Tucker: Milley is dishonest, incompetent and dishonorable

close

Video

Tucker: Milley is dishonest, incompetent and dishonorable

Tucker: Milley is dishonest, incompetent, and dishonorable

This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight" September 28, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated. 

TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS CHANNEL HOST, TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT: Well, good evening and welcome to TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT. 

If you tuned in to see the hearing in the Senate Armed Services Committee today and if you didn't, you missed out, but if you did, you may have been a little surprised to see Mark Milley sitting there. You remember Milley. He is the fleshy hood-eyed man who is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He is also a national disgrace. He is a living insult to the military he oversees. 

That's not invective, it's not an insult. It's objectively true. And yet, somehow, despite the overwhelming evidence that Mark Milley is dishonest, incompetent, partisan, and dishonorable, Mark Milley still has a highly prominent job. That's the amazing thing. 

And not only is Mark Milley still employed at the very highest level, he is still lying and doing so with his characteristic relish and enthusiasm. 

Today for example, with an entirely straight face, Mark Milley delivered an impassioned lecture about the importance of civilian control of the military, quote: "This country doesn't want Generals figuring out what orders we're going to accept or do or not, that's not our job." 

Oh really? Is that so, Mark Milley? Isn't this the same Mark Milley who once illegally seized personal control of our country's nuclear arsenal? And then when that wasn't sufficient, promised to tip off the government of China about future American military operations and did all of this because he didn't like his boss, who unlike him was yes, a civilian, elected by voters. 

Yes, that's the very same Mark Milley, the one lecturing you today about civilian control of the military. 

It was all pretty amusing in a dark way, but it did make you wonder, what is this about? Why is Mark Milley saying something so obviously preposterous? It has got to be helping him in some way and indeed it was helping him. 

What you watched in the Senate hearing today was pure blame shifting. Joe Biden's foreign policy is a legitimate disaster. Nobody disputes that. But Mark Milley wants you to know that none of it is his fault. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin wants you to know that, too. So does the head of Central Command, General McKenzie. 

All three of them want to make it crystal clear that the senile guy in the White House did this. It's his fault, not theirs. It was Joe Biden, they told us today who forced American troops to leave Afghanistan before we evacuated all American citizens. And because The Pentagon reflexively, in every case, follows every order to the letter from the sitting President, they had no choice, but to obey these crazy decisions. 

Watch them explain. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) 

SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): General Milley, it's your testimony that you recommended 2,500 troops, approximately stay in Afghanistan. 

GEN. MARK MILLEY, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: Yes, my assessment was back in the fall of '20 and it remained consistent throughout that we should keep a steady state of 2,500 and it could bounce up to 3,500 maybe something like that. 

COTTON: General McKenzie, do you share that assessment? 

GEN. KENNETH MCKENZIE, JR., COMMANDER, CENTCOM: Senator, I do share that assessment. 

COTTON: President Biden last month in an interview with George Stephanopoulos said that no military leader advised him to leave a small troop presence in Afghanistan. Did these officer and general Milley's recommendations get to the President personally? 

LLOYD JAMES AUSTIN III, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Their input was received by the President and considered by the President, for sure. In terms of what they specifically recommended, Senator, they just -- as they just said, they're not going to provide what they recommended in confidence. 

(END VIDEO CLIP) 

CARLSON: Are you following this? Wheels officially coming off, but whoa, what sleaze balls these guys are. We told Joe Biden to keep 2,500 troops in the country. We demanded it. On the other hand, because we are bound by the ancient and sacred rules of confidentiality, we can't really tell you what we told the President because that would be wrong. 

These people, so thoroughly deserve each other. It is wonderful to see them rat one another out, which is exactly what they proceeded to do for the entirety of today's hearings. 

Watch General McKenzie explain that despite the fact that he personally oversaw the disaster in Afghanistan, actually, he had nothing to do with it. It was all demented grandpa pulling the strings from the White House. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) 

MCKENZIE: I won't share my personal recommendation to the President, but I will give you my honest opinion and my honest opinion and view shaped my recommendation. I recommended that we maintain 2,500 troops in Afghanistan and I also recommended earlier in the fall of 2020 that we maintain 4,500 at that time. Those are my personal views. 

I also have a view that the withdrawal of those forces would lead inevitably to the collapse of the Afghan Military Forces and eventually the Afghan government. 

(END VIDEO CLIP) 

CARLSON: What a dirt ball that guy is? Did you just hear that? "I can't share my recommendation," quote, but here was my recommendation. 

Take those medals off. You don't deserve them. 

Until today, the Generals and their many allies in government have been undermining Biden indirectly and far be it for us to defend Joe Biden who deserves no defense, but it is a defense of the American system, which works well when civilians control the military. 

Up until today, they have been leaking Biden's phone calls for example, with the President of Afghanistan. That's illegal, but they did it anyway. They'd be giving nasty background quotes to their stenographers at NBC News about what a dope Biden is, all true, but still, they're not allowed to do that. 

But today was different. Today's performance took place in public. It was on the record and it was under oath and in that performance, they directly contradicted the Commander-in-Chief. As a reminder, here is what Joe Biden was saying just a few weeks ago on ABC. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) 

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS ANCHOR: Your top military advisers warned against what's drawing on this timeline. They wanted you to keep about 2,500 troops. 

JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No, they didn't. It was split. That wasn't true. That wasn't true. 

STEPHANOPOULOS: They didn't tell you that they wanted troops to stay? 

BIDEN: No, not at -- not in terms of whether we were going to get out in a timeframe all troops. They didn't argue against that. 

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no one told -- your military advisers did not tell you, no, we should just keep 2,500 troops. It's been a stable situation for the last several years. We can do that. We can continue to do that. 

BIDEN: No. No one said that to me that I can recall. 

(END VIDEO CLIP) 

CARLSON: Oh, it's not a defense of any of them. They're all so awful and so undeserving of leading this great country. They should not be in charge of this country. It's too good a country for people like this. 

So here you have the Generals claiming they told Biden the Afghan withdrawal would be a total disaster, Biden just in the tape you saw says they did not tell him that. The question is, who is lying? Someone is lying. Joe Biden doesn't know who is lying, he can't remember anything. He doesn't know what he had for lunch. 

Here's what we know for sure though and this is the point of today's hearings and it's the point that matters going forward. No one in The Pentagon's leadership will ever be held accountable for this, the latest in a very long string of colossal screw-ups that have dramatically reduced American power and prestige around the world and gotten a ton of people killed -- no one. 

This is unbelievable. Let's say you worked at a nuclear power plant and one day, you had too many beers on your lunch break and you fell asleep and the reactor melted down and thousands died, and then you got a massive raise. That's pretty much what's happening here. 

The House of Representatives just passed a $776 billion defense budget. How big is that? Well, it is fully $24 billion dollars more than even the White House requested. In other words, Congress just threw a little extra for a job well done, a bonus for the Generals who left $80 billion worth of American military equipment for the Taliban to use. 

Good work, guys. 

So, it's official now. No one will ever be punished for any of it, not for abandoning Bagram Air Base -- that was idiotic. Everyone knew it, they did it anyway. Not for leaving American citizens behind as they fled, not for leaving our troops exposed to the attack that killed 13 young American servicemen, not for the drone strike that blew up children, the one they lied about for weeks. 

The people who did these things are in great shape tonight. They will retire exactly when they feel like retiring, at which point they will get full benefits and jobs at Lockheed. That's how our system now works. 

It's very, very frustrating not because recrimination is good, but because in order to function, a system has to be accountable. And as of tonight, there is only one man in the entire U.S. government who is being punished for the failure, the catastrophic failure in Afghanistan, just one man. 

His name is Stu Scheller. He is a lieutenant colonel in the United States Marine Corps. He is an honorable and honest man. He is also blameless. Scheller had no role in any of these decisions. What was his crime? His crime was criticizing those decisions. 

In August, he posted this video on the internet. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) 

STUART P. SCHELLER, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS LIEUTENANT COLONEL WHO WAS RELIEVED OF COMMAND: If an 0-5 Battalion Commander has the simplest live fire incident EO complaint, boom, fired. But we have a Secretary of Defense that testified to Congress in May that the Afghan National Security Force could withstand the Taliban advance. We have Chairman of Joint Chief who is in command, is a member of that who is supposed to advise on military policy, we have a Marine Combatant Commander, all of these people are supposed to advise. 

And I'm not saying we've got to be in Afghanistan forever, but I am saying, did any of you throw your rank on the table and say hey, it's a bad idea to evacuate Bagram Airfield, the strategic air base, before we evacuate everyone? 

(END VIDEO CLIP) 

CARLSON: So that's an honorable man you just saw on the screen. That's a man who's in it for the right reasons, not to get promoted or work at Lockheed, but because he cares about the country and wants to defend it. There's a man who believed in his superiors, who is not cynical, who is genuinely confused by his superior's unwillingness to admit their own error. 

His confusion comes from decency, and almost immediately, his superiors reacted to that video. They didn't apologize for the disaster, they didn't explain why they did what they did. They punished Scheller. They relieved him of his command and they told him to shut up and stop talking. 

But he didn't stop talking. Here's how he responded. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) 

SCHELLER: To recap my position in the fallout of Afghanistan, I demanded accountability of my senior leaders, and I stated then that I understood that I might lose my Battalion Commander seat, my retirement, and my family's stability. 

As it has played out, I have in fact lost all three of those things. Would I do it again? I don't know. 

My name is Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Scheller and I was the only officer in the entire American Coalition fired in the debacle of Afghanistan fallout. 

I acknowledge that I should have been fired; however, the hypocrisy of the general officers who are not being held to the same standard is a microcosm for the entire problem that is going to bring down the great institutions of this Republic that we love. 

(END VIDEO CLIP) 

CARLSON: So that's the man you want serving in your Officer Corps in a serious country, a person who takes his job seriously, who is patriotic, who is honest, who demands accountability. And before you say, well, it's the military. They don't have freedom of speech, you're not allowed to give a political statement. Two points. One, that was not an explicitly political statement. In contrast, 2.2, the endless number of openly partisan statements from the leaders of The Pentagon. 

Mark Milley was openly thrilled by the election of Joe Biden. Was he punished for that? No, he was elevated, and Congress, again just rewarded him and the entire leadership of the U.S. military with 24 extra billion dollars. 

But Stu Scheller, for telling the truth? Well, here's what happened to him. 

Military brass forced Stu Scheller to undergo a psychological evaluation because only a crazy person would ask for accountability after the disaster in Afghanistan, and then when he wouldn't admit he was crazy, they threw him in prison, in jail, where he sits tonight. 

Scheller's father just released this statement explaining that his son is now behind bars with violent criminals and how long is he there? He is there indefinitely. This is happening tonight in America. Here's a quote from his father: "All our son did is ask the question that everybody was asking themselves, but they were too scared to speak out loud. He was asking for accountability. In fact, I think he even asked for an apology that we made mistakes, but they couldn't do that, which is mind blowing." 

"They had a gag order on him and asked him not to speak. He did speak and they incarcerated him. They don't know what to do with him." 

It's one of the worst stories of our time and there are a lot of bad stories right now. 

Tony Buzbee is one of the lawyers representing Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Scheller, he joins us tonight. Mr. Buzbee, thanks so much for defending this man and for coming on the show tonight. 

TONY BUZBEE, ATTORNEY FOR STUART SCHELLER: Thank you. 

CARLSON: So if we misstated anything, is he in jail right now? 

BUZBEE: He is sitting in jail right now with no formal charges against him. Supposedly, there is supposed to be a hearing on Thursday, but he doesn't even know what he is charged with, and you know, of course he still remains under this illegal gag order. 

CARLSON: So, this story broke, I think last night. In that time, how many Members of Congress have reached out to you to say, we will no longer approve a single promotion in the U.S. Military until this this prisoner of conscience is freed? A lot? 

BUZBEE: None. 

CARLSON: None. 

BUZBEE: And I'll tell you what's more infuriating is that today, we had testimony in the Senate where they tried to make the case that the withdrawal was an operational success. It's not a success of course to the 13 families who lost loved ones and when somebody tried to speak out and say, look, we could have done a lot better. We owe these Marines and sailors and army personnel better than that, they not only told him to shut up and when he didn't shut up, they put him in jail. 

CARLSON: He is a married man with children? 

BUZBEE: He is a married man, yes, with children. And I would say his spirits are high. The support, not of course congressional support, but the support that we have received, that he has received, that his family has received has been overwhelming. 

People see this for what it is. They see this from the top brass trying to shirk responsibility and when somebody in the chain of command speaks up, they are silenced, and we can do better than that. 

This is a man who is a 17-year Marine, a Marine officer, an infantry officer just like I was, a guy who's conscience required him to speak out and the American military and specifically, the United States Marine Corps, the entity that I love so much has put him in jail for that and people are just coming together all over the United States. 

The Pipe Hitter Organization, the foundation has raised already $200,000.00 for his defense. This is wrong and will not stand. 

CARLSON: You think of all those Members of Congress who, you know, served six months in the JAG Corps somewhere and brag about their military service and how you know, they are for the troops and here are 24 extra billion dollars saying not one word about this honorable man who is the best of America rotting in jail with criminals tonight for just telling the truth? It's beyond belief. It's disgusting. And I appreciate you, Tony Buzbee, your defense of him and I hope you'll come back. 

BUZBEE: Will do. 

CARLSON: Thank you. Dan Hollaway is a veteran of the United States Army. He is host of "The Drinking Bros" Podcast. He joins us tonight with reaction. Dan, thanks so much for coming on. 

If any miscarriage of justice -- injustice, atrocity -- kind of crystallizes the moment we're living in, it's this, I think. 

DAN HOLLAWAY, HOST, "THE DRINKING BROS" PODCAST: Yes, it absolutely is. I mean. Scheller asked for accountability and what he got in return for his years of service and his loyalty was persecution, it's insane. 

And speaking of insanity, as you said they sent him to mental health to get checked out because you'd have to be crazy not to agree with the administration, right? And that's the message that's being sent to America. It's not only are we right, not only is the government right and the administration right, not only are you wrong, but you're not entitled to accountability. You can't think for yourself and if you try, for either one of those things, we're going to throw you in jail. That's the message that's being sent right now. It's incredible. 

CARLSON: I mean things have changed so fast and so radically, but if you told me two years ago that there would be people sitting in jail for trespassing at a political rally or for releasing a YouTube video in which he asked his superiors to own up to their failure, they would literally be jailed. I would say, this is America, like, we don't do -- jailing people? What? 

No, and here it is, and nobody seems to think it's weird. 

HOLLAWAY: Yes, it is very bizarre. I mean I think the real question is how we've gotten here? How have we gone from Eisenhower to Milley in America? 

CARLSON: Yes. 

HOLLAWAY: Think about this, this whole mandate nonsense. It makes no sense. We all know that it's not really based in science at all, so you have to wonder what the purpose is. 

Cui bono, right? Who benefits from this? 

For the last few years the left has continuously chipped away at all of the institutions that protect America, you know, the military, the police, masculinity itself and you've got to wonder where they're going with all this. 

Now, they're using all the division they've created to basically gerrymander the ranks of these institutions, The Pentagon and the police services and things like that and it's a calculated move in my opinion. 

You've got to -- you tell me, Tucker, why would a political party want to gain control over the institutions that protect our country, right? 

CARLSON: Because they have guns, that's why. 

HOLLAWAY: I mean, it is very suspicious, right. 

CARLSON: Right. No, that's -- and they're gerrymandering the ranks of the armed institutions in our society and that's just a -- that's a really smart and correct way to put it, I think, and I appreciate that I'm going to steal it going forward. 

Dan, thank you. 

HOLLAWAY: It's all yours. 

CARLSON: Thanks a lot. 

So, the Biden administration is forcing millions of Americans to take a vaccine they don't want. This show was just learned from a source inside the Biden administration about what's in store for people who don't obey this unconstitutional order. We'll tell you next. 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) 

CARLSON: The White House has just mandated that every Federal government employee must be fully vaccinated by November 22nd, that's more than two million people. A senior official within the administration has told this show that preparations are underway to implement this order. 

According this official, unvaccinated employees in the White House are routinely forced to wear neon wristbands, which is interesting that there are unvaccinated employees at the White House at this late date, why is that exactly? 

Additionally, this official told us, government human resources officials would be in charge of determining whether an employee's religious beliefs are quote, "sincerely held." If they ask for religious accommodation. In other words, the government will decide how much you believe in God and whether your belief is valid or not. 

If employees don't get an exemption and refuse to take the shot, they'll be fired. The administration believes it could start dismissal proceedings in mid-December. That means by Christmas, tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of Federal workers may be unemployed. 

The administration is also forcing the majority of the private sector workers who do not work for Joe Biden to get vaccinated. How can this be legal? Very few are asking that question. 

Jenin Younes is one who is. She is litigation counsel at the New Civil Liberties Alliance and she is fighting back against vaccine mandates at universities. She joins us now. 

Thank you, I appreciate your coming on. I know that we don't -- I don't think we share the same politics and you'll probably take a lot of grief for doing this show, so that makes me extra grateful that you're willing to do it. 

Tell us what your case is against vaccine mandates at universities. 

JENIN YOUNES, LITIGATION COUNSEL, NEW CIVIL LIBERTIES ALLIANCE: Thank you so much for having me, Tucker. 

CARLSON: Of course. 

YOUNES: I'm currently bringing a case against Michigan State University on behalf of an employee, Gina Norris who has natural immunity to COVID-19. She recovered from COVID last year. 

We are arguing that for that reason, the government has no compelling interest in forcing her to get the vaccine and violating her rights to bodily autonomy and to decline medical treatment. 

It's also important to note that Michigan State University is a public university, so these arguments couldn't necessarily be used in the private context certainly not when private employers are acting independently of the government. 

CARLSON: So your answer suggests that -- I mean, there are huge principles, important principles at stake here. Tell us what those principles are that you are defending with this suit, do you think? 

YOUNES: Well, they are both legal principles that the Constitution recognizes the right to decline medical treatment, the right to not have things put in your body that you don't want. 

There is a substantial body of case law that was developed after the Jacobson case that I'm sure a lot of people have heard about. 

CARLSON: Yes. 

YOUNES: That's used to justify vaccine mandates and that is really not applicable to the present situation and certainly not when people have natural immunity. There has been a huge corruption of science that's been going on throughout the country with this. 

We know that natural immunity exists. We know that it is robust and the denial of it in these institutions' policies and the government's policies is inexplicable to me, and unforgivable. 

CARLSON: I agree with that completely. People feel so desperate and alone. At this point, if you haven't gotten the vaccine, which is free and readily available, there is a reason for it. You've thought this through and decided not to, you thought that was your right. But people are being forced to, some are being forced to get fake vaccine cards, which is understandable, I think because they feel -- they are trapped. 

What do they do? What's their recourse? If you're a person like that facing firing with no unemployment benefits because you won't take the shot, what do you do? 

YOUNES: Well, most of them seem to e-mail us. I have thousands of e-mails in my inbox from desperate people who don't want to get the vaccine and you know, you hit on something really perfect there, which is that, most people have thought this through. They know what is best for themselves and their health. 

Joe Biden and Rochelle Walensky and Anthony Fauci, they don't know what's best for people and their own health. Actually, I spoke to a woman in New York today who has natural immunity. She recovered from COVID in July and she got a different vaccine, right the day before she was supposed to get the COVID vaccine, and she had a very bad reaction to it. 

She actually lost use of her arm for a number of weeks, and so she was really scared. She didn't show up to the appointment to get her COVID shot, and she is rightly scared and she doesn't want the COVID vaccine now, and she has natural immunity. 

But because of New York's vaccine passport program, she can't go to restaurants, bars. She can't go to work meetings and you know, it is really ruining her life. 

So what we are looking at here is the government interfering in what should be personal health decisions that people make with their doctor.

CARLSON: I don't want to blow up your inbox even more, but it is the New Civil Rights Alliance and this is a civil right worth defending, so if you are -- and we are grateful that you are, and for explaining that to us. Thanks so much, Jenin Younes. 

YOUNES: Oh, thank you so much. And people should feel free to reach out to us.

CARLSON: Good, and I hope you can help. Thank you. 

So, "Revolver News" first reported on the F.B.I.'s involvement -- its deep involvement in the events of January 6th. They were attacked for reporting that. We reported it as well and we were attacked too as conspiracy theorists. 

It turns out, it was true, and now, there is proof. That's straight ahead. 

Get a book, cut out Big Tech. 

We will be right back. 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) 

CARLSON: Well, if you don't believe there is such a thing as mass hysteria, let us direct you back to last summer when the dummies who control our biggest cities decided as a group really, it would be a good idea to stop defending their populations from criminals and predators. They were going to defund the police, because of systemic racism. 

It's like the kind of thing maybe you'd come up with in college if you were super high and then the next morning realize that's stupid, but they didn't realize it was stupid and some of the biggest cities in the country actually did it. 

So what happened next? You don't hear a lot of talk about that. We just kind of moved on to the next enthusiasm. 

Well, we're keeping track. According to a new report from the F.B.I., murders in this country increased 30 percent in a single year. That's a lot of dead people. It's the largest single year increase in murders since the F.B.I. started tracking that stat 50 years ago, more than 50 years ago, in the 60s. 

Oh well that must be the guns, right? Those assault weapons? Those weapons of war that Joe Biden is so upset about. It was the guns that did it, right? 

No. F.B.I. data show that more people were quote "punched or kicked to death than were killed by rifles last year" nationally. Knives killed three times as many Americans as rifles, so it wasn't the weapons. The problem was the police. There weren't any, and those that remained were not allowed to enforce the law. 

Meanwhile DA's, the prosecutors, many of whom were elected with George Soros who controls our democracy somehow stopped prosecuting crimes. Meanwhile, the F.B.I. wasted its time thwarting kidnapping plots organized by other F.B.I. agents. 

The bureau has gotten dysfunctional, even its famed statistics department has. The "Free Beacons" Joe Simonson noticed a lot of irregularities in those statistics. For example, according to the F.B.I., white people are the second highest perpetrator of anti-white hate crimes in this country. How's that possible? We have no idea. No one is reading this stuff except us and Joe Simonson. 

We hope the F.B.I. clears it up because based on this report, it's pretty obvious we need an F.B.I. and that there are bigger things to worry about than conservative political rallies. This country has gotten dangerous, and a functioning law enforcement agency might be a good thing to have right about now. 

Well, speaking of the F.B.I., "The New York Times" has just published a report vindicating what we said months ago. F.B.I. operatives were deeply involved in the events of January 6th. The white supremacist QAnon insurrection, remember? 

Setting quote, "confidential records," the newspaper reported that quote "The records suggest that Federal law enforcement had a far greater visibility into the assault on the Capitol even as it was taking place than was previously known." The paper reported that an F.B.I. handler was texting a member of the so-called Proud Boys -- they are America's greatest threat -- at the Capitol Complex. 

Darren, thanks so much for coming on. 

So before we get to the question of why "The New York Times" is finally verifying what you reported months ago and I think they denounced you as a conspiracy theorist for doing so, tell us what you think -- since you have credibility on this -- what the scope of the Federal involvement in January 6th was? 

DARREN BEATTIE, REVOLVER NEWS: Well, it's a very good question and the extent is far more than the Feds and the media were willing to admit. "The New York Times" piece that you mentioned acknowledges two informants. 

If "The New York Times" is covering this, it's because the situation is far worse and there will be many more informants coming to light in the near future. 

And I think it's very important to point out that this poses a pretty severe strategic dilemma for the Feds and their apparatchiks in the regime media because you'll recall that Senator Klobuchar when she posed the question about informants to F.B.I. Director Wray, she did him the courtesy of assuming that there was no visibility into the protest because they had no informants. 

You see if they had informants, that would have meant they were informed as to what would transpire and then the question is, why didn't you do anything to stop it? Now that we know they have informants, the question re-presents itself why didn't they do anything to stop it? And I think this explains an interesting amount of sort of mixed messaging that we're seeing recently from the regime media coverage of this. 

You'll see that the -- basically, the Feds are using their sources in the media to present this new narrative that you know what actually, there wasn't fore-planning, actually it wasn't this conspiracy in advance. It was more of a spontaneous outburst. 

The reason you're seeing this transition in the narrative is that if there was no fore-planning on the part of the so-called insurrectionists, that means there could have been no foreknowledge on the part of the Feds, and they're absolved from suspicion as to why if they knew about it they didn't do anything to stop it. 

But the real beauty part about this is that, even as this narrative shift protects the downside for the Feds from that type of exposure, it completely blows up another foundational pillar of the official narrative of 1/6, which is that it was a conspiracy, which it was this pre-planned attack that was set up in advance and that's why it's like 9/11. 

It is the basis of the prosecution of all of the militia groups essentially associated 1/6, and furthermore, it is the basis of the entire 1/6 Commission, so they're really stuck in a bind. Either the F.B.I. has to address new questions of why, if they had a bunch of informants and they were presumably informed, they didn't stop it or why this whole narrative that they've been telling us about a conspiracy that was pre-planned that serves as the basis of multiple high-level prosecutions and the commission itself, why that was false. 

It's either one or the other. 

CARLSON: That's right and either way, they are lying and the effect is to strip law-abiding patriotic Americans of their civil liberties and that is happening and I appreciate your coming on, Darren Beattie, which got this story right months before anybody else. Thank you. 

BEATTIE: Thank you. 

CARLSON: So we showed you that tape of that racist lunatic screaming at people for sitting in a building being the wrong color, but she is not alone. She is a symptom of a much larger problem. One group is funding all of this insanity, the race hate on college campuses. 

J.D. Vance joins us to explain what he will do about it if elected to the United States Senate, that's next. 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) 

CARLSON: On Monday we showed you footage of this hate-filled whack job at Arizona State University attacking students for sitting in the wrong place because they have the wrong skin color. 

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What did I do wrong? 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You have a -- 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're offensive. Police Lives Matter? 

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're just trying to do school. 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What? 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You guys have the same sticker of the other -- 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But this is our space. 

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is the violence that ASU does and this is the type of people that they protect. Okay, this white man can take up our space, and this is why we need a multicultural space because they think they think they can get away with [bleep]. 

Every single part of the campus centers you. This is the only space that you're not centered and you're still trying to center yourself, which is peak white cis male [bleep]. 

You know what, you can choose to be a cop, you can choose to kill people with a badge and you're protecting that [bleep], which means that you're racist. 

(END VIDEO CLIP) 

CARLSON: So that's not even English, that's some sort of weird sub-dial active academic leftism. Well, a "Substack" called Karl Stack, it's from an economist called Chris Brunet identified the lunatic in that clip. It turns out she's not just an average student, she is a Ford Foundation fellow and a PhD student called Zarra Teacola. 

The Ford Foundation spends billions funding people like this, making them into radicals and placing them inside colleges. 

Karl Stack has just posted dozens of internal documents from the Ford Foundation. They show that that foundation which is supposedly nonpartisan because it's a non-profit, exempt from taxes is focused instead on pure partisanship, indoctrinating students with left-wing political propaganda and sending them forth to wreck the country, which as you've seen from that video they are. 

So it's a huge problem, a big problem that nobody talks about. 

J.D. Vance is talking about it. He is running for Senate in the State of Ohio and we're happy to have him join us tonight. 

J.D. Vance, thanks so much for coming on. 

So the Ford Foundation is just one of many foundations that have non-profit -- enjoy non-profit status, I would say, and get to completely change the country non-democratically using their tax exemption. How is this going on? 

J.D. VANCE (R), OHIO SENATORIAL CANDIDATE: Well the basic way this works is that the Ford Foundation, the Gates Foundation, the Harvard University Endowment, these are fundamentally cancers on American society, but they pretend to be charities, and so they benefit from preferential tax treatment.

So AOC talks about taxing the wealthy, but the Harvard University Endowment pays zero tax. The Ford Foundation that funds these radicals pays zero tax. They're not actually going to tax their wealthy friends who are funding radical left-wing ideology. What they're going to do is tax normal Americans and protect their friends, protect their special privileges so they have the resources to continue to fund what is ultimately the destruction of our country. 

This ideology is going to destroy our country, it gets special tax privileges from the American taxpayer to do that. 

CARLSON: So even Bernie Sanders who was considered a radical for reordering our economy et cetera, I don't think he ever called for taxing openly partisan nonprofits like this. Have you ever heard any politicians say, you know why are we subsidizing this insanity? These are the richest institutions in America, they don't pay any taxes. Like why doesn't anyone say that? 

VANCE: No. Other than me, I don't know anybody who is talking about it. Of course, the left-wing radicals are not going to talk about it because they care more about identity politics than lifting up the American worker and these foundations are the ultimate institutions of identity politics. 

When you think about it, this is crazy, Tucker. We're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars in ill-gotten accumulated wealth. It serves as a tax haven for left-wing billionaires and what do they do with this? They fund critical race theory, they fund ridiculous racism. They fund teaching six-year-olds that they should you know cast off their gender. 

We are actively subsidizing the people who are destroying this country and they call it a charity. It's just ridiculous. 

CARLSON: Right so, for ordinary people, gas has never been more expensive. Simple pleasures have never been more expensive, the things that normal people need to live. But there's not even a national conversation, not even a hint that we might tax the most powerful foundations in the country.

I hope you'll keep this up. When you do, how do people respond? 

VANCE: Look, they like it because they recognize at the end of the day, why are we allowing the companies, the foundations that are destroying this country to receive tax preferences? Why don't we seize the assets of the Ford Foundation, tax their assets, and give it to the people who have had their lives destroyed by the radical open borders agenda? 

Give it to the people whose lives have been destroyed by the heroin epidemic. Give it to the angel moms who have lost a kid, thanks to the Ford Foundation's ideas. This is what conservatives we need to wake up about. The left is completely controlling our society through these institutions. If we don't fight back against them, they are going to make this country not a good place to live. 

CARLSON: Amen. God, thank you. J.D. Vance, I appreciate that. Thank you for coming on tonight. Good luck. 

VANCE: Thanks. 

CARLSON: So since the beginning of COVID, a lot of people, not partisan people, just ordinary people have asked, well, wait why is the vaccine the only real medical treatment for this virus? Is that true of any other disease? No. 

It turns out there are several drugs that according to clinical studies do have promise in treating COVID safely and effectively. Interesting, the F.D.A. has not approved any of them. Why? That's all straight ahead. 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) 

CARLSON: Well, here is an interesting story, so the Federal government has done everything it can to approve the COVID vaccines despite the fact that we don't actually know what the long-term effects are because we couldn't know. 

At the same time apparently, for months, the F.D.A. has been sitting on applications for several drugs that appear to be safe and effective therapeutics for people who are hospitalized with COVID. What is this exactly? 

Dr. Cameron Durrant is the CEO of the biopharmaceutical company, Humanigen who joins us tonight to explain. Doctor, thanks so much for coming on. Can you give us an example of the kind of therapy that hasn't received the okay from the F.D.A. and why you think that is? 

DR. CAMERON DURRANT, CEO, HUMANIGEN: Thanks for having me on this evening, Tucker. Just perhaps to start with the scale of the problem that we're dealing with. Over one in 400 adult Americans have died since the beginning of the pandemic, and just to translate that into some further numbers. That's more than 685,000 people that have died. Most of them in the hospital.

So to give some context to that, that's the equivalent of the entire population of Nashville, Tennessee or the City of Boston, and so it's vitally important to balance the focus on vaccines to include therapeutics. 

CARLSON: Yes. 

DURRANT: Particularly therapeutics for people who find themselves in the hospital and especially those people who require extra oxygen. 

CARLSON: So why wouldn't the Federal government's vast public health apparatus be pushing as hard as possible to find and then approve effective therapeutics for this virus? 

DURRANT: Well, there are a number of companies that have been working on developing therapies including our own company, Humanigen, with our product, lenzilumab, some people refer to it as lenzi. We demonstrated with lenzi a 54 percent improvement in the relative likelihood of surviving without needing a ventilator and we are partnering with F.D.A. 

F.D.A. has a very difficult job to do. They are very stretched and under resourced, and we are pleased to work with F.D.A. as a collaborative partner and we hope with the benefit of additional data that lenzi will be authorized in due course. 

There are other therapies also available, but not very many, and we need more proven, safe and effective therapies for physicians to increase the size of their armamentarium for people who find themselves in the hospital through no fault of their own. 

CARLSON: Well, that's exactly right and instead, we spend a lot of time blaming people for their own illness and pretending that only one drug offers any kind of solution to this problem. So, I appreciate you reminding us that there are other options, Dr. Cameron Durrant, I appreciate that. Thank you. 

DURRANT: Thank you. 

CARLSON: We are out of time, unfortunately. We could go on forever. We'll be back, however, tomorrow night, 8:00 p.m., the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. 

We hope you have the best night. Sean Hannity, the Great Sean Hannity takes over next at nine o'clock. 

Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, 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 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.