This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," April 22, 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."

The holiest day of the Christian calendar turned to tragedy yesterday as you know in Sri Lanka. In a series of coordinated attacks, suicide bombers struck three Catholic Churches, as well as hotels in cities across the country. At least 290 people were murdered, hundreds more were wounded.

Sri Lankan authorities say the attackers were affiliated with a local terror group. The attackers were radical Muslims. Their motives were religious. Their targets were Christians. None of that is speculation. It is true. And maybe because it is so true and so obviously true nobody in authority wanted to say it out loud.

So instead, they went to great lengths to avoid the clear language, quote, "The attacks on tourists and Easter worshipers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity," tweeted Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton used the same awkward phrase. "I am praying for everyone affected by today's horrific attack on Easter worshipers and travelers in Sri Lanka," she wrote.

Easter worshipers. Why don't you say Christians? Nobody worships Easter. There is a reason for course, euphemisms are never accidental. Our leaders believe Christians are the problem, they are the dangerous ones. They can't be trusted. Tell them the truth and they might go crazy and organize a new Crusade, unsheathe their swords and march on Jerusalem. You never with Christians.

Just tonight, "The Washington Post" ran a story with his headline, quote, "Sri Lanka church bombing stoke far-right anger in the West." As if you have to be some kind of Nazi to be upset about church bombings. That's what they seem to think. That's why our leaders consistently ignore the persecutions of Christians around the world when U.S. policy contributes to that persecution and it does, they say nothing about it.

For example, less than 20 years after we overthrew Saddam Hussein, three quarters of Iraq's once thriving Christian population is gone. They have either been murdered by Islamic extremists, ISIS in some cases, or they have been driven out of the country as refugees.

In Syria, Christians live for generations under protection of the Assad family. They don't all have to say that anymore or even know it, but it doesn't make it any less true, it is true and you can talk to the hundreds of thousands of Christians who fled the country since the U.S. began supporting the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad if you want to know details.

But no one in the American media ever asks their opinion and nobody cares. Nobody cares that so many of our allies in the Middle East, countries that receive billions in U.S. tax dollars every year repress Christianity.

Afghanistan for example, receives billions from us every year. Why? So we can turn it into Belgium. But right now in Afghanistan converting to Christianity carries a death sentence, if you are a Muslim. The same is true in Saudi Arabia and the UAE -- both countries backed by the United States.

In Egypt, conversion is legally restricted and while it doesn't carry a death sentence, poll shows that most of the public in Egypt wishes it did. So where is our State Department in all of this? The State Department who spends a lot of time looking out for the human rights of people in countries we can't pronounce. They ignore it. When was the last time, the United States pushed another country to treat Christians better? Well, in some cases, it would be pretty easy to do that, we could demand that Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or Afghanistan -- countries were dependent on us -- implement full freedom of religion before we give them any more USAID. Why would we do that? Because we are afraid of being criticized by the nihilist at "The Washington Post?"

Maajid Nawaz is the founder of Quilliam and the author of "Radical: My Journey Out of Islamist Extremism," and he joins us tonight. We are always happy to have him. So, explain if you would the thinking behind not just being straightforward with the public about an event like the one we saw yesterday in Sri Lanka.

MAAJID NAWAZ, FOUNDER, QUILLIAM: Look, Tucker, let me begin by saying I am a Muslim and I express my deepest condolences to Christians around the world due to this and after this horrific jihadist terrorist attack in Sri Lanka that claimed nearly 300 lives and look, I am married to -- your viewers may not know, I am married to an American from a Catholic family and it's why it's so important for me personally to make this point that there are Muslims around the world that find this horrific.

Unfortunately, some of our leaders and in particular some of the political leaders that you've named are suffering from what I believe is an intellectual and moral retreat from our enlightenment values and also there's a level of political cynicism involved here as well.

The political -- the intellectual and moral side, they, for a while now whether when Barack Obama was President or even after, they had been unable to, and I've been calling it the Voldemort effect even on your show, they've been unable to name Islamist extremism by name and jihadist terrorism being as violent manifestation because they genuinely believe that a bigger threat due to their political perspective is white supremacy and far-right extremism, and then of course, there's the pragmatic political side of things they are pandering to a certain vote base and they fear that by naming these things, even if they wanted to, it would cause them trouble with their vote base.

And that's not how I operate. It's not how I think any decent human being should operate. What happened in New Zealand was a white supremacist terror attack and what happened what's happened in Sri Lanka now is a jihadist terror attack and it behooves us all to speak plainly about this so that we can address these problems head-on.

CARLSON: Yes, I mean what does it say about how they feel about their own populations in this supposed democracy that we have that they can't be straightforward as if most Americans can't handle the idea of knowing that Islamic extremists did this and still -- you know, and not hate all Muslims? I mean, they have a opinion, I think of their own population.

NAWAZ: Well "The Washington Post" analysis you referenced that feared a far-right backlash and I've read the article in question and it selects only those who are from the right of the political spectrum and their reactions to the terror attack in Sri Lanka, the jihadist terror attack. It's very easy to do that, by the way. It is lazy bait journalism and I advise fellow journalists and broadcasters not to stoop to this level.

I could do that for example after the New Zealand white supremacist terrorist attack. I could have said that the East fears a backlash from jihadists and I could have hand-selected and quote not only Islamist and jihadist reactions to the New Zealand attack to try and portray the fact that only the jihadists and Islamists what upset about it. It's a dishonest way to address any issue post-crisis.

I think sadly, Tucker, too many people play politics with tragedy and they allow for their own framework and their own biases to influence how they view human tragedy and then I use that to peddle their own political narrative and it is often not the right thing and I think we should all try and be as consistent as possible.

CARLSON: Yes, and stop lying because lying makes everyone cynical and it causes the backlash you fear, actually, I think

NAWAZ: Absolutely, absolutely.

CARLSON: Maajid Nawaz, thank you. A wise voice as always in a moment like. Thanks very much.

NAWAZ: Thank you.

CARLSON: Nina Shea is a religious freedom expert at the Hudson Institute here in Washington and she joins us tonight and in fact, Nina, I would say that undersells what you do, you are the most consistent and I think the most knowledgeable expert on the persecution of Christians around the world.

NINA SHEA, FREEDOM EXPERT, HUDSON INSTITUTE: Well, thank you, Tucker and thanks for focusing on this important issue.

CARLSON: So give us an overview of the picture.

SHEA: Well, let me just say that first that this was a message not just to those Christians who were attacked and killed over the weekend -- over Easter weekend -- but it was a message that there is basically a war on Christianity from a certain segment of the Muslim population, a Muslim extremist population and we're seeing that intensify over the last decade in places like Egypt where Sam Tadros who works at the Hudson Institute and is an analyst there who is a copt himself estimates there were about 500 church attacks in the last couple of years.

These occurred on Palm Sunday, a coordinated attack a couple of years ago on Christians in December around Christmas time at the seat of the Coptic Pope, Saint Mark's Cathedral in Cairo. I was just there and saw that sight. It's heartbreaking and it happens quite often in the village including last week in Egypt.

CARLSON: So where is the United States State Department? Where are American Churches?

SHEA: It's not saying enough and the President of Egypt tends to go after those bombing attacks that ISIS does, but that there are extremist Muslims in the local neighborhoods that are attacking churches with impunity and have been for quite a while in Egypt.

Thereabout, 10 percent of the population are Christians there. Nigeria estimated 900 Church attacks in one recent five-year period. So these are again happening on Christmas, on Easter and it doesn't matter what stripe of Christianity you are, it's across the board.

CARLSON: So I mean, there are powerful churches in the United States, rich churches for sure, powerful clergymen, I don't hear this issue addressed by them ever. Why is that?

SHEA: Well, I don't think people are aware of it. They're afraid of talking about it. Some of them are afraid that they will get retribution by the extremists if they talk about it back in those countries, so there are varied reasons why people don't talk about it, but the short term solution is security.

CARLSON: Yes.

SHEA: And we need to promote that and in fact, the United States did give a quiet warning to Sri Lanka that churches were going to be attacked over Easter and they did not heed it. So we need to elevate that.

CARLSON: So we've sent, you know, untold billions into Afghanistan which is an entirely separate debate, but you think that would at least buy us, a majority Christian country a change in the law that makes it a death penalty offense to convert to Christianity. Why would we ever fund the government --

SHEA: Yes, and why we had our troops there, they closed -- they broke the lease on the long-term lease in the last Church in the country and closed it.

CARLSON: So why would we put up with that?

SHEA: The government did that. We don't -- we sell ourselves short. We don't ever defend Christians. We always have higher priorities you know regarding terror, but we don't understand, there's a link between the two.

CARLSON: Yes.

SHEA: And the weakness of those Christians feeds this kind of -- that makes them a very soft target and the governments don't feel like any pressure coming from us, they feel pressure coming from one side -- that's the extremist.

CARLSON: That's such a smart point. There is a link. There is absolutely link. Nina Shea, thank you very much.

SHEA: Thank you, Tucker.

CARLSON: Well, the Mueller report came out last week -- no collusion, no crimes by the sitting President. Democrats are still talking about impeachment. Will they do it? We'll talk to someone who might know the answer, after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: Democrats have now had a full weekend to read the Mueller report, to lovingly savor every word, to digest it. Does it have -- and this is the key question from day one, it was the key question -- the crimes we've been hearing about for two years that would justify hiring a special prosecutor, and after having done that, it would justify impeachment.

Democrats are going to have to make a decision on that. Lawmakers and presidential candidates are ignoring the report's actual conclusion and it looks like they may be demanding impeachment anyway.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MAXINE WATERS (D-CA): I think that when you look at this report, you can see that there's enough information there, not only on obstruction of justice, but also on collusion or conspiracy whatever you want to call it, to move forward with impeachment on this President.

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We're not farther away from impeachment. If anything, when you read about this conduct, we need to figure out how we're going to hold this President accountable.

CHUCK TODD, MSNBC HOST: Do you think this is impeachable?

REP. JERROLD NADLER (D-NY): Yes, I do.

JULIAN CASTRO (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I think it would be perfectly reasonable for Congress to open up impeachment proceedings.

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We have a Constitution of the United States and it says when a President engages in this kind of activity, then it's time for impeachment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: You heard it. Time for impeachment. Richard Goodstein is an attorney and former adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton and he joins us tonight. Richard, thanks a lot for coming on.

RICHARD GOODSTEIN, FORMER ADVISER TO BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON: Sure.

CARLSON: So when does impeachment start?

GOODSTEIN: Well, I'll tell you what, I've actually gone both ways myself. Here's what we know from the Mueller report. You know people can make fun of why? Why did we have it? We now know indisputably that Donald Trump won with the help of a hostile foreign power and that he knew he was getting that help. He actually solicited the help. He did nothing to alert authorities to it and he's done zero to keep it from happening again.

CARLSON: So okay, so you answered your own question. We're impeaching him. When is that starting? Because we've been waiting for now three years, you tried to take it away from him, obviously the nomination then at the Electoral College, then we're going to impeach him. First we have to wait for the Mueller report. Okay, years have gone by. We have the report, let's stop messing around. When does impeachment start?

GOODSTEIN: Well, I think we need to have hearings first.

CARLSON: Why?

GOODSTEIN: Well because, the public first of all and even Congress has only gotten a redacted version of this report, correct? So they don't even know the full story.

CARLSON: Wait, I'm totally confused. Why wouldn't that just come out at the impeachment trial where all is revealed?

GOODSTEIN: The point of the impeachment -- well, no -- you only go forward as would any grand jury with an impeachment which is the accusation not the trial by virtue of having the evidence and the evidence will be having Don Jr. and Roger Stone and Manafort and all these people come forward and say what happened.

CARLSON: Okay, okay but why wouldn't -- I mean, it's not like we're going to learn story changing facts from the redactions.

GOODSTEIN: We know there were a lot of things that Mueller didn't get because he didn't -- look, he didn't put key people under oath.

CARLSON: Look, I'm being disingenuous, I'll admit it.

GOODSTEIN: I know.

CARLSON: We both know he is not going to be impeached. We both know that Democrats want to have it both ways where they can pretend it's serious enough to merit impeachment, but they don't actually want to have an impeachment because they will lose and be punished by voters.

GOODSTEIN: No, actually I disagree with that and the evidence is not just when they pushed Bill Clinton to impeachment, yes, the Democrats won five seats, but George W. Bush rode that to a fare-thee-well, right? About how he was going to have a cleaner White House and I would say Jimmy Carter, to a certain extent ran the Nixon impeachment to success.

CARLSON: Okay, but I guess, just look, you can't tell --

GOODSTEIN: So I disagree with the notion that somehow it's going to backfire.

CARLSON: You kick -- then why not do it? Because you can't tell --

GOODSTEIN: Well, because it's a question of whether it's a right or wrong thing.

CARLSON: Please, you can't tell the public for three years that the guy is a Nazi. He's a traitor. He is working with a hostile foreign power. I mean, every single day for years we've been hearing this, but no we can't, we can't impeach him because we can't convince the Senate to convict? So why do you think you can't convince the Senate?

GOODSTEIN: Mueller didn't look into the whole Nazi stuff, that was Charlottesville, but that's all another thing. Look, the fact of the matter is, the House will bring all of these people in, maybe they will get access to all these boxes of evidence that Mueller has and maybe not.

And maybe they have to basically again, bring everybody else under oath. Is it a waste of time? It's not only in so far as, if you think the Watergate hearings that Sam Ervin conducted were a waste of time, then you'd think these were too.

I think most people in the public contemporaneously, I was, thought that was actually a good airing of the facts.

CARLSON: Okay, I don't think this is Watergate. I don't think in the end anything is going to happen at all and I think what Democrats are actually doing is missing an opportunity to at least think through how to help the country in some tangible way before they get beaten inevitably once more in a presidential race that they could have won. That's where we're going, right?

GOODSTEIN: It's worse than Watergate in the sense that there is not just a hostile foreign power, but because of Donald Trump laughing about, it's almost an invitation for China and North Korea and Iran to do the same darn thing.

CARLSON: That's not going to happen. There are a lot of -- Russia poses no threat to the United States.

GOODSTEIN: Those countries do and there's been --

CARLSON: And all these Republicans who claim otherwise are truly the dumbest people. They don't even have any reason to claim it, it's a joke.

GOODSTEIN: But if you think there are countries out there that are a threat to the United States --

CARLSON: Yes, China is a threat.

GOODSTEIN: And then by basically looking the other way and doing nothing to stop it again, what's to stop China?

CARLSON: So the most anti-China President in the history is responsible for Chinese aggression.

GOODSTEIN: No, I am not saying he is, but I am saying he is inviting it next time to help him. If it works for him.

CARLSON: Wow. Amazing. Richard, thank you.

GOODSTEIN: Of course.

CARLSON: Herman Cain withdrew his name today as a candidate to serve on the Federal Reserve, he didn't withdraw because he was incompetent or sick or because he was shown as an unsuitable pick, he dropped his bid because he was blackmailed into doing that.

Attorney Gloria Allred teamed up with a woman who said she once had an affair with Cain and the two said they would expose him to public humiliation unless he withdrew his name.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GLORIA ALLRED, AMERICAN ATTORNEY: Ginger, if asked at the United States Senate Banking Committee hearing will also be willing to identify certain parts of Mr. Cain's body to corroborate her testimony. This testimony will not be necessary if Mr. Cain withdraws his name from the vetting process and/or the President decides not to formally nominate him.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Jason Nichols is a professor of African-American Studies at the University of Maryland and he joins us tonight. Professor, thanks for coming on.

JASON NICHOLS, PROFESSOR OF AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: Thank you for having me.

CARLSON: So you said pretty clearly you are not a fan of Herman Cain. You don't think he should have gotten this job.

NICHOLS: Absolutely.

CARLSON: You don't support Herman Cain in any way.

NICHOLS: I do not.

CARLSON: What do you think, given that, of what just happened to Herman Cain?

NICHOLS: So well firstly, we have to say that Herman Cain says that it was about his pay cut or something is the reason that he withdrew his name, but if you take what Gloria Allred just did, and I believe Gloria Allred has done some positive things in our career, you know, in terms of giving voice to people who are voiceless, but doing things like that actually undermine the movement, undermine with people like Tarana Burke and other people are doing in order to give voice to women.

CARLSON: So what do you -- I mean, because to me it looks like blackmail. She's saying, "We're going to show -- we're going to depict your genitals if you don't do what we want you to do," which is pull your name and he clearly caved. Understandably.

NICHOLS: Right.

CARLSON: Do want to live in a society where people can be blackmailed like that?

NICHOLS: No and I agree with that. I mean there were credible allegations against Herman Cain, so we have to state that.

CARLSON: Allegations of what?

NICHOLS: Sharon Bialek was a woman who said that Herman Cain had done some things that were really, really -- you know sexual misconduct. But the case --

CARLSON: But the one I read about was the woman who said it was consensual.

NICHOLS: Yes, that is where it's problematic is when you conflate something that is consensual with sexual abuse. When you conflate someone who is upset about not being acknowledged with someone who has been sexually assaulted and that's the big problem here and what they did to Herman Cain in that regard saying that, "We're going to expose what your genitals look like," which he is an old black dude, I can pretty much kind of guess.

But either way, that they're going to do that was totally wrong and I would agree with you that Gloria Allred is actually undermining things and I can tell you that I actually believe that this could be used against women in the future.

CARLSON: Well, you think?

NICHOLS: This is going to be really problematic. This is actually going to hurt women. Men don't get body shamed the way women do and so some dude who had an affair with Kamala Harris or you know or with Liz Warren is going say, you know, kind of threaten her in the same way and I think this is really problematic. I think you know, and again the other thing about - -

CARLSON: Well it hurts men, if I could just also say, which is every bit as bad as hurting women because human beings are equal in their inherent --

NICHOLS: And I will say one other thing and that is, it seems unfortunately for the right price, you had someone like Lisa Bloom who is Allred's daughter who actually supported Harvey Weinstein and was talking about putting things out against Rose McGowan and other people who were fighting the #MeToo Movement and fighting that fight that was so positive. She was actually supporting Harvey Weinstein for a while.

CARLSON: Of course, because she was getting paid. I mean, they are obviously.

NICHOLS: Yes, and it's really troubling. I believe that there is --

CARLSON: But why do we take them seriously? I mean they wouldn't exist without the media giving them airtime and nodding, "Oh, they're advocates for women." They're advocates for themselves. They are totally dishonest, obviously.

NICHOLS: I mean, I want it like I said -- you know, I want to believe that there's some sincerity there.

CARLSON: You're a good man, Professor Nichols.

NICHOLS: I just think that they're making a big mistake in what they're doing and in the way they're handling it.

CARLSON: I don't think they care, but I admire your high hopes for them, anyway, good to see you, Professor. Thank you.

NICHOLS: Thanks a lot, Tucker.

CARLSON: Well, a year ago, the creepy porn lawyer was traveling aboard a luxury private jet. It was his. How did he afford that? Well, we know the answer. We're going to tell you tonight.

Plus, we have footage shot by one of our producers last week that shows in pretty shocking detail what is happening in one of this country's greatest cities. That's after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: Well, the creepy porn lawyer has simple old-fashioned taste. He is happiest inside his CNN studio, but when he is traveling, he likes to travel in style aboard his own private jet. Now how could he afford that? Is ambulance chasing that lucrative? Well, no, not unless you rob your clients including an NBA player's ex-girlfriend.

Alexis Gardner had hired CPL to represent her against Miami Heat star Hassan Whiteside. Creepy porn lawyer succeeded in getting a $3 million settlement, but according to prosecutors, he immediately stole two and a half million from the settlement to buy a jet share. His poor client received less than a tenth of that. Keep in mind CNN told CPL was a presidential contender. Maybe, he was just trying to get used to traveling private.

Well, virtually everything you hear repeated on television if they repeat it enough probably untrue. Border is a racist. We're stronger, the less we have in common with other people. Kentucky high schoolers are privileged elites while journalists and DC are warriors for the oppressed. It's all fake. These are lies and they repeat them over and over and punish people who dissent because the lies give them power.

Well Sohrab Ahmari has decided to fight back in the most radical possible way by telling the truth no matter what other people think of it. He just wrote a piece for the "New York Post" with this defiant thesis no matter what they tell you, men cannot give birth, only women can. Sohrab Ahmari joins us tonight. Thanks for coming on.

SOHRAB AHMARI, OP-ED EDITOR, NEW YORK POST: Thanks for having me, Tucker.

CARLSON: So I guess this is an obvious point, but how much the world has changed even in five years where women give birth, men don't is considered some kind of radical or hateful statement. How'd that happen?

AHMARI: Oh it was a concerted movement of the trans movement which has sought to radically redefine the relationship between both sexes and what each sex really is. The fact that men and women are different chromosomally at the point of conception, men and women are different, we know that.

But because there's a tiny minority of people who feel discomfort in their bodies, the trans movement has set out on this what I would as a totalitarian effort to ask each of us to say no, men can have babies and women can have penises. It's this bizarre idea, but we've gotten to this point and as you said, it's a -- you're a dissident now if you describe this basic biological reality.

CARLSON: Well, so that's the thing, I mean I think most Americans are kind of happy to let people believe whatever they want to believe and you want to live in your own fantasy. I live in my own fantasy half the time, it's fine. You know what I mean?

Like, I think we all do -- but the idea that you get to impose your fantasy and other people and then get them fired or crushed if they won't play along -- that is totalitarian, no?

AHMARI: It is. It's kind of like Winston at the end of 1984 where you have to say that he is holding up your torture, is holding up five fingers when in fact he's only holding up four and if you say five, he'll give you pain and the pain comes. Look we're not being dispatched to the gulag for saying this, but the pain comes in the form of pressure on your career, pressure on your public presence if you at all try to speak up against this stuff.

And it goes to -- look, at the bottom of this is this desire for radical autonomy. Autonomy to the level of, "I can also redefine what it means to be a man or a woman," and you define autonomy that wide enough for me, Tucker, for me to be able to experience my fullest autonomy, you have to say your name isn't Sohrab, it's actually Sabrina and you know that I'm a woman and vice versa. It's this idea of autonomy push to such an extent that it becomes actually authoritarian.

CARLSON: Well right and it obviates -- it eliminates my autonomy, like I have to play along, and by the way, I don't think we're overstating the extent of the repression. You and I have to really of the only jobs in America where you could have this conversation in public without getting fired.

The average person could. If you worked at some investment bank, some insurance company, pick a place, you'll get fired for saying this.

AHMARI: Oh yes. You absolutely would, you absolutely would. Look, I mean, look at the people it harms by the way, it includes lots of women, right, we now have a lot of women's athletics being dominated by people who have the raw physical capabilities of male bodies because they have that.

And now through this idea of men being able to become pregnant, we're reframing pregnancy. It's something that's since time immemorial been bound up with what it means to be a woman, it is something, you and I, Tucker, could never experience. Now that is becoming a male experience as well.

CARLSON: Right. I don't know -- I don't know how that empowers women and by the way, where are America's biology teachers when you need them? Right? Just to stand up and say, "I'm sorry, I'm not taking a political position here but like here are the facts as we teach them and have known them."

AHMARI: There are a few, right, again they're dissident voices. Paul McHugh -- the great preeminent psychiatrist of his generation at Johns Hopkins is one of the dissidents, but the ideological movement has so made inroads even in the medical profession where within the medical profession, the dominant consensus now is that a biological sex, the reproductive organs that you're born with is not the basis for determining your gender.

So it's not just in the media or the public sphere, it's within among endocrinologists and psychiatrists and so forth, this stuff has become the norm and it's just pure power politics.

CARLSON: Only rich countries can afford to be this decadent and silly, I would say. It will end at some point. Sohrab, thank you very much for joining us tonight.

AHMARI: Thanks for having, Tucker.

CARLSON: Well, overwhelmingly speaking of kids, Americans want to have them. They want to have more children than they actually have. This is one of the core problems in our society. Instead of fixing this or even trying, politicians tell us that we need to just bring in new people in order to keep our population stable.

Elizabeth Warren recently proposed giving a $50,000.00 student loan amnesty to all American college grads. Here's a counterproposal. Why not forgive all the student loans of Americans who get married and have kids? It might help. Why is that crazy?

Penny Nance is the President of Concerned Women for America and she joins us tonight. Penny, thanks very much for coming on.

So most Americans want to have more children than they can afford. Why is this not like the basic promise every politician running for every office is making? If elected I will help you have as many kids as you want.

PENNY NANCE, PRESIDENT, CONCERNED WOMEN FOR AMERICA: Well, I don't know how that works out economically, but we have to actually address this because it has implications for our elderly, right?

And so security and even like new markets for corporations, there's -- it means, if we have less children, if the population continues to decline we're not at replacement rate. Replacement rate is 2.1, we're at 1.7. We're not going to be able to retire nearly as soon and we're going to have to work harder. And so this is an important issue.

American women say the vast majority want to have children and women with minor children, 60 percent say they want to spend more time with them, and if they had their ideal situation, 60 percent would only work part-time; another 19 percent would actually stay at home with their kids while they are little.

CARLSON: So why aren't people listening to America's women? I don't understand. I mean, why wouldn't a political party say here's a huge group of people who want something -- deeply want something, why don't we help try and provide it?

NANCE: Well, we need to and the Republican Party needs to step up actually and lead on this. We're trying to do more, Concerned Women for America worked with a Ivanka Trump to increase the child tax credit from a $1,000.00 to $2,000.00. That's not enough. It should be more.

We are talking through policies now that will allow women to dip into their Social Security ahead of time while they're at home during family leave, while they're with their little babies for three to six months and then just delay getting it later or less on the backend.

We've got to really think through. We need to talk to corporations. We want more flexibility as women in order to be able to --

CARLSON: But six months is not a childhood. I mean, shouldn't we be shooting for like six years?

NANCE: We need to find proposals that give more flexibility to women and that is a broader conversation including corporate America, including removing all the many, many regulations that stop us from having cottage industry.

I mean, the issue -- the point now, because of high taxes, because of the world we live in, we're at a two-income family is the norm and most people feel like they need that extra income.

CARLSON: Of course.

NANCE: And many women want to work at some level, so let's help them be flexible. Let's think of policies that actually give them the maximum amount of time that they want to be at home with their kids or a dad wants to be at home with the kids and help them to actually --

CARLSON: It seems like that would be a winning -- I don't know why it never occurs to anyone, instead we get these lectures about socialism on one side or you can be an entrepreneur on the other side, how about I just want to raise my kids? How is that? Why is that hard?

NANCE: And we have changed and actually, I talk to women all the time and they say, "I'm just a mom." We've got to change that. There's no such thing as "just a mom." That is the most important job and by the way, the hardest job I ever had. Children are --

CARLSON: Well, of course, people just internalize propaganda from like nine unhappy people who, some, write our social policies.

NANCE: That's right.

CARLSON: Shh. No more listening to them. I honestly think.

NANCE: Psalm 127, children are a gift from the Lord, they're his reward.

CARLSON: There is nothing more important. Penny, thanks. Great to see you.

NANCE: Thank you.

CARLSON: Facebook already knows more about you then your friends know, your parents know, probably that you know about yourself unless you're deeply self-aware. But they want to know more and they're trying to convince Americans to put cameras inside their own homes, inside their bedrooms even. Is that a good idea? We'll tell you after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: Facebook is the world's most popular social media network. You might think the company's billion plus users are its customers, but they're not. They and their personal information are the product that Facebook sells to its advertisers. That's the actual arrangement.

At a recent conference, Facebook's former Security Chief warned that the CEO of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, has quote, "More data about what people want to do online than anyone else in the world." Zuckerberg may have the most information, but he wants still more data.

Facebook is now using slick advertisements to try and convince you to put new more advanced cameras inside your own home. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NEIL PATRICK HARRIS, AMERICAN ACTOR: Happy Mother's Day.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's so good to see you.

HARRIS: Are you just hanging out with the moms of other famous people?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What's up, Neil?

HARRIS: Hi, Venus and Serena's mom, Snoop Dogg's mom, Odell's mom. Am I in trouble?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, honey. There's nothing wrong.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Although he does look thin.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He does look thin.

HARRIS: Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Come on over here and let us look at you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Roger McNamee is a former adviser to Mark Zuckerberg and author of the book, "Zucked," and he joins us tonight. Roger, thanks very much for coming on. It looks from that ad that a lot of really cool successful people are allowing Mark Zuckerberg to put surveillance cameras inside their homes. Should I do the same?

ROGER MCNAMEE, FORMER ADVISER TO MARK ZUCKERBERG: I would not recommend it, Tucker. I would not recommend it to anybody watching this show now. I mean, you I the point correctly before. Facebook is in the business of surveillance, right, they gather all the data they can about -- it's not just the stuff we put into the system, mind you. They track us wherever we go on the web and not only that, they buy data from banks and credit card processors. They buy it from health and wellness applications. They buy it from our cellular carriers to find out where we are.

They buy all this data so they can create a data avatar for us and that as you say, and that makes us maybe not even the product, we may be the fuel for their business model.

CARLSON: I think that seems right. Why is it that there's almost no skepticism in the media about this or any of the other companies? I mean, Kara Swisher who covers technology for the "New York Times" basically writes press releases for these companies. Why does no one push back ever?

MCNAMEE: Well, actually to be clear there is the beginning of a change, but I think you're right. I think there is a default mechanism to trust tech because for 50 years, Tucker, technology was something that made our lives better and I think what happened with Facebook, Google and now increasingly, Microsoft and Amazon is they've taken advantage of 50 years of trust and goodwill and they're starting to exploit that in a way that really takes away our choices.

The way to think about it is the business model they've built is really they're trying to use data to take away uncertainty for advertisers. The problem is, in doing so, they're taking away the choices for us, the consumer and choice is what America is all about. It's about our freewill and our ability to lead our own lives.

And I just think there's a philosophical debate that has to happen now and as you know in which you've been an important part of, I'm trying to lead this debate and say, "Hey, wait a minute. There are two points for you. You guys want to make the world more efficient. I want to have more liberty." I want to be able to have more choices and I want to see which side wins, but I like my side better in that debate.

CARLSON: So in this case, this Amazon product, the camera pivots around the room kind of following you obviously, shooting footage of what's happening inside your home in your most private spaces which is obviously the creepiest thing that's ever happened.

MCNAMEE: Not happening.

CARLSON: But what happens to the data? Like how do we know that data is secure? How do we know it won't be used against us? Why are we so trusting?

MCNAMEE: Yes, there's no reason we should be trusting and the same thing is true of Amazon Alexa and Google Home and the other products that either listen to you or film in your home. It's crazy.

I mean the notion that we would let one of these things into our kitchen, much less our office or our bedroom, you know. Right now, there are no rules to protect us. All we have is the company's a word for it that there will be no abuse and of course, these things are vulnerable to hacking and the people who work there are vulnerable to all kinds of exploitation.

So my view is that we should stop all of these things and push back really hard. I mean, Tucker, I want to go -- I'm saying to every single person who is running for office, whenever I'm on your air or anybody else's, I'm just saying we need to ask the simple questions -- why is it legal for there to be a third-party market in our personal data without our involvement or our permission?

CARLSON: Exactly.

MCNAMEE: Why should they be able to trade our financial data? Our health data? Our location data? Why should Google be allowed to scan our e-mails for their economic benefit? It's nuts.

I mean if they were at the Postal Service, they'd get arrested for doing that and I just think that there have been no rules for too long and it's time to have some rules.

CARLSON: The real threat as you know is Putin and Russia, but you make some solid points, Roger, anyway, great to see you. Thank you.

MCNAMEE: Thanks very much. Take care.

CARLSON: Well it's Earth Day, instead of cutting his own carbon footprint, Bill de Blasio has a new plan -- stop glass and steel buildings. On aesthetic grounds, obviously that's great, but what does it mean when you live in a country that can tell you what kind of building to build? Plus, we have exclusive footage tonight in what is actually happening on the streets of Los Angeles. We'll show it to you when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CARLSON: So the footage on your screen, the picture you're looking at right there was shot by one of our producers last week. We were out in California all week in Los Angeles, supposedly one of the richest cities in the world and in some ways, it is. But the video you're watching shows something else.

California is poor meandering trash filled streets right in the middle of the city, right downtown, block after block, homeless encampments along the sidewalks blanketing downtown LA.

The footage you're watching starts at 5th Street and San Pedro and goes west. Again block after block, tent after tent. This is how the poor spend Easter Sunday in California. They weren't clustered along a single road either, it wasn't just like Skid Row. It was like many Skid Rows.

We drove down three completely different blocks and the encampments just continued. It looks like Tegucigalpa or Port-au-Prince, but it's not; it's America's second largest city.

The encampments begin just two blocks away from Little Tokyo, one of LA's major tourist destinations. Nearby apartments rent for 3,500 bucks a month. You might be wondering with so many people priced out of local housing, the people are literally living in RVs, miles of RV's parked along the streets and as you're watching here, in tents. Why wouldn't local leaders want to slow or stop the flow of new arrivals to get prices under control? To opening up new housing? %They're doing the opposite.

LA is a sanctuary city in a sanctuary state. Every politician there with any ambition will denounce our borders an atrocity and that immigration enforcement is an abomination.

The poor in California are an afterthought, one of the reasons why they're multiplying. That's why when California Governor Gavin Newsom decided to fight poverty last week, he flew to another country to do it, El Salvador. The same people who want no limits on people moving here, he can't even house the people who already live here. It tells you a lot.

Well, today is Earth Day as you may know, a day to celebrate the Earth. That's a good thing for the record. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio presides over the dirtiest city in the United States. He enjoys taking his SUV convoy all over the city or taking a helicopter ride to the gym, but don't worry, he has got a plan for absolving his own guilt, restrict the behavior of other people.

He wants to pass the Green New Deal, which he says will ban New York's iconic skyscrapers. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL DE BLASIO (D-NY), MAYOR: We're going to ban the classic glass and steel skyscrapers which are incredibly inefficient.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Author and columnist, Mark Steyn joins us tonight. So I have mixed feelings about this. I am just going to get it right out on the table. I think Mies van der Rohe and Walter Gropius and all of the creeps who destroyed the world's landscape with worker housing and then I am paying the steel and glass stuff, they should all be punished posthumously.

So I'm against steel and glass, but I don't think that de Blasio wants to replace it with something better. That's my suspicion.

MARK STEYN, AUTHOR AND COLUMNIST: No, I'm with you. I mean, I'm opposed to that look on aesthetic grounds and I am horrified at the talk that they might be -- I am paying up the new roof at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris.

CARLSON: Exactly.

STEYN: So I'm with you on aesthetic grounds, but I don't want to ban it on climate grounds, which I think is just ridiculous even on Earth Day, which after what you've just shown on the streets of Los Angeles is a perfect reminder that climate change is essentially a boutique issue, it's almost like an accessory for Western liberal politicians to flaunt how much they care while actually doing nothing about the people and the jurisdictions for which they're actually responsible.

CARLSON: It couldn't really be clearer, could it? So why wouldn't you take Earth Day, which at least theoretically I completely support. I love the outdoors. I went fishing this morning. It's really important, I think to be outside. Why wouldn't you take this opportunity to clean up the actual Earth like starting how about in front of City Hall? Why wouldn't you do that?

STEYN: Well you're looking at it all wrong, Tucker. Earth Day is about flying a politician in to do the last bit of tree planting that several of his staffers and environmental activists have been spending the whole day working on.

I live in a town in New Hampshire that's 95 percent tree-covered, but we're all -- we've got the climate change Earth Day fever. We need to get it back up to 97 percent - 98 percent or the planet is going to die.

I know where that three percent of tree cover went, I think they were all used to print transcripts of the Mueller report and it's killing the planet, but that's what Earth Day is meant to be -- doing something about the filth in your own cities.

It goes back to the way Labor Day has been transformed. Labor Day was partly in its 19th Century origins about the order and cleanliness that man had imposed on a wild environment and now, as you see on the streets of Los Angeles; even that has to be returned to a primitive and brutish state.

CARLSON: What do you think the people who started America's Conservation Movement -- John Muir for example or Teddy Roosevelt who protected millions of acres of now Federal land, what would they make of Bill de Blasio's variety of environmentalism where you never go outside?

STEYN: No, I think that's where the whole bit about him traveling by SUV and everything comes in because I think they would see it as a class thing. In other words, what we've seen in the last 150 years has really been the democratization of mobility that things you had to be the second son of a Grand Duke to do like travel wildly are now available to everyone and Leonardo DiCaprio and Al Gore and Mayor de Blasio think no, it's just those guys who need the SUVs and the private planes.

The rest of us should be standing outside waiting for a bus every 40 minutes on a cold winter's morning and instead of using a washer dryer, we should be beating our clothes down by the river on the rocks. It's actually -- it's the most explicit expression of the new class politics that modern-day liberalism is imposing on us.

CARLSON: That's fascinating and so that's why de Blasio for example has hiked the tolls to come into New York City because the idea is if you don't already live in Manhattan like what are you doing here? I mean, it's snobbery.

STEYN: No, no and he says he has to go to his gym in Brooklyn to commune with the people, so he's not in the bubble. In fact, he's driven there in an SUV by guys with reflector shades and telephone cords hanging out of their ears and if any member of the masses try to get near him during his photo op at the Brooklyn gym, they'd be taken out by the SWAT team.

So it's this phony poser communing with the people and phony poser environmentalism, too.

CARLSON: Why there's an awful lot of that. Mark Steyn, nothing phony about Mark Steyn. Great to see you tonight. Thank you.

STEYN: Thanks a lot, Tucker. Great to be with you.

CARLSON: We are at a time, sadly, but we will be back. That's our promise to you. Tomorrow night, in fact, at 8:00 p.m., the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness and groupthink. But don't go away, we have fantastic news for you. By pre-arrangement, Sean Hannity will be hosting the 9 p.m. show from New York City.

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.