watch this and he joins us next with an answer.

♪ it's really not very important. i was in the stone ages as much as technology wise. and i would say i had nothing. you become a school teacher for one reason, you love kids. and so you don't have the same tools, you don't always believe you have the same... outcomes achievable for yourself. when we got the tablets, it changed everything. by giving them that technology and then marrying it with a curriculum that's designed to have technology at the heart of it, we are really changing the way that students learn. and i can't wait for ten years from now when i get to talk to them again and see, like, who they are. ♪

this ijust listen. (vo) there's so much we want to show her. we needed a car that would last long enough to see it all. (avo) subaru outback. ninety eight percent are still on the road after 10 years. come on mom, let's go!

you wouldn't accept from any one else. so why accept it from your allergy pills? most pills don't finish the job because they don't relieve nasal congestion. flonase allergy relief is different. flonase relieves sneezing, itchy, watery eyes and a runny nose, plus nasal congestion, which pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. and 6 is greater than 1. start your day with flonase for more complete allergy relief. flonase. this changes everything.

each day justin at work... walk. and after work. he does it all with dr. scholl's. only dr. scholl's has massaging gel insoles that provide all-day comfort. to keep him feeling more energized. dr. scholl's. born to move. when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night. hold on dad... liberty did what? yeah, liberty mutual 24-hour roadside assistance helped him to fix his flat so he could get home safely. my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. don't worry - i know what a lug wrench is, dad. is this a lug wrench? maybe? you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

>> tucker: virtually all of washington republicans and democrat have united behind the idea that we have a moral obligation to go deeper into the war in syria. we all ready have troops in syria all the wouldn't know it watching the mueller base to channel. that's not enough the pundits say. we need a real war, something big and deadly, primarily to avenge the syrian president assad's gas attack on his own citizens. here is some of the growing consensus on that. >> assad and his inner circle should be considered war criminals. legitimate military targets. they have the opportunity to take them out, they should. >> it's clear to me that this president after using rhetoric on sunday has to take a stronger

military action that we did last year. >> we have a leader who was a war criminal supportive by the iranians and russians. that's a risky response. if the west won't stand up when a leader uses gas, multiple times against his own people, we live in a very dangerous world. >> tucker: sets the consensus. last time we asked the obvious questions. when we go to war, are we sure this is all real? we really know that assad was behind the gas attack? it's an obvious question. how can we know that conclusively so soon after the attack happened question mike we didn't have any americans on the ground and why would assad do that given the surety of his own interests? while on the subject, why is a war in syria a good idea for the united states in the first place? how does it make us safer, happier, more prosperous? these seem like reasonable questions. the exact questions you would want your policymakers to ask. they're not asking them. the first person we asked those questions to come out republik and senator roger wicker implied

we were with vladimir putin just for asking. others just denounced us right off the top. he is insane, meaning me. "the new york post" summarized "shut the f up." these are journalists by the way. of course, shutting the f up is the point of tweets like that. they want you to be quiet, they want you to do what you're told. shut up and obey. there's no chance of that, sorry. glenn greenwald has been following all of this. he joins us tonight. you are leaving aside real question of how you should respond to syria and is it a threat to the world order, i

think that's a fair question. why the universal attempt in the media, to shut down a meaningful conversation about it? >> the only time i think the media praised donald trump was almost one year ago today when he got an airfield in syria and response to what had been alleged at the time. people who hate donald trump go on air every day, took a break for 24 hours to complain him him residential because that's what u.s. presidents do. they drop bombs on other countries with no declaration of war, no reason why u.s. interests or the u.s. borders are at stake when it happens. i think that's the ito's in washington that not only is it an inherent and presidential thing to do to drop bombs and other countries. that's why poles are on world showed the greatest threat to world peace is the united states. also, adam smith wrote 300 years ago that the reason people who

live in capitals love to watch their country bomb other countries is because it gives them a sense of excitement and purpose and this pulsating stimulation. it doesn't matter if it will accomplish anything. it makes us feel strong and powerful and purposeful to do. >> tucker: i think that's right. human nature explains a lot, but journalists exist to push back against that. not necessarily against war, but a rush towards anything. our job is to be skeptical and ask real questions. why is no one doing that and anyone who does is attacked? >> just about every name that you mentioned in the media who attacked you for raising questions about whether or not we ought to actually go in and bomb other countries are neocons. the same people who were doing this in 2002 and 2003 asked whether we should go to war.

they did the same in 2011. they said if you're against that, you wanted to see him slaughter people. it's the standard tactic. what we have now is this kind of union between neocons who are now once again kind of embraced by the establishment of the republic and democrat party and the military of both parties. they love every single war. this crime arises that you're supposed to cheer when it comes time to drop bombs and other countries. not that there is evidence to justify and ask whether it will kill any civilians. if you do ask those questions, it means you're on the side of american enemies. >> tucker: thank you as always always. richard goodstein is an attorney who advised both hillary clinton's campaign and he's got

strikes in syria. it seems to me no matter what side you're on, how is this america domestic and america's strategic interest question mike i haven't found anyone who's willing to answer it or even try. that's a problem, wouldn't you say? >> it would be if there was no answer. i did see your interview with senator wicker last night. you asked the question of how do we know that assad was behind this? because general matos basically said we weren't sure. what we know is that a u.n. commission so links between sarah and gas that we know was used and had the hallmarks but -- >> tucker: i'm totally open-minded. i just want to be certain that we are acting on the basis of verifiable information. in the case of last weekend's attack with the chlorine gas, there is no way we could no in

48 hours, 24 hours once the cable news shows start pushing for war, why stop lying? >> it had all the hallmarks of something we knew. he was destroying towns willy-nilly in the notion that somehow the rebels would kill their own women and children and have them foaming at the mouth, that's a bit much. >> tucker: the first sarin gas attack took place within a week of the trump administration. that happened, we went right back to the original policy. this attack took place less than a week after the truck people said we are going to pull our troops out. i don't know who did it. i'm not accusing anybody. i'm merely saying there's clearly questions that we need to be asking. anyone who does, i'm a living example, is shouted down.

that's insane. >> i wish i took as much pleasure of my critics coming after me as you do. >> tucker: i'm attacked all the time, i don't care. i care about when and where we commit american troops. my son is 21. it's not a joke. >> we are talking about degrading their air force, degrading their helicopters, doing something we didn't do. >> tucker: what does degrading mean? let's not use euphemisms. >> if you blow up planes and helicopters with people in it, so be it. they made their choice to line with assad and these of the people we've seen. we've had photographic evidence dropping chlorine bombs on civilian populations. do i think it's something they should be doing? yes. >> tucker: what's the goal? we take assad out and don't tell

me that's not the plan when he waged war against the government, you're not rooting for continuation. who runs it syria >> i don't know actually if taking him out is the objective. the objective is he knows dropping chlorine gas on people is something where he will pay a price. we have to establish whether he did it or not and the fact is it shouldn't be a feel-good exercise like it was last year. when trump was basically talking about eating that cake with president xi, that was a feel-good exercise. we should do something so that he can't do it as easily. >> tucker: doesn't bother you when there's universal consensus on the left among the established republicans, we know, stop asking questions, let's go into this for reasons that we can't fully explain. we can't tell you how it's going to make you richer or safer or

happier, but shut up and do it anyway. >> the question is, whether assad did it, and has all the hallmarks of assad. i don't blame people for concluding a did. we need to establish that it was? yes. >> tucker: any time a government does something appalling, we need to kill them. >> no. >> tucker: okay. richard, thank you. my head is spinning. one of the internet's top sites just shut down and feminists are delighted, no, they're furious. it's getting confusing and feminist role, so going to explain you. we'll get the new line on that next. before discovering nexium 24hr to treat her frequent heartburn, claire could only imagine

enjoying chocolate cake. now she can have her cake and eat it too. nexium 24hr stops acid before it starts for all-day, all-night protection. can you imagine 24 hours without heartburn? for all-day, all-night protection. you agreed to never give up. to ask, what else can i do? you agreed to remember the good people who rise with every challenge, to remember their strength. to serve, with grit and grace. you made a promise. we did too. the all-new ram 1500.

we've been preparing for this day. over the years, paul and i have met regularly with our ameriprise advisor. we plan for everything from retirement to college savings. giving us the ability to add on for an important member of our family. welcome home mom. with the right financial advisor, life can be brilliant.

♪ >> tucker: the site backpage.com has been shut down. some of the top officials who work there have been in trouble. they've been indicted over the allegations that that site facilitated and child sex trafficking. you would think happy feministd be happy about that. it may peak office talk show host and a feminist who supports keeping backpage up. good to see you. >> thanks for having me back. >> tucker: i know you're a libertarian, i think it's into actually coherent way to look at the world. i know you are a feminist.

they are at odds with each other. the libertarian side of you says people have a right to enter into voluntary contracts. falls under that heading, it's fine. the feminist part of you can't really believe that is empowering to women because it's the opposite. >> we are talking about government shutting down a website. regardless of what you and i think ethically about and other types of sex work, it violates someone's rights. we need to empower women, leave all choices up to them in terms of how to conduct their own personal lives and everything else. >> tucker: that's a libertarian side and i get that. i don't fully agree, but i think it's a reasonable thing to say. the feminist position has nothing to do without. the feminist position is about empowerment, dignity, not objectifying women, reducing them to their physical appearance.

>> so far as i consider myself a feminist, i consider myself a feminist interest might political rights. when there's a actual threat to women's rights, i'm going to be there and argue against taking some action accordingly. with it having to do with types of or other sex work, it's not the mark and way to force a particular type of lifestyle choice and someone just because you disagree with it from your own ethical perspective. we need to back up and look at the perspective of the individual. >> tucker: that doesn't mean that all "lifestyle choices" are the same. i don't know why a feminist group like women's march would describe as "sex workers." many are young, they are being out by older men. the whole thing is disgusting.

>> that problem would be only worse. there are two further troubling implications of something like this shutting down a site like backpage.com. one is in conjunction with a couple of pieces of legislation that are also troubling designed to remove content about sex from the internet. i think that sex is a good thing, i don't think we should be shutting down content on internet. there's been a lot of preemptive removing of content from reddit and other sites because of this. the second thing is i think this is ominous and terms of other types of websites and tech companies coming under government control. we just saw zuckerberg in front of congress today and you think right now, it's just out and sex trafficking website, but next it's going to be tender because people are using that to meet up for sex.

then it will be facebook and twitter. today's websites are not only the method of determining content to change the content for the better, they also collect information about users. it's a very different type of media. we have to be very careful about putting that under government control because you would agree with me -- >> tucker: i agree with you ten years ago when i was a mindless libertarian death of the government was the greatest threat to our freedom. >> we don't want to end up where we were before. in orwell's 1984. if you think information is troubling for someone who wants to make money, think of it in the hands of government. >> tucker: amy, thank you.

it's always nice to have you here. mark zuckerberg testifying on the hill, it's a big story. it's a division of the future. that's next. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr. a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well enough. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and further joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell you doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections.

needles. fine for some things. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. an "unjection™".

non-drowsy claritin 24 hour relief ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. when allergies occur. day after day, after day. because life should have more wishes and less worries. feel the clarity and live claritin clear. where we're changing withs? contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com. termites, we're on the move.24/7. roger. hey rick, all good?

oh yeah, we're good. we're good. termites never stop trying to get in, we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home. the wonderful thing about polident is the fact that it's very, very tough on bacteria, yet it's very gentle on the denture itself. polident's 4 in 1 cleaning system consists of 4 powerful ingredients that work together to deep clean your denture in hard to reach places. it kills 99.99% of odor causing bacteria

and it helps to remove stains. polident should be the first choice of every person that wears a denture, to clean their denture. >> tucker: mark zuckerberg consuming all the headlines recently. lucky for twitter ceo jack dorsey who revealed his terrifying vision of the country's future. he shared an article last week. published on medium. it says there is no bipartisan future for the country. must decide -- one side must win back and destroy the other. describes the country in a nonviolent civil war. the piece is explicit about importing a voter base. and debate. only allow the left to speak. make america a lot more like twitter, a one-party state where armies of serfs served tech gods

like jack dorsey. that's the future they are all hoping for. we didn't have sex-crazed panda site but we are on it because we are journalists. that's it for us. in new york, sean hannity standing by. >> sean: great show as always. covering several major breaking stories. we have new information about robert mueller's never ending partisan witch hunt. russia collusion has officially moved beyond its mandate into a political takedown of the president you elected. in a minute, we will uncover the shocking, unfair two-tiered justice system in the country and show you how abusively biased and corrupt mueller and his team of investigators are and that they have declared an all-out political war against this president. all sorts, the media spinning out of control following the fbi's raid on trump's personal attorney michael cohen. we will explain. also