0 with grace. this is all you can eat. holiday buffet. a smorgasbord of all you want. all you need. did i sit at the wrong table, sir? i ve got to get list longer than santa, but i ve got harry and david. so i m not stressing. i m saying the holidays sent my best to your favorite pairs shop. my favorite client, a banquet in a box. my brother got a christmas brunch. harry and david makes the holidays a piece of cake spread joy is here with harry and david. good evening and welcome to tucker carlson tonight. happy friday. since it is friday, we thought we would take just a moment to address one of the enduring mysteries of modern life. what do people do all day? if you ve ever been in an affluent urban area around lunchtime, you probably wondered that yourself. you see scores of fashionably dressed young people buzzing around by an expensive salads, strolling purposefully as they listen. podcast you never heard of on their tiny three hundred dollar intercranial headphones . whate
anyone who complains about the sexualization of children or who even notices it? noticing it, they tell us , is an attack on the lgbt community. so the assumption here, their assumption apparently is that gay people are in favor of molesting kids and of course ,in favor of performing mutilation on minors. but that s absurd. no normal person is for this or not. absur it s notd. anti-gay to oppose kiddy or to feel a horror at the fact that doctors are cutting the off okif healthyt o teenage girls. these are crimes.ct and most gay people thinkteenag they re crimes. why wouldn t they think that pel protecting children from adults who want to exploit them is ant basic human instinct and it s a noble instinct. and yet nbc news is doing its best to redefine that instinct as a crime. yesterday, nbc brought on its law enforcement expert a by thes a former assistant director of the fbi to warn viewerassists and anyone who complains about the sexualisation of children will be punished b
on the number of photographs that they received in the mail n . ma totally total since before when we didn tte have the internet, when we didn t have distribution. but the way that the guidelinene is now structured based on that set of circumstances is leading to extreme disparities in the system because it s so easy for people i to get volumes of this kind of material nowol by computers. now we ll just concede up front we are not world renowned legal minds or tront even techny lawyers on this show, but we re going to try to understand what the judge just said. so congress passed a law saying possessing a lot off kiddy is a very serious crime and then k anid invention. the internet comes along and makes it easier to collect a lot more kiddy. so according to noted legal mind, ketanji brown jackson, that somehow makes the act of possessing a lot of kiddy less
down sentences that so far beneath federal sentencing guidelines continue the explanation for her low sentences with the guidelines were written before the internet. now that peopleuidelines can ame amounts of kiddy. the guidelines are too strict. that was honestly her explanation. maybe you agree with that ifon you don t tell us the legal principle behind it, if you even if you agree that because the internet makes acquiring kiddy easier, we t shouldn t be as tough on kiddy . do you think that s a fair standard? it s certainly fair to ask about it, no. in a supreme court hearing for comparison sake and we didn tt want to go here. it sring just too obvious. but we can t control ourselves.u this isrs how the emotive weepiw cory booker treats the last nominee to the supreme court, oe someone whose politics he doesn t agree with . he told us at the timed that brett kavanaugh was so odious, so morally filthy, so satanic that anyone who could vote for his nomination was
which we re choosing the next supreme court justice. s they re saying it is immoral because the way that she looks to ask her real questions, what we re getting before she takes a seat for life and of course this is the whole point. it skes gretta sunberg play. you a throw someone up there. who represents her views who can t be questioned because anyone who questions the person is of courseie mean or racist or sexist or whatever , you know, pick your attack. but p the person is immune from sincere question that s for telling and yet somehow it gets even more nauseating. the washington post editorial board saw that grovelingreth and decided it didn t go far enough. so they published this headline yesterday, quote f, republicans boast they have not pulled a cavnar. in fact, they treated n jackson worse. so if you read the post piece and you shouldn t obviously jeff bezos as newspapers utter garbage, you will find that the post editorial board is aghast that republicans ask, contends jack