Dnc. That seems like corruption. I dont know how else he would describe that. No, its not. Heres what actually happened, and im sure it happened on the republican side as well, which is that when someone has secured their partys nomination, essentially they start acting as one with the Party Committee. So it seems as though the Clinton Campaign decided to make this agreement early which said, hey, guys, when i actually secure the nomination, you know that we are going to have to go over some things like that. That, to me, does not seem out of the ordinary. Tucker thats not actually what it said. Look, if youre making the point that both parties tried to rigged the system in favor of the candidate they want, youre absolutely right, and the republicans tried to do that and they failed, and that is how they got trumped. No, its true. Both parties tried to rig it, but my question is, dont voters have a say in this . It doesnt belong to the party who is paid by it but by the voters that vot
dnc. that seems like corruption. i don t know how else he would describe that. no, it s not. here s what actually happened, and i m sure it happened on the republican side as well, which is that when someone has secured their party s nomination, essentially they start acting as one with the party committee. so it seems as though the clinton campaign decided to make this agreement early which said, hey, guys, when i actually secure the nomination, you know that we are going to have to go over some things like that. that, to me, does not seem out of the ordinary. tucker: that s not actually what it said. look, if you re making the point that both parties tried to rigged the system in favor of the candidate they want, you re absolutely right, and the republicans tried to do that and they failed, and that is how they got trumped. no, it s true. both parties tried to rig it, but my question is, don t voters have a say in this? it doesn t belong to the party who is paid by it but by the
hillary clinton has been a democrat, you know, largely all her life. she talks about how she was a goldwater girl. tucker: and bernie is not really a democrat. i love that bernie is not really a democrat. a democrat his entire career in the senate, as he will know, but how about someone who has been a democrat consistently, elizabeth warren, saying the system is rigged. is she not a real democrat too? this is not just donald trump or right-wingers like me trying to cause problems in your party. these are actual democrats. would you think joe biden thinks of that, for example, who got chapter because the dnc put its thumb on the scale when it shouldn t have, and let s just admit that its corruption again, i think people like martin o malley and bernie sanders have a legitimate complaint to say that, on a personal level, the staffers at the dnc probably preferred hillary clinton. i think that is true. tucker: [laughs]
mantra every day on your show. democrats say, we need not give tax breaks to the wealthy. we need to raise taxes on the wealthy and preserve breaks for the middle income americans. what we have done in this bill is pretty simple. we have driven all of the tax breaks toward middle americans, and actually, we have taken some of the wealth away from the wealthiest americans. democrats become uncomfortable because they like the talking point of saying, no tax breaks for the rich. but when we actually accommodate them, the rich live in their districts. they have the limousine liberals who sipped their lattes and the love to talk about their social justice, but when we accommodate them, all of a sudden, they are like, whoa, we want to make sure you can write off the interest on $8 million home. when i live in wausau, wisconsin, tucker, we don t have any million-dollar homes. you are at wealthy if you have a $450,000 home. the left wing nuts are going crazy that they might pay a little bit mo
off the rails and jumped the tracks. at times, this white house has an unfit gnomic unhealthy fixation on what i call the 3ms, the mexicans, the muslims, and the media. tucker: keep in mind that as of this morning, jim acosta was still listed at cnn senior white house correspondent. that is a different job from being a talking head on one of those panel shows of 19 guests. at least, it s supposed to be a different job. as jeff zucker watching any of this? our guests tonight, i am not attacking jim acosta for bad pond injury although that is bad pump and treat i m kind of wondering what the boundaries are. if you are a white house correspondent supposedly committing journalism, gathering facts, bringing them to your audience, how can that person coexist with the person we just saw? it cannot, tucker. as far as reporters are concerned, you can say jim acosta is the face of the