Transcripts For FOXNEWSW Tucker Carlson Tonight 20180329 : v

But first, to fox chief National Correspondent ed henry whos been following this all day. Initially, democrats like adam schiff laughed off these allegations about fisa abuse, but tonight some of the obama inner circle as well as a former top fbi officials like james comey and Andrew Mccabe may be sweating a bit because this is heating up now with the Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz saying hes going to take a close lookh at it. Remember, attorney general Jeff Sessions had said he wanted horowitz to handle this and sessions got a lot of heat from supporters of President Trump who said the Inspector General would bury this and that this was sessions passing the buck again. This is a sign horowitz is moving full speed ahead on what republican devin nunes first revealed with his memo, laying out how top fbi and justice officials in the Obama Administration got a warrant from the fisa court to spy on h extrump advisor carter page. Most importantly, comey, mccabe, and other officials allegedly used former british spy Christopher Steeles antitrump dossier to get that initial warrant without telling the judge that the dnc and Hillary Clintons campaign had paid for the dirt in that dossier. Horowitz is already working on two other major reports, including comeys conduct, d fbi agent Peter Strzoks Text Messages, and mccabes unauthorized leak the media. We should note that just this week, there have been criminal charges filed in minnesota in a separate case involving a former fbi agent who allegedly leaked classified sensitive information, so the bottom line is this is also a part of Jeff Sessions crackdown on the leaking of sensitive information, a Big Development tonight. Tucker it sure is. Ed henry, thanks for that. Jonathan turley is a law professor at George Washington University Law school in washington, and he joins us tonight. Professor, thanks for coming on. Its the gravest of all charges, the federal government potentially spying illegally on american citizens. Why only now is the ig looking into this . Theres been an interesting phenomenon. A lot of people who have rightly criticized those who want to shutdown the the special counsel investigation, those same peoplo often belittle these allegations about what happened in the secret court. Its a dangerous combination to have a secret court that isha based on a standard lower than the Fourth Amendment that is totally secret and insulated from public reviews if that court is also used for political agenda. We dont know if thats true, but we have worrisome facts that should be looked at. What i think is missing in washington is this sense of balance. Both sides should be investigated. These are troubling issues that are raised by both republicans and democrats. What happened today is that we are going to be guaranteed thatd there will be an independent investigation and horowitz is the perfect guy to do it. He knows the doj. Hes very well respected, and i think what were going to learn from this process could help us in the future. Re tucker what will he be looking at . Looking specifically at that application with carter page. Many people made fun of President Trump when he said that his campaign was under surveillance and people like former director clapper said i would have known if there was an order of surveillance. It turns out there were multipli orders of surveillance. Tucker clapper said that, mocked the idea. Clappers been caught lying to the public before. Is there any way to read this other than as dishonesty . I dont know what clapper was thinking. What we know as there is not just one, but a renewal of these orders. Thats a very serious question to look at. When you have someone who is associated with the opposing partys campaign for president. The judge looked at this and said it warranted a renewal, but that application, while it says that one of these sources was political in nature, didnt reveal everything that the fbi knew about the dossier, that itu was funded by the clinton campaign, that it found that much of the dossier was not corroborated, there were serious questions about the motivation. And the fact that steele himself tried to shop this to the media and had told a justice official that he didnt like trump and wanted to do everything he could that he wouldnt be president. Those are material facts. Does that mean that the court became an adjunct of the dnc or was caught up in a political agenda . We dont know. The point is that the American People have a right to know if this very powerful court was p used for inappropriate or abusive reasons. Tucker have you noticed, briefly, since youve covered and taught the law in this city for a long time, a decline in the concern over Civil Liberties of americans and washington citizens . I have. Weve almost become numb. People have a really low expectations of the government now and thats a real shame. The fisa court has always been a concern for libertarians because of its standard, because of its insularity. When this scandal focused on the fisa court, it was a huge concern because abuses in that court can be magnified in terms of their damage because it is so insulated, it is so secret, and its capable of doing a lot more without people seeing it than a normal court. Tucker i think its terrifying. Potentially anyway. Thank you for that, i appreciate it. In california, weve redefined who the criminals are and as of yesterday, criminals are those who seek to enforce the law, at least in orange county. The sheriff in that county is trying to assist i. C. E. By publishing release times of immigrants who are in custodyt and wanted by the feds come that puts her in conflict with state law. Fl Xavier Becerra has suggested hutchens should be sued or even arrested for her efforts. This seems like the moment where legitimate concerns about what happens to people here illegally become something grotesque in the state starts to act against the interests of its citizens. Here you have a sheriff saying you have potentially dangerous criminals who are wanted by thew feds, theyre going to be released, im going to post the times publicly so the feds can do their job and attain them in the attorney general, the chief Law Enforcement officer of her state is saying she should be arrested. How could you take his side in this against the safety of citizens in california . Two points here, as far as the sheriff posting the names, not just undocumented, but all people who are being released from our jails, as far as my reading of this law goes, that actually complies with california sanctuary law. It would be a different situation if she were singling out people who were on detainers or undocumented people, shes not doing that. In this instance, i disagree with the attorney general because i think if you look at an interpretation of the law,e she is in compliance with what shes doing. I however, we have to remember it when we talk about what theyre doing in california, what the sheriff is doing, the people of california do support these socalled sanctuary measures. Tucker right, lets back up. Hold on. Sanctuary policy. When we speak in general terms, its easy to make generalizations. Lets be specific. Let me finish my question, if you dont mind. What percentage of californians do you think support the mayor of oakland warning wanted criminals that they may be apprehended and then watching as four of them went and committed felonies during the period they escaped apprehension by federal authorities . Do you support that . . In reference to those four individuals apprehended later, i. C. E. Officials and department of Homeland Security officials were not able to tie any of them directly to oakland. They apprehended them, but therb was no direct link foror them. Remember that what the mayor did tucker i wonder at what point is there anything you wont make an excuse for . Here you have guys who got out and committed actual crimes with firearms. One guy gravely injured his wife by beating her. They should have been in federal custody. They were wanted by federal authorities in the state of california made it harder for them to apprehended. Can you say thats appalling . I hear your emotion and this is my answer. When the department of Homeland Security arrives and wants to go after these violent criminals, they need to issue a warrant. What they do instead is detainers. In 2015, i. C. E. Issued Something Like 95,000 of these immigration detainers. 62 of them were not even followed up on in any way and only 50 resulted in actual deportations. Tucker the debate is not whether i. C. E. Is issuing the appropriate detainers or warrants. The debate is over whether the mayor of oakland should be warning criminals that the feds are out to get them. Te what she did was direct people to know their rights based on what she heard and tucker i wonder. Is there any normal person who would support that . Even people who are sympathetic to the dreamers. I get it, we feel compassion, but if you have someone standing up for political reasons and saying you wanted for a serious crime, the feds are coming, thats the beginning of the end. You dont see that . I dont have that cynical take. What i do have is that theyve been celebrated because many appreciate what shes doing. Although its controversial because not everyone likes the idea, they do appreciate that shes directing not necessarily criminals to know their rights and thats what we deal with them on enforcement. Tucker good luck to the communities who are supporting her. Thank you. Chris cuomo says nobody is trying to repeal the Second Amendment, nobody has not been reading the paper. Well tell you who is actually coming up. Plus the Democratic Party has been utterly transformed in the last few years. Thats not an attack, merely an observation. Would the barack obama of 2012 be welcomed in the Democratic Party . Taking a close look. Joining us next is clinton and obama confident Jennifer Palmieri. She will join us in just a she will join us in just a second. Applebees to go. Order online and get 10 off 30. Now thats eatin good in the neighborhood. Tucker cnn poet laureate chris cuomo is wise in many ways. But today he confessed he cant figure out why people seem to think the left wants to ban guns. Youve got the president of United States this morning tweeting that the Second Amendment will never be repealed, we must have who is calling for it . Tucker who is calling fordo it . I dont know. How about former Supreme Court Justice John Paul stevens who just wrote a New York Times piece 24 hours ago with the hard to interpret title repeal the Second Amendment. Brad stevens agrees. You are not going to get a handle on the problem of americas gun culture while there is a constitutional right to own a weapon. Most of the guns in the country isnt done with ar15s. Or the assault weapons i suspect both of us would like to see banned theyre done with handguns. So you at least address the principle that there is a righta to bear an arm, you will not deal with the problem that weve had. Tucker even two years ago, Rolling Stone magazine called for repealing the Second Amendment. This is totally real. Its not a fever dream unfortunately. Dan bongino, as you know, Democratic Party strategists are concerned about saying any of us out loud because they dont want to scare conservatives into voting in the midterms, but i think its kind of out in the open now. This is not a conspiracy theory, this really is the agenda. What you make of it . A couple things here. Number one, let me tell yous something, democrats. If youre going to repeal the Second Amendment, go for it. Good luck. In the 1994 midterms, after the clinton assault weapons ban, we cant figure out what an assault weapon is. Liberals change the definition,d democrats lost 53 seats in rural america. Knock yourselves out. Heres the problem i see. I read an interesting oped piece today and im getting a lot of feedback from my audience on this as well. The problem with liberals like chris cuomo and others, they dont understand us. Liberalism is easy to understand. Its everywhere. Its on tv, its in the media, academia, were surrounded by it. Its the de facto, default normal position for society. To actually understand conservatives and why gun owners would want to own a gun to defend themselves, you have to do some hard work. You have to go to kentucky and go to some areas of florida outside of miami and talk to people, and liberals have zero interest in doing that and thats why theyll never understand american government. Understand american gun owners. Tucker re they are not calling for the abolition of guns. They are calling for a transfer of firearms from the country to the ruling s class. No one is seriously saying that the bodyguard protects the hosts you just saw, should be disarmed. They are saying everyone should be. Its a power transfer. Absolutely its a power transfer. One thing thats frequently cited with the founders is there obvious fight against the monarchy and tyranny which led to the Second Amendment. The other thing if you read af lot of the federalist papers as you can sense a theme of what they want. They wanted a sense of individuality. They didnt want the people to depend exclusively to be surgically attached to the government for the one thing that matters more than anythingd safety and security. They didnt want that. They wanted people to have an independent spirit, and this is what i believe, not all democrats because some are naive and frankly being useful idiots on this, but the radical left entirely understands that this isnt about guns, its about power. Its about removing that symbol of individuality, removing financial power, the power over your own security from peoples lives. This is bigger than just firearms and i wish people on our side, these socalled moderate republicans would get hip to this quick, that this is a bigger agenda for the radical left. Tucker i appreciate the radical left for being honest about it. What im shocked by is the t willingness of people in the media to become handmaidens. T theyre supposed to be challenging, but instead their foot soldiers guard down, thank you for putting that in perspective for us. The world has changed a lot in the last couple of years, but the biggest changes have taken place in the Democratic Party. Its core positions are almost unrecognizable to the ones they held five years ago. Not at an attack, just an observation. We will lay it out for your next for a long time official in the obama and Hillary Clinton regimes who joins us. Also, new ways facebook is invading your life. Ways you never thought of, but you should start thinking about. nadia white the moment a fish is pulled out from the water, its a race against time. And keeping it in the right conditions is the best way to get fish to your plate safely. dane chauvel sometimes the product arrives, and the cold chain has been interrupted, and we need to be able to identify where in the cold chain that occurred. tom villa we took our world class network, and we developed devices to track environmental conditions this device allows people to understand whats happening with the location, but also if its too hot, if its too cold, if its been dropped. dennis woloshuck if you have a sensor that can keep track of your product, it keeps everybody kind of honest that way. Who knew a tiny sensor could help keep the food chain safe . Tucker facebooks Business Practices get more disturbing the more you learn about them and we learn more every day. Now we have new evidence thece company may be spying on users at work and in their homes in ways they never imagined. Brett larson is a fox news tech reporter and anchor for fox news headline 24 7 and he joins us tonight. Were getting some very troubling information about jus what facebook is learning about their users. Theyre listening in on your conversations. How would they do that . Its pretty simple. If youve got the facebook app on your phone, theres a microphone right here. Most of our smartphones haveou multiple microphones on them so they can hear your voice clearly in a loud room. Facebook denies they are doing this, saying they have never listened in for the purpose of advertising. But many users have gone online and folks have even queried me in person with anecdotal evidence that usually goes a little Something Like hey, so i was having this conversation with a friend of mine and we opened up facebook and saw an ad about about something we were justsa discussing. This news also comes as christopher wylie, hes the whistleblower here from cambridge analytica. He appeared before the british a house of commons. Thats similar to our house of representatives. And he said facebook has the ability to listen in so they know if you are walking around, if you are in a loud bar, or if you are at home watching tv. We already know that facebook tracks our every move online, every site you visit, things you like, friends you have, also they can build this increasingly accurate profile about you toli sell you targeted advertising. Facebook Ceo Mark Zuckerberg has been invited to speak to a Congressional Panel<