Eric Swalwell says he's open to jailing gun owners

close

Video

Eric Swalwell says he's open to jailing gun owners

The Collective PAC founder Quentin James weighs in on Rep. Swalwell's gun reform proposal on 'Tucker Carlson Tonight.'

This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," April 16, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Good evening and welcome to "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

Imagine how it must feel to be Beto O'Rourke right now. If you're O'Rourke, you're out there running for President really hard or at least running for Vice President, you're running anyway.

You're given speech after speech every day. "Children are our future. Today is the first day of the rest of your life." Inspiring stuff like that. Deep stuff like that. And there's a physical component to the job, too. You're riding your skateboard for the camera. You're taking God knows how many selfies for your fans on Snapchat and Instagram. It's not an easy gig.

Then one morning, you wake up and discover that your one true love -- the American news media -- have called it off. They've left you for a younger, hotter candidate. Went out for a pack of cigarettes that just never came home. They split with some guy from Indiana. You can't even pronounce the guy's name.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And there he was yesterday front and center; now, third in the polls with a speech that many have said are historic.

JEFF MASON, REUTERS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: He is inspirational so far and that's something that voters absolutely want.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But he has this appeal for a lot of reasons. He is a veteran. He is openly gay. He is from Indiana. He is honest. He speaks from the heart. He seems like he is a lot about empathy here.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You are a concert pianist.

PETE BUTTIGIEG (D-IN), MAYOR: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You speak many languages including Norwegian that you learned because you wanted to read a book. A real renaissance man.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He is like Beto's smarter brother, a little bit.

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: And he's so smart to try to channel Obama.

JOY BEHAR, ABC HOST: The second coming of Obama, huh? We'll see about that. My prayers may have been answered if that's true.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: The draw to this point has been young, fresh, positive and a change agent.

NICOLE WALLACE, MSNBC ANCHOR: This guy is Chicken Soup for my Soul.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Chicken Soup for my Soul -- even by the naughty standards of the news media. This is a new level of political commitment. They don't just want to vote for this guy, they want to consume him like a hearty stew -- every last drop of Buttigieg, yum. They're all in.

What's going on here exactly? Who is this guy? There are a lot of liberals running for President right now. Why would the 37-year-old mayor of some third-string Midwestern city -- no offense, but that's what it is - - why would that guy stand out? Why is he more impressive than, I don't know? Senator Cory Booker or former Governor John Hickenlooper, or for that matter any of the approximately eleven thousand progressive Democrats running for President at the moment. Why is this guy better than them?

That's a pretty tough question actually. We checked. Nobody knows. Least of all, Buttigieg himself. His website gives you his bio and then tells you how young he is -- very young -- it says pretty much nothing about what policies he might support. That's not an accident, but we can't just talk policy points all the time, Buttigieg said recently, "As Democrats, we have to figure out how to tell a better story about our principles," end quote. And actually that's not a crazy point.

Storytelling does matter, but first you have to know what your story is. You have to know what your principles are, and suddenly neither party knows this. They're not sure what they stand for and that's really why things seems so bizarre right now in this country politically, why they are so chaotic.

The confusion is especially acute on the left, we have to say, because when your only principle is gaining power, well, you're out of luck. You wind up elevating people like Bernie Sanders who seem like they're acting on principle, but are just the opposite.

Here's one example. Sanders recently took fire from the left wing think- tank Center for American Progress. CAP noted the irony -- and it's real -- that Bernie Sanders became a millionaire by writing a book about how millionaires are evil.

Sanders didn't like that criticism. Last night, he delivered this response to it. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You raise the issue, I am a millionaire. Well, actually this year, we had $560,000.00 in income, and that's a lot of money and that money in my case, and my wife's case, it came from a book that I wrote. A pretty good book, you might want to read it. It's a bestseller. It's sold all over the world and we made money.

So if anyone thinks that I should apologize for writing a bestselling book, I'm sorry, I'm not going to do it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: So the question is not should you be allowed to write a book? The question is, should you become a millionaire doing it? And Bernie says, "Yes, yes, if you want to become a millionaire, write your own bestseller."

So Bernie's solution is, what? With me now -- entrepreneurship. Just like Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan, it is fine. He's not embarrassed about it and neither were they, but let's not call it socialism. Let's not tell the kids it is socialism. It's not socialism. Bernie may think it is, or more likely, he doesn't think that much about anything. Maybe he is not capable of it or he doesn't care to or whatever. How else to explain this?

Last night on this channel, Sanders seems completely baffled when Martha MacCallum asked him a very simple question. The immigrants being detained at the border, where should they be kept exactly? Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: The overflow that we have no capacity for, where do you think they should go?

SANDERS: We need real comprehensive immigration reform. We don't need -- and let me say this very clearly, we don't need to demonize immigrants. That -- we don't need to do it.

[Applause]

MACCALLUM: But let me ask you to answer my question, which is, right now, if you were the President of the United States, we have overflowing facilities.

SANDERS: Yes.

MACCALLUM: They need to go somewhere because they're in that asylum process.

SANDERS: What about building --

MACCALLUM: Where would you put them?

SANDERS: What about building proper facilities for them right now.

MACCALLUM: Where? Where?

SANDERS: Right on the border. Right on the border at the same --

MACCALLUM: So the people who live on the border should have more facilities in their states, but sanctuary cities, which have said they're open to accepting people should not take any part.

SANDERS: Now, this is a political act on ...

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: It's not a real question says Bernie Sanders. Keep in mind, Sanders is the front-runner in the Democratic race for the nomination right now and he's considered super impressive, at least a man of principle and depth. He's an intellectual. You may not like him, but he's very smart -- really.

So you just ask, where should they be kept? And he basically said, "Well, nobody should be denied entry at the border." Okay, so where are they going to stay? "Shut up. That's not a real question. Don't demonize immigrants. Pass comprehensive immigration reform." He reverts immediately to talking points. That's not impressive, it's buffoonish and it's par right now.

In the Democratic Party, logical incoherence is practically a campaign plank. For example, Democrats are telling us that America sends too many people to jail and they may be right about that. We sent a lot of people to jail. They're telling us we need to let thousands of drug dealers out of jail even though we're in the middle of the worst drug epidemic in American history. They even got the White House to sign on to that as you may have noticed and so it's happening. Legislation passed and was signed.

And yet, even as thousands of criminals stream out to freedom and to voting which is always the point, at least one Democratic Presidential candidate, Eric Swalwell, tells us we need to send a new class of people back to prison. Mass incarceration on a huge scale. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: Criminal prosecution for keeping assault weapons, what's the punishment for people who don't hand in their guns? Do they go to jail?

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, Jake, they would, but I also offer an alternative which would be to keep them at a hunting club or a shooting range.

But I think the greatest threat to the Second Amendment is doing nothing and then the Second Amendment is not an absolute right.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Yes, the greatest threat to the Second Amendment is not sending millions of law-abiding Americans to prison after they've been reclassified as felons overnight. That's the real threat. So how is this going to work exactly? How does Swalwell plan to seize all those weapons and imprison all of those people? And who's going to fight on his side during the Civil War that inevitably will result from this?

Well, we have no idea; and of course neither does Eric Swalwell. He is just making noises he thinks the left wants to hear. That's what they're all doing on every topic. They tell us the Green New Deal is the most important thing we can do. It's more important than the beaches at Normandy. It's more important that winning World War II. It's more important than putting a man on the moon. Neil Armstrong, shh; the Green New Deal is in town now.

Okay, so what's in the green New Deal? Nobody knows. They're making it up as they go along. Impeach Trump. It must be done. That Steyer character is taking a break from private equity or whatever he does to devote his life to impeaching Trump. Okay, what are the charges? They don't know. They don't have any idea. They can't even tell you.

Democrats don't even know who's leading their party right now. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says that she's leading the party. Nancy Pelosi scoffs passively aggressively in response to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LESLEY STAHL, AMERICAN JOURNALIST: She likes to minimize the conflicts within her caucus between the moderates and the progressives.

You have these wings -- AOC and her group on one side.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): Yes, that's like five people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Yes, it's like five people, if only. And by the way, the divide is not between the moderates and the progressives. There's nothing moderate about Nancy Pelosi. There's nothing progressive about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Here's the real division -- it's between equality which is the traditional agenda of the Democratic Party. An agenda that cared about the individual and the constitutional rights that protected the individual and the new wing of the Democratic Party, which news to Nancy Pelosi is bigger than five people. It's the identity politics wing of the party.

Identity politics is the opposite of equality. Identity politics preclude equality. They make it impossible. In identity politics, all groups are not equal. Some are much better than others. Some must be destroyed. That is not equality, it is permanent war.

So that's what's taken the place of concerns about the individual and you can see it even in the personal behavior of the Democratic candidates for President. Beto O'Rourke for example, it turns out gave one-third of one percent of his total income to charity last year, one third of one percent. He's a rich guy, too. Kamala Harris, also a rich person, 1.4 percent to charity.

So why are these people not being called out on this? They want to run the country where they give nothing to charity? Well, because they say the right things, that's why. They check the little identity politics boxes. They're against white privilege.

So it's enough, except it's not enough. This is not a satisfying style of politics, it doesn't actually improve anyone's life. It's not working and the Democrats running for President even though standing on the sidelines know it's not working. They're going to lose to President Trump unless they figure out a way to improve the lives of actual people, otherwise the internal contradictions in this party will become unbearable.

This is the party of hedge fund managers and illegal aliens. What holds it all together? They have no idea, and until they find that out, it's going to fall apart.

Nate Lerner is executive director of Build the Wave. He helped found the group Draft Beto, and we're happy to happen on tonight. Nate, thanks very much for coming on. So it must -- I mean, there's something kind of poignant about watching yesterday's adored figure get cast aside for this new character, this cad from Indiana or whatever, but it does raise the kind of bigger question here which is, what is the principle -- the core principle of the Democratic Party right now?

NATE LERNER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BUILD THE WAVE: Well, I think Bernie Sanders put it very well on your network last night when he said the Democratic Party is about making sure that government and the economy work for all Americans, not just the one percent in corporations and I think that's pretty simple and you see it in our policies, you see it in the way Obama governed, in the way Clinton governed and what the candidates are talking about right now, which is quite different than what the Trump administration is currently doing.

CARLSON: It's interesting though. I mean -- would -- okay, so look, I'm for that. By the way, that's a politics that I agree with and any candidate on either side who puts forward policies that achieve that, I would be for and I don't care what party that person represents, so I'm with him on that.

I just wonder how the actual policy prescriptions line up in favor of what you just said, so obviously unrestricted immigration, more low skilled immigration helps big companies. It doesn't help average people.

The Green New Deal is a massive, obviously, blank check to the power companies. Now, the green power companies, but they're still power companies. Someone has got to build the wind farms. Someone has got to build the solar farm. No, I'm serious, so like what exactly are you talking about? The party that takes all the hedge fund money is the party of the people. How does this -- I mean, really?

LERNER: I mean, we're the party that passed the ACA. We're the party that's working to make college more affordable. We're the party that is out there fighting every day for all Americans to make unions stronger, to increase wages, to make sure that Americans can afford to go to college and have equal access to good education. It's --

CARLSON: Okay, I'm for those things, but how does increasing the number of people in this country willing to work for less through immigration, which is a Democratic priority, it's the number one priority as far as I can tell.

LERNER: It's Trump's number priority.

CARLSON: How does that raise American wages? How does it strengthen the labor unions?

LERNER: We are just responding to his policies.

CARLSON: I'm sorry?

LERNER: We are not for open borders. We are for making sure the border is secure, making sure that immigrants -- illegal immigrants -- are treated humanely when they cross the border, I mean, for those seeking asylum legally are allowed to do so and through the proper channels.

CARLSON: Okay, then that's -- those are -- I agree, look, those are those are things that you're for, I believe it. And you can defend those things. You can't say those things raise wages. They make wages go down. They're one of the main reasons that wages at the low end have remained stagnant for 40 years because of low wage immigration.

So how can you say you're for higher wages and then support something that lowers wages? It doesn't make any sense? Are you following me?

LERNER: I agree with that, but we're for minimum wage, we're for fighting -- what Republicans are fighting for a minimum wage right now, we're seeing across the country Democrats fighting nationwide, state-by-state to increase the minimum wage in their state.

Here in New York, we just increased our minimum wage to $15.00 per hour and it's had massive benefits citywide already.

CARLSON: It's not actually going to solve the problem. Okay, so let me just ask you one last question, a sincere one, and I'm not trying to be mean, but is there a good explanation for Beto O'Rourke giving less than one percent of his income to charity last year? That seems pretty low for someone who wants to remain in public service.

LERNER: I'll let him answer that question. I don't claim to speak for him, but if you want to talk about charity, let's talk about Donald Trump and his charity, which is currently under investigation.

CARLSON: Okay, Trump bad. Trump bad, okay. But we're not -- but hold on. But what's the -- I mean, are you bothered by that?

LERNER: I don't have enough information to I -- all I know -- all we know is the headline that we've seen. It's still very early in that, but at the same time, we don't measure a person's character simply about how much he gives to charity and again, there's -- I think voters care about actions.

CARLSON: Well, it's one of the measures, I mean, rich people --

LERNER: I think voters care about actual issues right now.

CARLSON: For whom much is given, much is asked.

LERNER: And not something small like this.

CARLSON: I mean, and maybe he is giving it and not writing off as taxes. Maybe -- you know, that's a real answer. But if he's giving less than one percent of his total income to charity, he's disqualified from running from Federal office. I mean, you would agree with that, right?

LERNER: I think this is a small issue and voters care about healthcare. They care about being making sure they have a livable wage --

CARLSON: I don't care what he cares --

LERNER: To make sure their kids can go to school. They don't care about small things like this that the media makes a big deal about. They care about the --

CARLSON: It's not a small thing. It's a major thing.

LERNER: It's pretty minor. This is not a big deal.

CARLSON: Thanks very much.

LERNER: Thank you.

CARLSON: No, it is to me. Good to see you, thank you. Fox senior political analyst, Brit Hume has been following this season as closely as anyone and joins us tonight. Brit, what do you think? Do you think that there has been -- I mean, this is a sincere effort to try to understand shifts in American politics. I think the Republican Party is at sea as well. I'm just being honest about it there.

But the Democratic Party does seem like there's been a huge reorientation and I'm not really sure what it's about anymore, are you?

BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: No, I'm not and I think we will soon find out. If you assume Joe Biden gets into the race, how he fares in the early going will tell us something. It seems clear to me that Bernie Sanders whatever you think of him, has a full toehold in the race. He has got money. He has got a base of support and you could tell in that audience last night that he has a strong base of support even in parts of Trump country.

So those are two candidates who are not young and not new faces, obviously, who will -- who I think will be with us awhile. What we can't tell is whether you know Beto O'Rourke or Pete Buttigieg or Kamala Harris or any of these others are going to develop any momentum or going to have any staying power and I think, this is a field that is really kind of shapeless at this stage and is in terms of our understanding of it, it is it in bad need of being winnowed which I think, before very long, it will start to be.

CARLSON: So you saw the Speaker say I thought fairly in hope more than with evidence that there are about five people on Ocasio-Cortez's side of the divide of the Democratic Party. What do you think the real number is between the young insurgent angry left and the Pelosi party?

HUME: Well it's only five people if you're counting Members of Congress out in the country. I think those three have a considerable following and they have an appeal.

The thing you have to weigh against all of this, Tucker, when you start thinking that these people are pretty far out there is, if in the end somebody -- a member of the old guard is nominated. Will people stay home or vote for Trump? I doubt the people who were disillusioned by Joe Biden are going to vote for Donald Trump, just to cite an example. I don't think -- I don't think that's going to happen.

CARLSON: I think that's right.

HUME: So they'll probably come home and vote and they desperately want Trump out of office. They believe he's the Antichrist and the most evil man ever to be President and maybe something worse than that. So they have that powerful unifying factor on that side, which I think will tend to knit the party together when all is said and done.

But between now and then, who knows what's going to happen. We don't know whether young Pete Buttigieg for example it was just having a moment and will prove to be a flash in the pan or whether his seemingly thoughtful approach to things where he seems a little more substantive than Beto O'Rourke for goodness' sake will last a while or whether he'll just fade from the scene, you know, flavor of the month.

It's very hard to tell and you know, we've got all these other characters in there. Eric Swalwell? I mean, it's almost impossible for me to believe that he would get a toehold in this race, but in a field is large, who can tell?

CARLSON: You never know. This could be the Swalwell administration in a couple of years. You never know. Brit Hume, great to see you.

HUME: Thanks, Tucker.

CARLSON: Thanks, Brit. Actress Lori Loughlin has a new strategy to avoid jail time in the college bribery scam, we will tell you what it is after the break. Plus, American colleges increasingly resemble the estates of feudal lords. Even professors are becoming serfs. A really interesting conversation with someone who works in an American college right now about what it's like. Probably not what you expect. That's after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: There are new developments tonight in the college admissions scandal. Many parents have already pleaded guilty in that case, but actress Lori Loughlin remains defiant. Tonight, she and her husband have pleaded not guilty to fraud and money laundering charges now that they argue -- they are arguing currently that they were manipulated by unscrupulous operatives who convinced them they were not breaking the law somehow. Trace Gallagher has more on that story tonight -- Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: And tonight, you have Lori Loughlin and her fashion designer husband, Mossimo Giannulli now reportedly feel like they got scammed in this college scam.

A source close to Loughlin is now telling "Entertainment Tonight" that those who orchestrated this whole cheating scandal misled and manipulated Lachlan about the severity of her involvement and that she and her husband were under the impression they were breaking rules, not laws.

The source goes on to say quoting here, "They realized how serious the charges are, but feel that once the judge hears their story, he will see they had no bad intention." So let's review.

Loughlin and Giannulli newly allegedly paid a half million dollars to bribe their two daughters into the University of Southern California to be designated as recruits for the crew team even though their daughters had never rowed before and now Loughlin and Giannulli say they did not believe they were money laundering, they felt the $500,000.00 would be used as a donation to benefit the school, which begs the question why didn't they donate money to the school?

And a legal expert is telling Fox News that after pleading not guilty, Loughlin and her husband have very few options saying that because they face 40 years in prison, they desperately need to cut a plea deal, but the best case scenario could be maybe 21 to 27 months in prison, although experts also say the final decision is up to a judge.

Loughlin's friends reportedly say until the actress recently, she believed that she'd just end up getting a slap on the wrist. She does not think that anymore, Tucker.

CARLSON: Trace Gallagher. There's something about that story. It's a lot of things, but one of them is amusing, I have to say.

GALLAGHER: Yes.

CARLSON: Thank you for that.

GALLAGHER: Sure.

CARLSON: Every year, college costs more. You know if you have kids or grandkids going. Students graduate with bigger amounts of debt, so much that it's distorting the entire U.S. economy. A lot of kids are struggling to buy homes or start families well into their 30s. Many are living at home because of the debt they face, and yet some people, a small group are getting very rich from this setup.

But what's interesting is that does not include a lot of the people who actually do the teaching in colleges, whether you like them or not. At many schools, many classes are now taught increasingly so by adjunct faculty. They receive low pay and little to no benefits. Many moonlight as Uber drivers or waiters to pay the bills.

In other words, college administrators are the Lords here and the faculty are mere serfs. Now Jason Nichols is Professor of African-American Studies in the University of Maryland. He is a frequent guest on the show. We always debate politics when he's on, but he seemed like someone who might be worth talking to about this because it's an interesting fact.

So Professor, thanks a lot for coming on to explain this to us.

JASON NICHOLS, PROFESSOR OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: Yes, thank you.

CARLSON: We both agree that a huge amount of money, a lot of tax dollars, too are flowing into American universities.

NICHOLS: Absolutely.

CARLSON: Some kids are benefiting, but a lot aren't. They're being crushed by student debt.

NICHOLS: Absolutely.

CARLSON: And yet, it looks like a lot of people teaching the courses aren't benefiting either, so who is getting rich from this arrangement?

NICHOLS: Well, I would say, you know in many cases it's the banks that actually lend people money to go to college. Oftentimes, when you're looking to trace money and who is making money, it's usually the banks. Then of course, at some universities, it may be the football coach, it may be the President of the university. There are lots of people who get paid lots of money and they do their job, they do it well, hopefully.

At some universities, they don't do it so well, but either way they get paid a lot. But you have a lot of adjunct faculty, people who have gone to school for eight, ten, fifteen years in some cases in order to get a Doctorate because they're passionate about teaching and they are actually part of the working class even -- and some of them are even impoverished. They're sitting there and driving Uber just to make ends meet or doing real estate or mowing lawns or doing whatever they can to make money and this is actually really problematic and it's not good for students and learning. That's one of the biggest problems.

CARLSON: Well, that's the problem that I have and I'm pretty hostile to a lot of college professors, but I have kids in college, most people do and when you pay 70 grand a year to send your kids off, they're being taught by someone who's not making enough to live, he must drive an Uber. That tells me that the college is not putting any kind of priority on teaching. They don't care. That's the message I'm getting, am I right?

NICHOLS: Well, I would agree in many ways. I think, teaching is something that is undervalued. We put a lot of value on research and in some cases research that people don't read, and then all of a sudden, teaching becomes a secondary aim of the university and of a lot of departments and so I think that is very problematic.

And also a lot of the people who are working to get a Doctorate are also teaching a lot of the courses and you have a lot of young people who are being taught by people who don't have much more experience than them and at the same time, you know, the people who are studying to get a Doctorate sometimes don't make it through the program because they're working so much teaching the courses.

CARLSON: Right.

NICHOLS: So you know, there is something that needs to be done. A lot of people have said that we need to unionize grad students. We need to unionize adjunct faculty, and so that people can actually make a living wage off of what they do which is so important.

CARLSON: Or blow up the system. It's interesting, I mean, I think we disagree on most political questions, but we're in full agreement on this. This is not sustainable. It's a scam obviously.

Professor, thank you very much for coming on tonight. I appreciate it.

NICHOLS: Thanks a lot, Tucker. Thank you for having me.

CARLSON: Well at least one Democratic presidential candidate has just come out and said it, "If elected I will put law-abiding gun owners in prison." Huh. Is that a winning message? I'll tell you after the break. Plus, Dean Cain tonight on the set in Los Angeles. That's ahead. Stay tuned.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: Well, we've been trying to hide it, but you may have figured out the show is in Los Angeles this week. It's a continental country. We want to see both sides.

Anyway we're here in LA. The other day we passed through a town south of here, Laguna Beach, California and we saw to our surprise that the local cop cars, they were decorated with a logo that features the American flag. Now that should not surprise us, because this is after all America even its westward outpost, it's still America, but it did surprise us. We were surprised that anyone could get away with supporting America in 2019, and it turns out we were right to be surprised.

Laguna Beach Police are now under attack for using the flag. Would that be controversial? We will let an actual Laguna Beach City councilman explain the problem.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE DICTEROW (R-CA), COUNCILMAN: Unfortunately, this has devolved into a debate about what the flag means. What is the symbolism of the flag and there are people in Laguna Beach as well as elsewhere who are saying that the flag is hostile. It's intimidating. It's threatening, and that it's a symbol of racism.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Hostile, threatening, racist -- your flag of course is none of those things. This is all projection. It the left that despises the American flag. They despise it because it implies that America is a country inhabited by Americans rather than a hodgepodge of other cultures united only by economic interest. That's their vision.

If Americans remembered that it's an actual country and not just some massive private equity scheme, they might expect their politicians to focus on the best interests of Americans, the people who live in that country, but focusing on Americans would threaten the hegemony of the Democratic Party so there could be none of this country or sovereignty talk, the flag must go, even in little Laguna Beach, California well.

Well, as we told you at the top of the show, Democratic Presidential candidate Eric Swalwell committed an almost unprecedented act of honesty recently when he talked about guns. He didn't talk about background checks or barrel shrouds. He was far more blunt.

He said, "We're banning semi-automatic rifles if I'm President. We're going to take them from their owners by force and anyone who refuses to comply goes to jail." That's the Swalwell program.

Quentin James is co-founder of the Collective PAC, pretty familiar with Democratic politics and Mr. James joins us tonight. Thanks so much for coming on. So we've had Swalwell on this show a bunch of different times about Russia. We've never had him on about guns. He won't come on. So I'm interested in your take on this.

I don't think I'm misunderstanding it and in fact I'm not, what he is saying is that anybody who possesses illegal product today will soon be a felon when he makes that product illegal and without committing any act of violence, that person can be imprisoned. That sounds like mass incarceration to me. I would think you'd be against it.

QUENTIN JAMES, CO-FOUNDER, COLLECTIVE PAC: Well, Tucker thanks for having me.

CARLSON: Of course.

JAMES: Obviously, again you do have it a little wrong. Congressman Swalwell did say he wants to ban military-style assault rifles. He also said that folks who want to keep them would be able to do so at a gun club or a hunters range in a locker, so it's not taking them by force. It would be a buyback program. Again, this is his proposal, not mine.

CARLSON: No, but he just said it -- and I'm sorry.

JAMES: It is not taking by force.

CARLSON: No, I know it's not your proposal, but he just said -- he said twice. He actually wrote a "USA Today" op-ed saying it and then he just said it on CNN, people who don't give up their guns, will go to jail. He just said that. So it's not a buyback program, that's a gun confiscation by force.

JAMES: No, people who don't follow the law.

CARLSON: If you don't agree, we're going to imprison you.

JAMES: People who don't follow the law will be prosecuted. Now, what the charge are --

CARLSON: Okay, and the law is you can't have the guns in your home. Well, he just --

JAMES: Correct.

CARLSON: He's really -- he couldn't be clearer so like, look, we can't debate what he's saying. You're mischaracterizing it. I just played the clip. Let's debate the proposal itself.

JAMES: Correct, but --

CARLSON: You would get a Civil War if you did this. Why would you want to do this?

JAMES: But there are additional pieces of it that you are not talking about that are really important. And listen, I think -- look the majority of Americans agree that we need to fix our broken gun law system. We have a broken system here where folks are finding loopholes being able to buy ...

CARLSON: Okay, but that's banal. We're talking about a specific -- okay, I got it. Okay.

JAMES: But it's about fixing a problem here of gun control.

CARLSON: No, no. But I just gave you. It's so frustrating.

JAMES: What's so frustrating, Tucker, this is about the issue.

CARLSON: Here is a Presidential candidate -- it's really simple.

JAMES: Yes.

CARLSON: It is the issue. here's a Democratic Presidential candidate who is offering a very specific solution, which you're ignoring because it's embarrassing.

JAMES: I'm not.

CARLSON: Why don't you just say, yes, I support putting people in prison if they don't give up their guns or no I don't support it, but why are you saying this stuff that's irrelevant to the specific ...

JAMES: No, Tucker, I support an assault-weapons ban. I support an assault weapons ban.

CARLSON: Would you support putting people in prison, if they don't give up their guns.

JAMES: If people want to break the law, whatever the punishment for those crimes are, they should -- yes, they should definitely deal with. I do agree with that. Yes.

CARLSON: Man, you guys are reckless. People wouldn't give up -- I would never give up my gun, under any circumstances.

JAMES: But Tucker, we've already had an assault weapons ban in this country for 10 years. We've already done it. Yes, we have in 1994.

CARLSON: I wouldn't. No, no. If I have a firearm in my house and I am posing no threat, I am not giving up, and most Americans wouldn't and you know that. So what are we going to --

JAMES: It's not about any weapon. It's not about any weapon. Keep your pistols, keep your shotguns. This is about military-style weapons and getting them off of our streets.

CARLSON: All right, scary, man. You're scaring people.

JAMES: This is a big problem in terms of preventing ...

CARLSON: You're scaring people when you talk like this. You're scaring me.

JAMES: Tucker, look we all want to be able to defend ourselves. We all -- I agree with the Second Amendment --

CARLSON: No, you want to disarm me because you want total power.

JAMES: I agree with the Second Amendment.

CARLSON: And you know that.

JAMES: No, it's not about total power, Tucker. This is about saving children's lives.

CARLSON: Yes, it's about power and we're hip to this.

JAMES: For all viewers, all of your viewers who are church going ...

CARLSON: All right I am being told we are out of time.

JAMES: ... faithful people, I would hate for them to be able or would I want for them to be able to go to church, go to school and be safe.

CARLSON: To go to prison for exercising their constitutional right.

JAMES: And not worry about -- and not worry about some crazed deranged person coming in and shooting massive amount of people.

CARLSON: Please, don't try this crap on America. All right, we're out of time. Mr. James, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Tiger Woods is the champ once again. He just won the Masters. An amazing story. For once, the country is united in joy that this guy won. Why aren't more sports stories like that? We will ask that question with one of our favorite guests after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: Pretty amazing moment in golf and really in America the other day. A thrilling come-from-behind victory, Tiger Woods wins his fifth Masters on Sunday after 11 years. It got great ratings. Everyone who saw it was excited. For a moment, America seemed united in cheering on a legend.

Sports used to be like that all the time. Now, whether it's the National Anthem or the voting preferences of athletes, as if we should care, sports divide us too often. How can we get back to where we were?

Jason Whitlock co-host Fox Sports 1, speak for yourself and he joins us tonight. Jason, thanks all for coming on.

JASON WHITLOCK, CO-HOST, FOX SPORTS 1: Thank you for having me.

CARLSON: So I'm a non-expert on this question of golf or Tiger Woods, remember, but I saw this and I thought there's something great about this. Why did everybody feel that way about this?

WHITLOCK: America loves a comeback story. And American loves the story that's about family and Tiger Woods and his dad had a special bond that that's where the Tiger Support started. What Tiger represented in 1997 when he won his first Masters and the iconic hug with his father after winning the Masters at 21 and then his dad has passed. That was a tragedy for Tiger.

Obviously, what happened in Thanksgiving 2009 with his wife and Tiger's image blowing up in his face that was a tragedy and then all of the injuries that Tiger has had, and then he had -- he got an addiction to painkillers. Tiger has become a comeback story and an underdog.

Tiger Woods didn't think he would ever play at a high level again for a while. He thought he might never play again and then to see him return to the greatest golf event America has and to win and to win against a group of young guys that basically he created, it's the "Rocky" story --

CARLSON: So it's like as someone who cover sports for living, just give us two sentences of perspective. How remarkable is it as a sports achievement what he did?

WHITLOCK: It's right there with the miracle-on-ice in terms of the hockey and us beating the Soviet Union in hockey and it is right there in terms of a feel-good story. When Muhammad Ali lit the torch in the Atlantic Olympics in 1996 that was a great wonderful story and kind of the bow on Muhammad Ali's career. This kind of feels like even though I'm sure Tiger is going to be in competition for more Masters and major tournaments.

But this kind of feels like the bow to Tiger Woods' career and it's a great -- it's like a movie, man.

CARLSON: I agree completely. So here's the obvious question. If I'm looking at sports as a business and you cover the business of sports a lot, I want a lot more moments like this and I want a lot fewer moments about the National Anthem or some -- I want politics out of my sports.

WHITLOCK: Yes, sports traditionally overwhelmingly have been a platform that bring us together despite our differences and over the last five years, we've turned sports into a platform where we're debating our differences and that's been inappropriate and just quite frankly, it's been bad business.

Because at the end of the day, all of these sporting ranging from golf to football, they're just television shows and they're way off script trying to have these political debates. This is the place for a political debate.

CARLSON: Amen.

WHITLOCK: You don't have a golf club, you're not throwing a football. Everybody's expectations when they come to your show, there's going to be a political debate. There's going to be some disagreement.

CARLSON: I can't throw a football. That's why I'm hosting a talk show.

WHITLOCK: When we go to a football stadium, a basketball arena, a golf course that's not our expectations. We will get in a big disagreement with people. No, we're there to watch athletes do things we could only dream of doing. We're there to be entertained and we're there to --

You may be a right-wing person and this may be a left wing person, but we both love Tiger Woods and we both love football. This is the way we bond.

CARLSON: So I've got to believe that most professional athletes feel the same way. They agree with you and me no matter where they are politically.

WHITLOCK: Most, no question.

CARLSON: So who is pushing sports off into this territory that's divisive?

WHITLOCK: Okay, I come back to the same people all the time. It's Silicon Valley. It's the tech companies. It's social media. Because they've hooked all these athletes from their social media brand and they're more caught up in their social media brand than their brand as great athletes.

Our brains have been hacked. And all of these athletes, many of them, not Tiger Woods but many of them -- in football and basketball other sports, they're addicted to their cell phones. They're addicted to social media. They want to be popular there and the way to be popular there is to be polarizing and divisive.

CARLSON: That's so deep. If I was -- and I and I agree with it completely, last question, if you were coaching a professional sports franchise.

WHITLOCK: It's tough. If I were running one. If I were running one, I would put it in my contracts that my athletes not be involved with social media. The team will have Twitter feeds. The team will have Instagram accounts, but as an athlete, we don't want you involved in that at all.

CARLSON: Wow. Is anyone doing that?

WHITLOCK: No, no, but people want to do it and listen, I think it was just last week, Bob Iger at Disney spoke against Silicon Valley and the tech companies. I think people were finally waking up.

CARLSON: Oh, it's destroying our country. You've been one of the people saying that for the longest time. Jason Whitlock, great to great to see you.

WHITLOCK: Thank you for having me, Tucker.

CARLSON: Thank you. Well they're coming after one of the country's top podcasts for not adequately towing a liberal line. I'll tell you what they're saying after the break. Plus, Bernie Sanders, the latest Democrat to endorse abortion up until birth, the great Dean Cain here to respond to that. He's got a new film on the subject, straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: Joe Rogan is a comedian and television figure and host of a podcast called "The Joe Rogan Experience." You may not know it, but it's a big deal. It's one of the most downloaded podcasts in the world. Suddenly, he has some very angry critics on the left. Media Matters which is a character assassination organization benefiting the Democratic Party, but posing as a non-profit just went after Rogan.

Their complaint, he has too many men on his program. It doesn't matter that it's his program and he can invite on whomever he wants. It doesn't matter that his fans are obviously happy with his program. More people listen to Joe Rogan than watch anything on CNN or MSNBC.

Media Matters is sending a warning. Joe Rogan had better listen to them or they'll crush him. They'll find some excuse to start an ad boycott to take his show away. Now if you ask Media Matters, they'd say they're upset because Rogan doesn't care about diversity, but of course the truth is exactly the opposite.

Rogan is popular precisely because he welcomes a diversity of opinion -- left, right, everyone in between, Milo Yiannopoulos, Elon Musk, Alex Jones -- he has interviewed them all. If you've got something interesting to say, Rogan and his fans want to hear it.

But for the speech police on the left, that's terrifying because they don't control it, so it shouldn't exist at all. Why tolerate freedom when you can have power instead. So stay strong Joe Rogan. I'm sure you will.

During his Fox Town Hall last night, Bernie Sanders said his position on abortion. It is pretty clear, it should be legal without any restriction at all up to the moment of birth. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: With regards to abortion, do you believe that a woman should be able to terminate a pregnancy up until the moment of birth?

SANDERS: Look I think that that happens very, very rarely and I think this has been made into a political issue.

The decision over abortion belongs to a woman and her physician, not the Federal government, not the state government and not the local government.

[Applause]

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: So like 10 years ago that would be considered an extreme position. Today, it's the moderate position in the Democratic Party. Some are defending infanticide just flat-out. Safe, legal and rare. No. That's not at all the position today. It should be free, frequent and horrifying so Dean Cain starred in a movie called "Gosnell." President Trump's screened it at the White House last week. He joins us tonight.

Dean, thanks very much for coming on. So I think of you as having a pretty kind of traditional liberal view of abortion. You've never been advocating for the overturning of Roe v. Wade or anything. Are you surprised by how much the goalposts have moved in the last couple of years?

DEAN CAIN, AMERICAN ACTOR AND FILMMAKER: Shocking to me, really, to be talking about abortion-on-demand and he says it's rare, well how rare? I mean how many -- how many babies that are viable should be murdered, Senator Sanders until it is okay? Is it a hundred? Is it is it a thousand?

CARLSON: So if I said to you -- if you said, you know, this guy got the death penalty. He was executed and you didn't do it, you'd be like, Dean that's pretty rare, okay? Don't politicize it. All right, let's not politicize this now.

CAIN: Well it is -- abortion being a political hot-button issue is not new. That's not new. I don't think people are politicizing it now. It's been that way for a long time and for him to say people are politicizing it, that's insane to me and --

CARLSON: It should be political. Should we allow this in our country or not? That's a political question.

CAIN: A hundred percent and that's why it's been talked about forever, but this new stance is so extreme, it's frightening -- I mean up to the moment of birth and that's abortion-on-demand, anytime, anywhere for any reason is not okay.

I'm actually a pro-choice in my -- I were to be a legislator, I would legislate pro-choice about viability. I'd probably be in that ballpark where most of our states are, 20 weeks, 24 weeks and then there are extenuating circumstances, okay and I do want it to be rare. Personally, I'm very pro-life. I've been one in my life, but it's shocking to me that someone would advocate for allowing it up until the moment of birth.

Kermit Gosnell did that. He had live births and then he killed the children. I mean, he very well could have just given them comfort care until they passed away like Governor Northam suggested, but he actually went out and he snipped their spinal cords and that's why he's in jail forever. But it's shocking to me.

CARLSON: It must have changed your views on the subject doing that movie.

CAIN: It did. It made me less apt to be -- I was a fan, but less apt to be accepting about -- well, I want to push against it more and more because I believe at 24 -- I mean, I've seen too many instances of 24, 26 weeks babies born, 20 weeks and they're viable and they live happy wonderful full lives.

CARLSON: Yes, I mean they're people.

CAIN: Yes, they're people. That's the thing that gets lost is. It's not about the woman, he says -- Senator Sanders says you know, it's about a woman and her healthcare and her body, but at a certain point, at what point in time is that a life? And that is the big question everyone asks.

CARLSON: Last question, do you think we'll start having -- I'm not even advocating for a point of view, but do you think we'll start happening like actual conversations, like adult conversations about this topic?

CAIN: I hope and pray that we do and we need to and where it's at right now, his position -- it cannot be mainstream. It cannot be that -- I don't think America is ready to elect somebody who is going to say abortion anytime on demand at any point in time anywhere anytime anyplace. I just don't see it happening.

CARLSON: I agree with that and I think most people, no matter where they are would find that repugnant because it is. Dean Cain, one of our -- the great pleasures of coming out to the West Coast is seeing you in person. Always.

CAIN: Thank you, sir.

CARLSON: Thank you.

CAIN: A pleasure.

CARLSON: I wish we were staying. But we're not. But we will be back tomorrow from Los Angeles, not to brag or anything. We'll be back at 8:00 p.m. tomorrow night, Eastern. The show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness and groupthink. DVR it if you have an advanced degree in Electrical Engineering from a prestigious university, you will be capable of doing that; otherwise, just tune in tomorrow night 8:00 p.m. Eastern; 5:00 p.m. Pacific.

That's it for us.

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.