give you a taste of what's to come, so that is jeff bezos, again, your new boss. i want to put a picture on the screen there, that's professor x from the x-men. you'll notice a striking similarity. accidental? or an ominous foreshadowing? we will continue to report on the story. in the meantime tonight, the kyle rittenhouse trial continued today in wisconsin. in a move that surprised lawyers ever, he took the stand in his own defense. that is unusual in criminal cases and especially unusual in murder trials and the reason is simple, the stakes are too high. one wrong answer in a cross examination and you could wind up spending life in prison but this case was different. by the time he testified today, kyle rittenhouse had already won the case. at this point there was no remaining doubt the kyle rittenhouse had acted in self-defense during the riots last summer in kenosha. every shot rittenhouse fired was captured on videotape and from multiple angles. every single witness who testified this week at the trial confirmed exactly what happened. here are the facts of it. a convicted child rapist called joseph rosenbaum was released from a mental hospital and when directly to join the mob that was burning down kenosha. once he got to the right, rosenbaum saw kyle rittenhouse and immediately threatened to kill him. rosenbaum then chased rittenhouse and try to pull the gun from his hands. when he did that, kyle rittenhouse shot him. so joseph rosenbaum died as he had lived, trying to touch and unwilling minor. at this point, rittenhouse ran to find police. a mob then chased him down the street howling for his death. a riot or jumped on rittenhouse and knocked into the ground. another smashed him in the face with a skateboard. he had another loaded gun pointed in his face. he shot the second two men, one of them fatally, so those are the facts and there's no way to interpret them except for what they are. the exercise of self-defense. kyle rittenhouse shot people so he would not be killed. but if you take a step back from the story, you see some thing else entirely. you see violent insanity completely out of control in the middle of an american city. the question is how did that happen in our country and why did nobody stop it? it wasn't just happening in kenosha, course buried violent mobs at the same moment overwhelmed new york and minneapolis in portland and many other cities. they killed at least a dozen people, because hundreds of millions of dollars in damage. they burned businesses, torched police stations, they bombed court houses, invaded suburban neighborhoods in the middle of the night purely to intimidate people because of their race. democrats applauded all of this as it happened. most are republicans just ignored it and of course the media lied about it. in kenosha, the police barely even showed up. officers an armored cruiser sat and watched as writers torched a car lot with more than a hundred vehicles in it and they did nothing to stop the chaos. the question then is how exactly are we surprised when a 17-year-old lifeguard from illinois decides to step in? they hate it when you say that, but it's an entirely fair question. when legitimate authority refuses to do its duty, it sworn duty, others will fill the backing. that is always true, it's a physics printable. but rather than acknowledge that obvious truth and accept the responsibility they there, the people who made these rights possible in the first place decided instead to crush kyle rittenhouse. joe biden publicly called him a weitzer premises, something for which someday we very much hope he has sued because it is totally outrageous and false. numbers of congress called him a domestic terrorist. today, kyle rittenhouse spoke for himself. see what you think. >> once i take that step back i look over my shoulder and mr. rosenbaum -- mr. rosenbaum was now running from my right side and i was cornered from in front of me and there were -- [sobbing] there were people right there. >> take a deep breath, kyle. >> tucker: so after a ten minute break to compose himself, kyle rittenhouse returned to the court room and proceeded to blow up the prosecution's claims that he had racked his rifle in a threatening manner. it turns out he didn't rack his rifle at all and video proved that. and then he it explained why he turned himself in. >> people are saying frame him, kill him, people were screaming and i just was trying to get to the police. >> you say i'm trying to get to the police. why were you trying to get to the police? >> i didn't do anything wrong, i defended myself. >> did you feel as though there were safety where the police were? >> yes. >> tucker: they didn't really have a response to that since it's all on videotape. it's probably true. so instead, the lead prosecutor in the case, in today's case, who is essentially an npr pledge drive donor took a very different tactic. he went on to -- must be guilty because he went on to exercise his right to remain silent. watch. >> since august 25th, 2020, this is the first time that you have told your story. since august 25th 2020, you've had the benefit of watching countless videos of your actions that night, correct? you've also had the opportunity to listen to the testimony of all 30 some witnesses that have testified in this trial so far, correct? >> yes. >> and after all of that now, you're telling us your side of the story, correct? >> i am making the point after hearing everything in the case and now he's tailoring his story to what has already been introduced. >> the problem is this is a grave constitutional violation for you to talk about the defendant's silence, and that is -- and you're right on the borderline. and you may -- you may be over, but it better stop. >> understood. >> tucker: yeah, this is day one of our school stuff, but just to be clear, exercising her constitutional right is not an indication that you are guilty, it is a sign that you are american. it is your birthright. the government's own lawyer does not understand that, what you think might get the attention of merrick garland's justice department, which after all is in charge of justice in this country. but no, merrick garland is not interested, just to see has ignored the thugs of videotaping jurors outside the courthouse. the judge in this case seems pretty well fed up with all of it. today he ruled the prosecutors could not mention statement about shoplifters that kyle rittenhouse apparently made weeks before the shooting. prosecutors asked him about them anyway. once again the judge was forced to shut down the trial. >> i indicated that bias towards -- hold it open with a bias towards denial. why would you think that that made it okay for you, without any advance notice, to bring this matter before the jury? you are already -- you are -- i was astonished when you began your examination by commenting on the defendant's postarrest silence. that's basic law, it's been basic law in this country for 40 years, 50 years. i have no idea why you would do something like that and it gives -- well, i will leave it at that. so i don't know what you're up to. >> tucker: you can watch televised trials for the next ten years and never hear a judge talk like that. that's how completely out of control the prosecution in this case is. at this point it's not even clear it's going to make it to a jury. the defense has asked the judge to dismiss the case without the possibility of pretrial and the judge indicated he might very well grant that request. so again, what you're watching is willful prosecutorial misconduct. it's an intentional perversion of justice and the judge very well knows that. >> i have heard nothing in this trial to change any of my rulings. so -- >> testimony, your honor. >> pardon me? >> that was before the testimony grade >> don't get brazen with me. you knew very well -- you know very well that an attorney can't go into these types of areas when the judge has already ruled without asking outside the presence of the jury to do so. don't give me that. >> tucker: yeah, don't give me that, exactly, good for the judge. we should tell you where so used to evaluating everything throw partisan lens that it's worth knowing the judge in this case, that guy, was appointed by a democrat. the point is however still believes in the constitution. that's always the point. kyle rittenhouse should be very grateful he's the judge in this case. yesterday the prosecutors tried to bully a freelance photographer. in return, that turned out to be a mistake, he ratted them out on live television. watch this. >> you said there was a lot of tension in the room when you met with me? >> yes. >> is it fair to say you were very nervous. >> yeah, absolutely. >> and we did it, you read over your statements, right? >> correct. >> and we ask if you knew anything beyond that statement. >> correct. >> we didn't ask you to change it. >> yes you did buried >> tucker: yes you did. so pressuring a witness to changes statement, right, that's exactly the kind of justice that kyle rittenhouse has received from the government so far. no one who's been paying attention a surprised by any of this. goals like joe biden politicize this case day one. what's terrifying and very unnerving to anyone who lives in this country is the number of institutions that joins the democratic party in trying to prevent kyle rittenhouse from getting a fair trial, which again, is your birthright and his american. here's an example. in virginia a police lieutenant called william kelley was fired from his job for daring to donate to kyle rittenhouse's legal defense. kelly was a 20 or veteran of the norfolk police department. he had three children and a wife with cancer. for disagreeing with joe biden's view of the rittenhouse case, the department dismissed him without a pension. that actually happen. insult lake city, local news station decided to terrorize a paramedic called craig shepard. his sin? giving $10 to rittenhouse's legal defense, so reporters called shepherd's employer. another reporter showed up at his house with a camera crew and brag about it. "abc four news investigator went to shepard's home to get his side of things, but those inside the home didn't want to talk." yeah, wonder why. it is shameful and authoritarian, hurting the week to appease the strong. that's the american media, 2021. having watched the trial, no honest person could fail to admit the obvious. the media were completely wrong about kyle rittenhouse. they slandered an innocent kid, but they're not admitting it. it's at least one exception though and we want to highlight that person tonight. her name is anna. she's a lefty on a show called the young turk, she hates the show and most of the time we disagree with her. but on the question of this trial, anna was bravely honest and good for her. watch this. >> so look, these details matter because if you're going to make an argument that you acted in self-defense, there needs to be some proof that there was an imminent threat. now, what really mattered to me was how all of this unfolded. what was the thing that sparked it? what started all of it? and initially i was under the assumption that rittenhouse was the person who was chasing after joseph rosenbaum, that that's how it started. but i was wrong about that. okay? so i want to correct the record. i was in fact wrong about that. >> tucker: wow! you don't see that too often, but it's not hard, by the way. well the truth, let reality be your guide. it feels good. that's what decent people do. there are too few of them. judge jeanine pirro is joining us in just a moment to respond, but first tonight, and honest man assesses what he has seen. j.d. vance, running for senate in ohio enjoins us now. thanks so much for coming on. so you've watched this whole thing in a nearby midwestern state. what's your assessment of it? >> well, look, tucker, i think that it's not a trial, it is child abuse masquerading as justice in this country. this entire trial, this entire force is an indictment on every institution in our society. if an indictment of the adults that didn't protect kenosha, which made kyle rittenhouse get out there and protect his community. it's an indictment of our disgusting president who called him a white supremacist even though he shot other white people. it's an indictment of our media, which slandered and bullied a 17-year-old boy. i haven't seen anything that disgusts me with the leaders of this country like this ridiculous farce of a trial. >> tucker: i mean, it's scary, actually, because a year -- more than a year ago in august of 2020, the tape was available, publicly available, we put it on the air it was really clear this guy thought he was going to be killed and he had very good reason to think that. so you had to really ignore the videotape evidence to make the case that he was the aggressor, but they did it anyway. what does that tell you? >> i think it suggests that justice in this country is no longer about equal justice under law. it's all political. think about this. think about four years ago, them attacking donald trump with the fake russia collusion hoax at the federal level, the fbi investigating the united states -- president of the united states for something totally fake and was obvious at the time and now at the state level we have a state prosecutor who knew that this kid acted in self-defense, and he's trying to destroy his life anyway. the message to every normal american in this country, certainly the message that i take from it, is that that you have the wrong politics, you have unacceptable politics according to our elites, the justice system will come after you and it will come after you hard. that's not the american constitution, that's not the american way of life, that's a bunch of power-hungry leftists who have decided they are going to use our criminal justice system as a weapon against the people. >> tucker: i think that's exactly right and if you were to pick the weakest in our society, the least privileged i think you might pick kyle rittenhouse. j.d. vance, i appreciate your coming on tonight, good to see you, thank you. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: judge jeanine pirro is the host of course of justice with judge jeanine, she joins us done it with her reaction to the trial. judge, think leper coming on, what you make of this? >> i think that along with your last guest, j.d. vance, what we are seeing here is the politicization of the criminal justice system. this is a case where clearly self-defense is something that will exonerate kyle rittenhouse and whether this case goes to the jury or whether judge dismisses some some of the charges on his own or whether the judge grants a mistrial, this young man will be acquitted and exonerated. what has happened here is there was a rush to judgment in this case. this kid who was a fire cadet, a lifeguard, and a police explorer, he was a kid who went there to clean graffiti, they have video of it. he went there to help people, he was a medic, he was cpr trained, he finds himself in this situation, he's got a gun, and in every circumstance he is -- and it's corroborated by what the witnesses say. if the prosecution's star witness, the one who isn't dead, said basically yes, i was lunging at him and i had a loaded gun and i was aiming at him. i mean, they established the case right there. as a judge i would say hey, come up to the sidebar here, what are we doing here, guys? but what you had was a rush to judgment in august of 2020. we are in the post-george floyd world, jacob blake had just been shot, everybody wanted to make sure that, you know, that everyone was prosecuted. this kid was prosecuted when the evidence was clear that he was defending himself. now, once the burden of proof has shifted, once he claims self-defense, the prosecution has to disprove that and a reasonable doubt. that's why the prosecution is desperate right now. they're on the ropes. the reason they're on the ropes is they cannot disprove beyond a reasonable doubt based on the drones, the video, the testimony of the prosecution's star witness and the incredibly focused testimony of this young man. he may only be 18, but i'll tell you, in all the years i've prosecuted myself and tried cases as a judge, this kid in every point never lost his cool during sure he cried, he never got angry. he said all he wanted to do was stop the threat. i wasn't interested in killing people, it was not my intent. he knew what he was doing, he knew how to handle a gun, and the whole course -- the whole course of the justice system from the president on down to the mainstream media calling him a vigilante, a white supremacist, a militia man, i mean, this is what happens in our society when police are told to stand down. where no one is there to protect businesses. police were nowhere around there. this guy rosenbaum, you had his number, tucker. he was somebody who is looking for trouble. he was -- they were yelling "premium him," which means shoot him in the head. they were chasing him, trying to kill him with a skateboard and the prosecution saying oh, kelly with a skateboard, that deserves lethal force? it sure does. when you hold it like a baseball bat and you hit me in the head with it. i mean, come on. why this case went forward, why there wasn't a plea-bargain of some sort, but this will end up i think a good thing for kyle rittenhouse. >> tucker: hope so. yeah, the convicted child molester out of the mental hospital, that's who they are defending. judge dineen, thank you. good to see it's in. so there's a lot going on between russia and the ukraine. some u.s. congress believe that u.s. troops should be dispatched to the reason. plus, you can get access to our original free for 90 days, go to tuckercarlson.com. ♪ ♪ with xfinity home, you can keep your home and everything in it more protected. i can wrangle all my deliveries. thanks, hoss! and i help walk the dog from wherever. *door unlocks* ♪ ♪ well, i can bust curfew-breakers in an instant. well, you all have xfinity home, with cameras to home security monitored by the pros. *laughs* learn more about home security or get our self-monitored solution starting at just $10 per month. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: so there's a tense and escalating situation tonight on the fringes of europe. american officials say the russian military -- and it appears to be true -- his massing forces on the ukrainian border. in response to this, a group of 15 republican congressmen have written a letter to joe biden. if the letter demands the administration sends troops to ukraine. congressman mike turner of ohio is one of the signator so that t joins us tonight. thanks so much for coming on. >> tucker, thank you so much for bringing attention to this issue. this is when the mainstream media is not going to be reporting and is incredibly import for people to understand what russia is doing and really the threat to the united states and the threat to the united states allies. >> tucker: well, that's kind of the force of my question. a lot of military families watch the show. you have called for sending american troops to ukraine, to the region, as you put it. i wonder if you could explain to them why it is in america's interest that their kids risk their lives in ukraine. >> sure. yeah, well, there are a couple of things which i'm certain you're aware of, that the united states signed with russia and ukraine a treaty in budapest guaranteeing the integrity of ukraine, in exchange for the dismantling of the soviet union of giving up nuclear weapons, of not being a nuclear weapon state. and then the nato summit we also agreed with our nato allies that ukraine, which is an ally to nato, would receive a pathway to nato. russia sees ukraine as importantly strategic because it's also the pipeline to give gas to europe that they are trying to bypass with respect to building nordstrom two. as you know, russia has already invaded ukraine once and taken crimea, which they have militarized and are likely very advanced nuclear weapons there. we already have troops in ukraine. the issue of our letter is to raise the importance so that people understand that we are about ready to see debacle number two of the biden administration, we saw afghanistan, china and russia are going to be more adventuresome as the results of the administration but when you think of afghanistan, you think of those planes leaving and people running towards those planes, people falling to their death and as you know, tucker, if those planes were russian, no one -- no one would be running toward them. this is the idea of america, of democracy, freedom. >> tucker: may i just ask really quick -- >> and it is certainly one that is an ally of ours. >> tucker: so the lesson of 20 years in afghanistan and the tragic and cowardly and counterproductive exit from afghanistan is that we need more troops in ukraine? i don't -- so why should the average american care about the territorial integrity of ukraine, sincerely? >> okay, so ukraine is a strategic import of the black sea. most of the reports that you've been seeing of russia being aggressive with our ships, aggressive with our planes, are in the area of the black sea, which is an important area for us and our nato allies, for countries, bulgaria, greece, and turkey, all border rid of which we have reciprocal defense agreement. we have not asked anybody to go to war with russia or to send troops to russia for ukraine for the purpose going to war with russia but it is incredibly important that they be providing lethal weapons, that they be providing intelligence so ukraine has an ability to defend itself. >> tucker: why is it incredibly important to america, i know from ukrainian perspective it's a credible important but why is it imports important enough to preserve the territorial integrity of ukraine went by the way our own territorial integrity has been flagrant we violated by a million foreign nationals coming in over the past ten months? i wonder why the emphasis on ukraine's and not ours. >> well, i think everyone has emphasis on our borders, tucker, but certainly i think you would -- >> tucker: have you called for american troops to our borders? >> the importance -- everyone has called for american troops -- that is on our side, tucker but i think what you're missing is the fact that because the president has failed in afghanistan, both russia and china are looking at threatening their neighbors, including taiwan, including ukraine, countries that are important to both our allies and to the strategic importance of the areas in which they are. what we do ask for is don't be obama. you have to recall, tucker, that when ukraine was invaded and crimea fell, obama sent blankets to the president in ukraine, he came to the house floor, joint session of congress and he begged for lethal weapons to be able to defend his own country against russia. he said i can't defend my country with blankets. that's what we've said is make certain that we give them what they need, give them intelligence, give them weapons, give them assistance. give them guidance, because it's important. >> tucker: but hold on, why would we take ukraine's side and not russia's side? it's a sincere question, if you're looking at america's perspective. who's got the energy reserves? who was the major player in world affairs? who's the potential counterbalance against china, which is the actual threat? why would we take ukraine's side, why would we be on russia's side? i'm totally confused. >> well, clearly. maybe if you get out a map and you look to see where the black sea is and romania, where we have our missile defense system, greece, and turkey, the entrance to the black sea and then from there you look at what the conflicts have already been on russia's areas there. ukraine it has a democracy, russia is an authoritarian regime that is seeking to impose its will upon a validly elected democracy in ukraine we are on the side of democracy, that's what people were chasing those planes afghanistan and wouldn't be chasing russian ones. we are for democracy, we are for liberty. we are not for authoritarian regimes coming in and changing borders by tank. russia isn't showing up in the board with ballot boxes, they are showing up on the border with tanks and that's why we need to make certain we are on the side of democracy and give the aid that's necessary so we don't have another obama sending blankets to a country that's being invaded. >> tucker: yeah, i mean -- for democracies in other countries, i guess, but i'm really for america and i think that our interest is in counterbalancing the actual threat, which is china, and the only other country with any throw weight that might help us do that is russia, and our continuation of the cold war has pushed russia towards china, and that does not serve our interests in any way, does it? or maybe it does. >> you have to understand this is not a cold war, this is a hot war. russia has already invaded ukraine and has taken crimea and annexed it and militarized. >> tucker: but how does that -- i'm glad you brought that up -- >> militarized. >> tucker: how does that hurt america exactly? they came into crimea, i guess i'm against that but i didn't notice aid to tactical -- >> advanced weaponry systems. >> tucker: okay but why do i care again? >> the issue -- you care because what russia is doing as they are rebuilding their area access of denial with crimea in syria to fortify what they had when they had the warsaw pact countries, many of which now are in nato and headed towards nato. so that we can make certain that liberty and democracy is strengthened. you should be against -- i'm sure you are, tucker -- any country using tanks to invade another and putting their will on that country and changing that country's borders. >> tucker: academically i am. but you know, there are a lot of priorities on the map here. last question, so you sent this letter to present biden asking for the commitment of the american troops to a foreign country. >> you miss read the letter, because what it said, it actually tells specifically -- we did not say send troops into ukraine, we set make certain that there's a military presence in the area so we can provide aid to ukraine in two important areas, intelligence. if we have troops in the area we can watch, we know what happens, we can know what washer is doing. at the second is lethal weapon so ukraine can defend itself. >> tucker: i got it, send lawyers, guns, and money. >> that congress suggested that anybody should go to war in ukraine with russia. no one. in the letter doesn't say that. >> tucker: i will let -- our viewers can pull up the letter on the internet and reach the conclusion. >> you can go to my website. spirit absolutely -- final question, our democracy is undermined when people come from other countries and that devalues the vote of the people who already live here, so that's an attack on our democracy. democracy has to have discernible borders. so where is the american military presence? where the republicans demanding that we send 101st or whatever it takes to close the border? never heard anybody say that. they are all whipped up about crimea. >> hey, tucker, unlike your anti-trump friend j.d. vance, i supported donald trump enclosing the border, including defending him, which you yourself reported, and that border was being closed on the policies that we had under donald trump which i supported when i supported donald trump. >> tucker: you actually wrote a letter to donald trump. now that we're getting factual here -- i don't want to be mean but you wrote a letter to trump in which you said yes, protect the border but make sure that we don't in any way take troops or material from our foreign commitments and bring them to the border, you said that in your letter. so i just thought that's just a different perspective. >> donald trump sent lethal weapons and intelligence. i'm a senior member of the armed services committee and the intelligence committee. what i'd ask for in that letter, donald trump did. >> tucker: yeah, no, i'm aware. i thought it was stupid then, i think it's stupid now. >> the obama administration did not and we believe that this it administration -- what i love about the fact that you brought attention to this is because the mainstream media is going to let russia invade ukraine without anybody knowing. if they're not going to know that the biden administration had options on the table, things they could have done and they could have done right now. >> tucker: not quite as preston as hondurans invading texas, which is maybe a little more imminent for most of us. that's my only point, we have an invasion going on right now, a million people, bigger than the population of boston or denver or washington, d.c., and we are all like no, no big deal. that's a big deal. in my view. >> tucker, i don't know we are arguing with her because i'm on your side all of those issues except apparently you need a little education on ukraine, i'd be glad to send you some stuff on it. donald trump thought it was important and i supported donald trump's policies there. >> tucker: amen. commerce men, appreciate your coming on here, thank you very much. >> thank you, thank you. >> tucker: so really kind of the last point in the bill of rights, the last constitutional right they haven't messed with yet is the second amendment. now we learned it administration is cracking down on tens of millions of gun owners across the country by secretly amassing a database of their names. how is this legal? we will speak to someone who knows the details. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: here's a story for you, the biden administration apparently has secretly amassed a database of more than 50 million gun owners in this country. they're not supposed to be doing that. "the washington free beacon" obtained documents showing their collecting and storing records on private done transactions it looks like to build a database of gun owners. that is the nightmare scenario. again, they are not supposed to be doing that. a spokesman for gun owners of america joins us now. thanks so much for coming on. so this is, again, exactly what they're not supposed to be doing. it's a threat to a constitutional right. tell us what we know about it. >> yes, well, gun owners of of america has obtained information from an inside source from the atf, actually and it shall not the atf is actually been holding onto these records, like you said, 49 million records from people who have been part of out of business gun stores who essentially have been being able to buy the guns and then also have information that have to do with the guns itself. and so unfortunately atf has had this opportunity to of course get these firearms through fire arm information through the laws of the last few years. they had 20 years to do so because the law they have right now, but with the biden administration is trying to do right now is to extend that where 100% of these gun owners are going to be able to be obtained for their record and collected so they can use that to essentially continue a gun registration and of course gun registration goes on to gun confiscation of course. >> tucker: inevitably, that's the entire point of it. so in other words, people who obeyed the law with the background check with the assurance that their names would not be entered into a database, their private information would not be kept by creepy politicians who wanted to end the bill of rights, those people have been betrayed. >> absolutely, and like you said before, this is unconstitutional. it's not very hard for most people to know that the atf putting any type of infringements obviously shall not bring in fringed is in our second amendment, is unconstitutional and shows that this is a showing that the biden administration has worked very hard to make sure that law-abiding citizens, gun owners were just trying to do the right thing, trying to protect themselves and their family, that they are considered the criminals here and they're doing everything in their power to make it harder for us to access firearms and do it legally. >> tucker: even as they dropped cases against people who use guns illegally. the normans of america, thanks for coming on tonight. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: we told you at the top of the show there was so much that happened today in the kyle rittenhouse trial, it's hard to process it all. it really told you a lot about the society and justice system. our friend laura ingraham was glued to it, she's an attorney among many other things. she joins us next to make sense of what we saw. you can get official merchandise -- official -- tuckercarlson.com -- whatever that is. click shop during the break if you like, we will be right back. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> tucker: amazing trial today as we told you is the open but kyle rittenhouse took the stand, he described a moment that a convicted -- no exaggeration, read it online -- that he threatened to kill him. watch. >> mr. rosenbaum was walking with a steel chain, he had a blue mask around his face, he was just mad about something. we were asking people if they needed medical help and then he screamed -- sorry for my language -- he screamed "if i catch any of you believe i'm going to [bleep] kill you." >> tucker: a nightmare scenario. rosenbaum then chased kyle rittenhouse, grabbed him, and tried to pull his gun away. so how to assess this? well, laura ingraham is a white-collar criminal defense attorney and so we thought she'd be the perfect person to turn to. she joins us now. hey, laura. >> hey, tucker, former. i'm a recovering lawyer but this was wild. i mean, this entire case from the beginning, you knew and i knew, anyone with a pair of eyes knew what happened. rittenhouse was under threat of imminent bodily harm, he was obviously totally justified in using lethal force to defend himself but apparently in the new world we live in, if you're a counter protester or an observer at a left-wing mob or riot, you actually have to allow yourself to be shot if you are threatened -- even if you are threatened with severe imminent bodily harm. apparently that's the situation that the left prefers the scenario to play out as, but in the real world we actually do have judges and juries that can see the facts dispassionately for themselves, and it looks like this case is certainly going against this prosecutor. >> tucker: yeah, i mean, it looks like rosenbaum tried to touch them wrong minor in this case. so this video has been out for more than a year. i know that you assessed it. there was never -- if we are being honest there was never really a question about what happened, was there? >> no, there was never a question about what happened from the beginning, but there seems to be a pattern here, tucker. with every major institution, whether it's public health, the fbi, our universities, everything that the left burrows into becomes political. even the u.s. military leadership, which you have documented on your show in so many ways, everything is political. like facts don't matter, covid, political, facts don't matter. natural immunity doesn't matter. the goal is always an ideological one. in the media is ideological so they drive that narrative and then at some point later on you learn the truth -- remember nick sandmann, same deal, learned the truth ultimately about him and what he did not do to that native american gentleman he was standing and just looking at. that was his offense, looking at someone. >> tucker: it's making you less ideological. you've got to care but the physical reality. if it's degrading around do you have to try and fix it and speaking about, california, our biggest state, is degrading, and you have done a new special for fox nation on it called california on edge, grateful that you did. what did you find? >> well, there's a lot to be in despair about in california. i know you've documented some of this, so we went into from north to south and went into some of the most distressed neighborhoods but talked the on just the current crime to the small business owners who are trying to still make a living there, haven't abandoned it yet. their stories are shocking, enlightening, and yet there's moments of hope too, tucker, with the police officers who are still sticking it out, trying to do the right thing, and i feature a couple of these incredible able doing community safety partnerships and actually forging relationships with african-american women who are like matriarchs of entire neighborhoods. ms. green is someone everyone will like to learn more about in california on the edge, her story is amazing and we feature that as well. >> tucker: were any of these people at the wedding in san francisco last weekend or was that just the governor? >> that was just a governor and other people who prefer to go mask list when the cameras -- they think the cameras aren't rolling. >> tucker: it's beyond belief. i'm going to watch this. what happens in california, which is the prettiest place on planet earth, that's just true. it really matters i think to the rest of us, so thank you for doing this. laura ingraham. thanks. >> great to see you. >> tucker: you can watch her new special, california on the edge, right now in fox nation. told you can get 90 days priya fox nation, just go to tuckercarlson.com. a lot going on tonight, we will be right back. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: the guy who wandered through the capitol in january has been in jail for 10 months. the biden administration made a major decision in that case. kevin brings us that story. >> 51 months just over 4 years behind bars and that is what prosecutors called for. the so-call sham an. that would be the longest sentence handed down to any individual. the government doesn't allege any assault or attack on an individual or property but his prominence for asking for a severe sanction. they went on to state this. in addition to entering the building, the government accuses him of using social media to incite the mob. his lawyers say his remorse is sincere and his history of mental illness and in solitary confinement and asking for leniency. >> tucker: completely insane. a guy shoots up with a school in fort worth gets out in one day. back tomorrow. the great sean hannity takes over new. >> sean: welcome to "hannity." a fox news alert. day 88 since joe biden abandoned our fellow americans and green card holders and siv applicants in afghanistan and the pentagon admitted biden abandoned family members of u.s. troops of the there are still hundreds of americans trapped and abandoned by joe biden. he doesn't care -- he turned page. his words not mine.