Ned Ryun on Who’s Planning to Sabotage Trump From Within, Is DOGE Too Ambitious, & the FBI’s Future
01:48:01 Share

Is this some of your new stuff? Oh, it's so good. Do you use nicotine products? I don't. This is totally life- This is Alp. This is life-affirming. I'm not bragging, but I feel great at 55. I'll just say that. Okay. Sorry. You ready?

Welcome to the Tucker Carlson Show. We bring you stories that have not been showcased anywhere else. And they're not censored, of course, because we're not gatekeepers. We are honest brokers here to tell you what we think you need to know and do it honestly. Check out all of our content at TuckerCarlson.com. Here's the episode. Okay, so there are so many...

unfolding stories swirling around that give the attentive person anxiety. Anyone who's paying very close attention to what's happening in the world right now is anxious about it. I will say that. But there is also a lot to look forward to and a lot to be comforted by. Yes. And I just want to go through with you, if we could, since you were right in the middle of this election. Yep. Working on behalf, outside the campaign, but on behalf. Very hard project. Of reform and...

on behalf of the country, really, you know the answers to this question. What are the things that you're looking forward to over the next four years? Well, first of all, stop to the madness. I mean, there was no way we were going to last another four years with the insanity that was going on. So we can put a stop to that at least for the moment. I think one of the most exciting things to me is... Can we just pause for one second? I think that's not an overstatement. It's not. I mean, if that's all... I'm going to be disappointed if that's all we get, but if that's all we get...

That's a serious step in the right direction. So just name three trends that are, well, I guess Biden's still president, that have been in progress the last four years that we could not sustain for another four years. Can I start with immigration? Yeah. I mean, this is insane. I mean, we're seeing what we've seen over the last four years, not only the wide open borders. We don't even really know who's come in. No. We know there's tens of millions of illegals that have come in, millions of getaways. Yeah.

I still don't understand why we haven't had a deeper conversation about the tens of thousands of Chinese national males that have come in over the southern border. Like, what the hell is going on with that? Whoever else has come in. At the same time, conversation about the fact that for four years they've been importing new voters. I would hope that every Republican, regardless of where they are on the spectrum, because again, we know that not all Republicans are created equal,

that even the Chamber of Commerce Republicans understand over the next four years for their own self-preservation. They should be wholeheartedly behind Donald Trump's deportation efforts. We start with the hard criminals. We start with those illegals that have criminal records. And we keep right on going and deporting all of the new Democratic voters that they've imported over the last four years for the sake of self-preservation. If you want to have a two-party system instead of a single-party state, the immigration has to be fixed. And...

I would argue to the point of if we do not have, if Donald Trump does not unleash Tom Holman and Stephen Miller to go all the way to actually deport everybody that is needed to be deported to fix the southern border, it calls into question who we are as a country. I mean, this to me is one of the things that, again, if you don't have a border, you don't have sovereignty, you don't have citizens.

What does it actually mean to be a country? What does it mean to be a citizen? What does it mean to be America? What does it mean to be an American citizen? What does it mean to have a constitution? We're very unique people. We have a very unique way of life. And with everything that has been taking place in regards to immigration, if it was to have continued for another four years, again, I think all bets are off on who we are as a people, who we are as a country moving forward. So immigration, first thing. Foreign policy...

I mean, that to me, what are we even doing on a whole host of fronts in regards to Ukraine? That whole mess is still going where we're still apparently sending billions of dollars over to Ukraine before they shut the lights out on the Biden White House.

But the foreign policy, again, getting us to the point, and also the weakness that we have demonstrated on the international stage for the last four years, at a certain point, that was going to cause even more serious implications if it was another four years of that. And I don't know where it would have ended. Obviously, Donald Trump showing up. This week, I mean, as if he hasn't started enough wars. I mean, he started all kinds of wars. People aren't, I mean, we're in battle with the Houthis right now. Right. But Biden just announced,

um that in the final couple weeks of his administration he's gonna start a war with iran with with lindsey graham's full support um that this this to me is at some point at some point i hope that we can restructure the republican party in the primaries of 2026. that's another topic that would love to discuss with you but yeah at some point donald trump won on an america first message right

It'd be really nice if the rest of the Republicans fell in line with that and understanding that the people voted for change and the change is what they want with America first. And that includes Donald Trump's approach on foreign policy. That does not include more shooting wars with Iran and others across the globe. At the same time, there is a certain approach that I think Donald Trump brings to foreign policy that brought us peace. I mean, four years of no new wars, peace, peace.

He has the ability to do that, and it does not involve starting new wars or foreign intervention. So I would say that's one of the other topics. One of the other issues that I think has been a blessing for us with Trump winning, the economy. I mean, can you imagine if we had another four years of this economy, where we'd be? When they tell us, they gaslight us and tell us the economy's fine, inflation, all these things are figments of your imagination, everybody's doing just fine.

And you look at, and that's what I do with the American majority. I work with the grassroots. I'm out there with everyday people. It is not fine. And I couldn't imagine another four years of them being devastated economically where we would be. So those three things, immigration, foreign policy, economy, inflation. I know personally, someone I'm close to the other day just told me, a middle-class person, solid, you know, probably makes money.

I mean, I don't know, probably makes $160 a year if I had to guess. Which used to be considered pretty solid. Pretty darn good. Salary. I was shocked when I made $100,000 a year when I was in my 30s. But anyway, worried about food prices. Yes. No, I know. How? It's kind of shocking when you realize that people that are making what would be considered, used to be considered pretty good salary. Kind of rich, yeah. Yeah, we're feeling a little pinched here.

Yeah. Okay. So sorry, I just wanted to, because I think it's just a, you know, stopping the destruction or slowing it down is itself a win, as you noted. Exactly. Okay. But then the next step becomes, Donald Trump to me, listen, nobody's perfect, right? We all have many imperfections and nobody's a perfect person. But I think Donald Trump's a man for the hour. He has shown and demonstrated political courage. I cannot even begin to imagine

the last four years of the political, the lawfare that has been put on him, used against him, the incredible pressure to try and destroy him. And I've told people this, and I'll say it here. Donald Trump knew what he was going up against. He didn't run away from it. He ran at it. That to me is one of the most amazing parts of this story. In some ways, I think back to the story of David and Goliath, and it's one of my favorite stories out of Scripture.

If you go back and look at it, David didn't run away. He didn't kind of slowly approach Goliath. He ran at him. And that kind of to me is Donald Trump knows exactly what he's up against. He's up against very powerful forces. I mean, as much as we despise the administrative state and the deep state and the corporate propagandists and all these things, these are very powerful forces and they can do a lot of damage to your life. He didn't have to do this. He could have been enjoying a very good life somewhere else in the world, playing golf for the rest of his life every day and the lovely spot in the world. He ran at them.

And he took incredible pressure, incredible body blows, kept running at them, and in many ways triumphed over these people that were trying to destroy him. And now he's back in a position of power to be able to implement, I think, a vision for this country that will begin a restoration. This is, I don't consider myself a conservative necessarily, because what are we actually conserving? This to me is one of my great frustrations with the conservative movement writ large is

Explain to me again what we've actually been conserving over the last 40, 50, 60 years.

I'm more interested, and it's a very reactive term too, conservative. I'm far more interested in restoration, in being a restorationist, in restoring the republic, in restoring a constitutional republic, in restoring a government of, by, and for the people that actually promotes the interests of the American people, which is kind of the premise of the American republic, right? All power flows from the American people, from the people to their duly elected representatives, who they make the stewards of the power and money given to them.

to put together a government that actually promotes and protects the interests of the American people every day on every issue. And we've kind of lost sight of that. And Donald Trump's, the great temerity of Donald Trump back in 2016 was that he kind of showed up and said, hey, I think a government of, by, and for the people should actually promote the American people and their interests. And that's why I think he was considered such a great threat by permanent D.C., the administrative state, whatever you want, however you want to define it. This, to me, is a moment in time where we have a shot.

where we have an actual shot of restoring the republic, of restoring a government of, for, and by the people, to the people, to promote the people, to protect their interests. That, to me, is one of the most interesting things over the next four years, but it's going to require someone like Donald Trump, with his political courage, instilling into others political courage to actually do the right things. I'm a little nervous about Mike Johnson as Speaker. I have my doubts about John Thune.

But I think if he can actually instill the political courage necessary into Republicans on the Hill, but also into his various nominees, who I think will actually have what it takes to do what they should be doing in the various departments and agencies, we could be in for a singular moment in American history in which we look back and go, this was the turning point where we actually began to restore the republic.

Um, so many threads, but before we get to, no, no, I, I, um, I think it's a great overview. Will all of Donald Trump's nominees be confirmed by the Republican Senate? I feel pretty good about a lot of them. I would not be surprised if Pete Hegseth gets 52. We'll see. It feels that way. Yeah, it feels like he's going to get... I'll be a lot more specific. They don't like Tulsi Gabbard. They don't like Tulsi. I think RFK's got some problems. Um...

I feel good about Pete. I feel good about Russ Vogt. I think Russ is going to be one of the most important. Nobody really talks about OMB outside of D.C. I'm telling you, one of the most important vehicles that Donald Trump will be able to use to deconstruct and dismantle the administrative state is OMB. And you've got to have somebody like Russ Vogt. Ed Martin's going to be the chief of staff. Bishop has his deputy. And then I'm hoping he gets Eric Ulan in as deputy director of management. That's a rock star team at OMB. Yeah.

Marty McCary, FDA. Amazing. Yeah, that would be huge. Paul Atkins at SEC. I feel good about that. So I think a lot of these people are going to be— But you can't— I think he's going to get an overwhelming number of them through without too many problems. I think Tulsi and RFK are going to be question marks, if I'm being honest. I don't think you can tolerate that. I don't either. Because it's one thing to get like—and I don't want to attack anybody that hasn't even started—

But, you know, there are some nominees who are just like, whatever. They're like everyone. They don't have views that are consistent with what Trump ran on. That's a fact. And so if the Republican Congress rubber stamps their buddies...

whatever. Right. But I'm sorry, they're not in charge of the Republican Party. They're a lot less popular than Donald Trump. And I don't understand if you're, you know, Bobby Kennedy's point is like really important. He's not a perfect person, but we have a system that is killing people and he's a step in the right direction. Same with Tulsi. Yeah. She's not perfect person. No one is. But our foreign policy is insane and it's hurting the United States. So like, why wouldn't the White House call over to Republican senators and say, oh,

You get in our way, we're going to crush you. How's that sound? I mean it. No, I've proposed this to certain people behind the scenes. Yeah, like, let's go. So we're not going to put up with that. Well, first of all, the agent of change. People voted for Donald Trump. Yeah. I mean, this was a very clear election. You get choice A, choice B, very different approaches to government and to the future.

There was no real illusion about, like, there's no confusion about what people were voting for. And they voted definitively for Donald Trump. First Republican to win the popular vote since 2004. First Republican to win 311 electoral votes since 1988. First non-consecutive president since Grover Cleveland. I mean, this is a historical election. He wins. Agent of change. Agent of change gets his change agents back.

In the various departments and agencies. Well, yeah. And the Senate gets to advise and consent. They don't get to say, no, we want our buddy or we don't like this person, so we're not going to give you this person. Donald Trump won.

Donald Trump won and also, by the way, I would make the argument, helped get them the Senate and the House. So you have majorities because of Donald Trump. Donald Trump won. Donald Trump would like these people to actually be in these departments and agencies. And unless they're a criminal or unless there's some terrible thing in their past that is disqualifying, you get to confirm them.

In the story. Well, let's be honest. Tulsi Gabbard and Bobby Kennedy are opposed by lobbyists. That's what opposes them. Right. Bobby Kennedy is opposed by pharma and ag lobbyists. Tulsi Gabbard is opposed by lobbyists acting on behalf of foreign countries. That's a fact. Yeah. So there is no reason that lobbyists should take precedent over the population of the United States.

And so why wouldn't you say to a cop, I can think of a cop. Yeah, but then you're acting, so, but DC, you've been in DC, I've been around 25 years. But where's the cleansing sort of justice where you call up certain senators, I'm not going to name names. You should. And say, not only will we primary you and make sure you lose your Senate seat, we'll make certain you don't get a job after you leave the Senate. And then we're going to unleash some of the toughest people in the Republican Party to take a really close look at you. So I propose to- We're going to do to you what you plan to do to our nominees. I have proposed to some people behind the scenes-

that Donald Trump should have a very honest conversation with some of these senators. Yeah. You have friends and family and associates that would like to be involved in this administration.

Some of you have primaries in 2026. Let me be very clear here. If you oppose or vote against any of my nominees, I will find primary opponents for you in 26. Also, none of your family or friends or associates will ever find a job inside of this administration. I will become one of your worst enemies. Period. But also, if you're going to attack the—if you're going to sit back and allow people to call Bobby Kennedy a nutcase and Tulsi Gabbard an agent of a foreign power, really—

I mean, I'm thinking of one senator in particular from the Northeast, you know, whatever, without even getting in. Right. These are people who are vulnerable. Yes. Really? We're going to look into Bobby Kennedy's behavior? Well, how about we look into yours? I think they're using— Like, let's not play. I'm sick of this. I know. I think they're trying the carrot approach right now, and I'm— Well, we need the flaming sword of justice at a certain point. I'm usually the stick approach first. Yeah. Yeah.

So I'd really like the big stick to come out. Let's see how these hearings begin in really just a couple days, how they start to play out. But I think there needs to be a conversation behind the scenes of, you know, we'd love for you to do the right thing. And if you don't, there are going to be serious consequences. Because most of these elected officials, this is one thing that I've noticed about D.C. having been there for way too long.

They are experts in self-preservation. Yeah. They want to come back. That's what they care about. Right. They want to come back in two years as a member of the House. They want to come back in six years as a member of the Senate. Let's have a little chit-chat about what your political future looks like if you don't want to actually give me my nominees.

Well, especially on the basis of no good reason, on the basis of like the most corrupt motives, pressure from lobbyists to oppose. And I just want to be clear, it's Bobby Kennedy and Tulsi Gabbard we're talking about. I think you're absolutely right. And they're going to impugn their characters. This is how DC has operated for way too long. Tulsi Gabbard has never had a sip of alcohol in her life.

you're gonna call her a bad person really the the the corporation the corporate lobbyists and all of these various interests have way too much say in how a senator actually or congressman actually operates instead of the people that actually voted them into office and you and i both know this because the lobbyists are in there every day pressuring making sure there's a lot of money coming in for the re-election campaign so they can get re-elected the idea of self-preservation

It's a pretty, I mean, there's a whole host of things wrong with our system today, but this is one of them. The bell that rings that they respond to is not the right bell. It's been over a decade since Edward Snowden, who is a hero, exposed the US government for spying on its citizens. He didn't commit the crime they did, but he, of course, was punished. Now, you would think that the information that he brought to the public would cause permanent Washington to pause, reflect, apologize,

for violating the Constitution to the United States, the privacy and the rights of American citizens. But that's not what happened. No, Ed Snowden is still in exile. And in fact, just this year, the House of Representatives extended the rights of government agencies to spy on you. This is happening in public. It's infuriating to watch. American citizens have lost, as of today, the battle with their government to have privacy and freedom. You're being watched. So what can you do? Congress is not going to help you.

Well, you can actually do something. You can use ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN returns privacy to your life. It's an app that reroutes 100% of what you do online through encrypted channels. That means nobody can see what you do online. So if you want to protect yourself from corporate and government spying, and we do, go to expressvpn.com slash tucker. And if you do that, you get an extra three free months of privacy.

That's expressvpn.com slash Tucker, and you get an extra three months free. It's worth it. Privacy always is. So J.D. Vance said something I thought so I'd never have forgotten it during the election. And he said the Republican Party needs to be like a legit opposition party.

and needs to oppose the other side. Like, we need two parties, okay? We need to be in balance. And one of the things that the other side does, and this is the key to Pelosi, you know, Pelosi's like kind of an idiot, but she's really tough. Yes. Like, actually tough. And she'll sit people down and just have, you know, daughter of a mafia mayor, like she knows how to do this, from Baltimore. Right. And just like, let's be clear about what's going to happen if you do that. And I don't know a single person in the Republican Party who will do that. No, this is what concerns me a little bit about...

The current Republican leadership in both the House and the Senate of I wouldn't mind politically speaking, I want to make that very clear. Politically speaking, it's OK to break a few legs and just say this is the reality of what's going to happen. A lot of moist handshakes. Yeah. Republican leadership. So this is this is a bigger frustration with the Republican Party.

People give you power, political power, to use the political power to enact change. I think too many Republicans have come to D.C. and are like, isn't this a lovely experience? It's going to be a great career. We have a lot of careerists who are enjoying the fun career in D.C.,

And Democrats are like, "By God, we have political power. We're going to break you to achieve what we want to achieve to fundamentally change and transform this country." They're religious zealots. And we're all sitting here going, "Oh, that's kind of mean. We probably shouldn't do that."

If you have been given political power, you should freaking use the political power given to you by the American people. Or they might start to question, why did we give you political power in the first place? Because you don't know how to use it. Yeah. So I've watched this like for decades and it's driving me slowly. It's slowly driving me crazy. But why isn't there like an outside group, like a 501c3 of some sort, or c4, I guess, to...

to do this, to say, like, we're going to extract a cost if you don't serve your voters. It's super simple. You got elected on a program, you've ignored the program and the people who voted for the program in favor of lobbyists. You can't do that anymore. We're going to hurt you. You know the RNC is never going to be that. Even though you would like the RNC. The RNC is gone. It doesn't even exist anymore. You and Charlie Kirk have replaced it, so I get it.

We need a significant, and it's not minor, it's not tens of millions, right? You're talking with hundreds of millions every election cycle to have a proper enforcement mechanism of, you said you were going to do this, this is what the people voted for. If you do not toe the line on this, we will find a competent, credible primary candidate for you, and he or she will be well-funded, and we will crush you.

That doesn't exist right now. Well, and it's not just that. I mean, I look at people, including some in leadership, who clearly have had a hard conversation with someone who's like, we've got your online porn records, or we know who your boyfriend is, or, you know, you got wasted on a Codell to Croatia and acted like a pig. And we know that. I mean, clearly, these are people who are being blackmailed. Like, I can think of one in particular who's clearly being blackmailed.

And I'm against blackmail, but I'm also in favor of serving your constituents, of restoring democracy to the United States. People vote for something, they should get it.

And they're not getting it and they never get it. And I'm just... The republic is in the balance. Yes. And I would make the argument, one of the arguments I make in American Leviathan is we're not really a constitutional republic anymore. Do you think? We got a shot at restoring it. The republic is at stake. Freedom is at stake. Liberty is at stake. The future of your kids, your grandkids, future generations is at stake. We are in a cold political war. We have been in a cold political war for decades with the un-American left.

At some point, are you going to figure out the reality of what time it is, Republicans in D.C., before it's too late?

And if you understand where we're at in our nation's history and the singular moment that we have and what is at stake, I would hope they would find it somewhere within themselves to go to the mats and to fight with everything they have for their future, for their children's future, for their grandchildren's future, and understand it might make you feel a little queasy in the moment, like this is really hardcore, we're using some pretty brutal tactics.

Freedom, future of the country, there are a lot of things at stake. And not only for this country,

For the world. I mean, think about who we are for the rest of the world. The United States. We are a beacon of hope. We are really the world's last great hope. We are, if we fall, there's nobody coming for us. That's for sure. There's absolutely no one that will come and save America if it falls. We are the hope of the world. We're the hope of the world. Even as we decline, we're even more important, I think, as the last free place. We have to think of the stakes not only for our country, but for the world as well. I agree. Dear God, find a backbone and understand we're...

if it's street style brawling tactics that are necessary to win, I think it's justified in doing that because for God's sake, they just tried to abuse our entire legal system and justice system to take out Donald Trump, quite frankly, others as well. Honestly, if they had won, I think they would have gone after some of us that are not in DC, but are considered somewhat prominent in the conservative movement. No, I told people, I told my staff,

And I told others that I was working with this last year and, you know, pretty significant project. There is a sense of urgency coming from me specifically, and there should be urgency from other leaders of organizations because if they win again, the next people that are going to show trial and lawfare are us. So we better freaking win. And if we don't win, we've got problems.

I don't think that's crazy at all. No, I don't. And I think we actually have to have that conversation about where these people on the left are. They're deeply un-American. They are antithetical to freedom. They're antithetical to liberty. If they had the political power to do whatever they wanted to us, I think they would. I don't think I'm overstating that at all.

And so people have asked, how do you think we get back to normal with this un-American left in this country? And my argument to them has been we beat them into political submission and send them into the political wilderness for generations. That's the only way you get back to normal.

But you have to frame the entire... You have to build the entire conservative movement around political power with the right people, achieving political power, maintaining political power, and keeping it for long enough that you can actually achieve all the reform while putting them into the political wilderness. And I don't think we're actually organized or structured that way at all right now. I do think...

A lot of meaningful reform will come from outside the party. Yeah. As it has on the left. They've been really effective and thoughtful in building up outside organizations that fund their party and keep it, you know, aligned.

keep it on the track that they think it should be on. Of course, I find, you know, I find their goals repugnant, but I think they've been very clever. I'm a great admirer of the left in regards to achieving political power and how they structure themselves and their, how they have structured themselves to achieve political power for all the wrong reasons. All their policy ideas are terrible for this country.

But they have structured themselves to achieve that. And in fact, based off all the numbers and statistics I've seen, the left is in the minority in this country. And yet they have an undue influence in politics and the various institutions because they have structured themselves to achieve power in the institutions and politically how they've invested their time and money into doing that. We, on the other hand...

I mean, I know some people love a good white paper and like some of the things that the think tanks do. We are not structured correctly to achieve and maintain political power. And I think that's one of the things that,

that I hope that I can achieve over the next four, five, six, seven, eight years, however long it takes, for people to understand if we do the right things in the field, in the various states, we can achieve and maintain political power for years to come. But you actually have to be doing the right things. Yeah, and have the right goals. I mean, power is never an end in itself. It's, you know, it's harnessed in service of... Right. Right.

fighting corruption and improving the lives of the people who live here. And restoring a representative democracy. So with the caveat that in the end all politics is disappointing because the point of life is not power or politics, it's, you know, it's God in my opinion. Yeah, it is. But, um...

You always be disappointed the closer you get to the political process, the more horrified you're going to be. That's you grew up around it. I should say. I mean, your father was. Yeah, he was in the house for 10 years. Yeah. Famous congressman. So, you know, the system better than anybody. And I think people who don't know it, once they get a glimpse of it, they're like, oh, that's repulsive. I want to go back home. So, like, it's just inherently disappointing. It's where ignorance is bliss comes in handy. Yeah. But it doesn't mean that one outcome is not better than the other. It is better than the other. So.

With that in mind, now that we've lowered the bar a little bit, let's just start. What are you excited about? What can this administration achieve in the next couple of years? What can they achieve? What will they achieve? What I hope they will achieve?

I want Donald Trump. I'm not interested in trimming this government. I'm not interested in making it more efficient. I'm interested in shattering this administrative state into a million pieces. I think Donald Trump has figured out who the enemy is over the last, call it nine years, in which I think he truly showed up in D.C. January of 2017.

as the duly elected representative, president of the American people, shows up in D.C. and goes, "I'm the duly elected president. I get to decide a lot of the foreign and domestic policy," and ran into a system of government that said, "Yeah, we don't think so. We think we decide." And I think it was a startling moment for him when he realized, "I thought we were a constitutional republic, representative democracy,

And then folks in D.C. are like, no, we're not really that. We're an administrative state. The unelected bureaucrats and their allies were the ones that actually decide these things. A lot of these things were settled years ago. Foreign policy, for example. This is the crazy part to me. Donald Trump's one of his great sins.

was showing up and thinking, I want an election. People voted for change. One of them was different approach in foreign policy. So we're going to actually enact that. Like, no, we already settled that years ago. You don't get to decide that at all. It's already been decided by the smart people at the State Department, like Victoria Nuland. And I think that for him was a moment where he realized we have a real problem. Then, of course, he became a target

of his own government, the DOJ and the FBI and all these people trying to take out the duly elected president of the United States with fake FISA warrants and fake dossiers and all this stuff. And he realized we have a serious problem here. So leading up to now and then the four years of lawfare in which...

on the most spurious of charges. They literally, I don't know the exact figure, but I have to guess it was hundreds of millions they soaked out of his campaign in regards to legal fees and not only like trying to destroy him as a person, but also just suck cash out of him. I think he's coming back

This month and being sworn in for another term and fully understanding we have a form of government that is running this country that has nothing to do with the Constitutional Republic. So I hope I sincerely hope that he understands who the enemy is, that he has to go at them. They've already declared war on him. This is not about him declaring war on the administrative state. They declared war on him years ago.

And it's him responding in kind and going, we are not going to take this sitting down. And I hope on day one, I've got a few thoughts on this. I'm glad you asked. That he would go out and fire hundreds of thousands of federal employees day one, GS-12s, GS-13s, just pick out random names, fire them.

Federal employee unions are going to sue back, stays. They're going to go back and forth through the courts to get to the Supreme Court, probably 18 months, two years, to ask a fundamental question. Does the head of the executive branch, the duly elected president of the United States, the Article II branch head, get to hire and fire whoever he wants to inside of this branch? Is the question, is it yes or no?

And I would hope this Supreme Court says yes. And at that point, Donald Trump becomes the demolition man for the administrative state, because that's where most of the administrative state resides is inside the Article Two branch, the executive branch of our government. Donald Trump goes for broke and he starts firing people. My hope is that he's also told some of these new nominees that are going to be secretaries, you're going to go in and on day one announce that

I'm Linda McMahon. I'm the new secretary of education. I'm going to be the last secretary of education because by the time I'm done here, we are going to shut down this department. And then on top of that, we're going to not only shut down this building, we're going to implode it. We're going to raise it to the ground and we're going to build freedom parks over this.

I mean, that is the approach that has to be taken by Trump day one of going right at the administrative state. I'm not interested in making it more efficient. I'm not interested in cutting regulations. I'm not interested in cutting spending. Those are all in effect. The cause is the state. You have to shatter it into a million pieces. So that's my biggest hope. And I think he actually has the moral and political courage to actually do that.

My hope and prayer, quite frankly, is that all of his various nominees have the exact same political and moral courage to do the same thing, because that is the issue. I'm telling you, Tucker, every issue that we are experiencing today in this country, in D.C. specifically, but in some ways in other aspects of the country, comes from a deeply unconstitutional administrative state that I think is

has nothing to do with advancing or promoting the interests of the American people. That's the fight. That is the issue. That is the thing. It's a big ask of a cabinet secretary because in cutting your staff, you cut your power. Yeah. That's my concern. Yeah. Capture. Right. No, my concern is that these secretaries, these new nominees who are going to be confirmed, the secretary is going to walk in and go, oh my gosh, I'm secretary of this department. Isn't this wonderful? And then how can I be as effective as possible as the new secretary of this various department? Yeah.

and all the power that I have to actually enact change. No, no, the whole point is for you to make this thing go away, to make it end, to make it cease to exist. I have questions about some of them. Doge. Not part, these are not federal employees. Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, they're not going to become federal employees, but they're going to oversee what they're saying is the most transformative effort ever done.

shrink government to do to the federal government what Elon did to Twitter. I hope so. How will that work? I think they're going to run most of it through OMB. Right. Right. They're going to run through Ross and his team and advise strategies, you know, plans. I'll be completely honest. When they say we're going to declare victory and say we're done in 18 months on July 4th of 2026...

That's insane. Good to have a deadline, though. It's nice to have a deadline. It's also an insane one. Why? The administrative state started 112 years ago. It has been building. It has got so many reinforcing loops inside of this massive Leviathan building

You're not going to absolutely, first of all, I don't think you can get the fundamental question answered about does the head of the executive branch get to hire and fire whoever wants to in 18 months? I think it'll probably be two years. I've actually talked with Sean Davis, who's a good buddy. He's like, dude, I think you're lucky if it's answered in two years. I think there's some fundamental questions and things that have to be answered and done that are going to take some time. I don't think you can declare victory in 18 months.

This has been 100 plus years in the making. And there are so many people with so many vested interests in the status quo, various people in government, outside of government, the entire system, they're going to fight tooth and nail to make sure that this system of government does not go away. So you're going to be up again. I think we're going to be involved. If Donald Trump goes down the path of I'm going to destroy the administrative state, it could be that the previous nine years of the craziness that we have seen as a warm-up act-

from maybe one of the coldest political wars we'll see in DC ever. Because of what's at stake. I mean, you're talking about regime change politics here, where, I mean, two very different governing philosophies of how you approach government on a whole host of fronts, from basic human rights to how government actually operates. And there are a lot of people with vested interests in maintaining the status quo of the administrative state.

and they're going to fight tooth and nail to make sure that it doesn't go away. So I think in some ways, I love the fact that he has put brilliant minds like Elon and Vivek to do this with an outsider's approach. I just don't think it's going to happen. I don't think meaningful fundamental change that is long-term and lasting is going to take place in 18 months. And I'm being realistic having been in DC for 25 years.

Well, 2024 is a wild year. Who knows what 2025 will bring? But one thing a lot of people have realized is that, remember thoughts and prayers? People made fun of that. No one makes fun of that anymore. Prayer actually works. It's just a fact. Every society has recognized that from the beginning of time until recently. And people are starting to realize, oh, wait, prayer is essential every day. So if you want to start something new that's good for your soul, easy to maintain, and will last for the rest of your life, pray.

Check out Halo. It is the world's number one prayer app. I heard about it from my wife, not just once, but every night at dinner for the past six months.

She loves it because it's easy to use and it is life changing. It builds a daily habit of prayer and allows you bit by bit to grow closer to God every day of 2025. There are over 10,000 guided prayers and meditations on how you can check out the daily scripture readings, nightly sleep prayers, and a daily minute if you're short on time. There is all kinds of stuff on Hallow, all designed to get you to grow closer to God.

So start the year off right by putting your relationship with God first and pray with the help of Hallow. You get three free months of Hallow when you sign up at hallow.com slash Tucker. That's hallow.com slash Tucker. That is sincerely endorsed from personal experience. They've both of them, as you said, are smart and capable. Very smart, very capable. Generational. Yes. And both have put their prestige on the line. Yep.

So they're highly motivated to show results by July 4th, 2026. But I don't want cheap victories. I don't want them to go, we've cut. I mean, first of all, it'd be great if they cut X number of dollars of spending and cut X, you know, hundreds or thousands of regulations. Wonderful, wonderful victories. Again, those are the effects.

The cause is the state. All of this stuff that we've seen, the out-of-control spending, the out-of-control growth of government, all of these things are because of the administrative state. It's in the DNA of it. Right. No, I mean, the progressives who founded the administrative state viewed the state as salvation.

Salvation was to come into every aspect of your life. It exists for its own benefit and it grows. But it's in the DNA. The DNA of the administrative state is perpetual growth. So if it continues to grow and you're just trimming right here and like, oh, we declared victory, it'll continue. It'll grow right back.

You have to cut down the tree. The branches will keep growing. So I don't want them to just trim branches. I need them to tear up by root the administrative state so that it doesn't return and continue to grow and grow. A quick way to pair it, I think, pretty significantly would be to cancel the security clearances of the contractors who work – because the federal government is –

its employees are just a percentage of its overall workforce. A lot of them are contractors. Last statistics I saw, there are about twice as many federal contractors as there are federal employees. Exactly. All of the contractors attached to the national security state, which comprises the entire economy of, say, Northern Virginia. Right. Where I'm from. Where you're from. Yes. Exactly. These are the richest zip codes in the country because they're all federal contractors. And you could end...

their employment tomorrow by canceling the security clearances. I mean, they can't work there without security clearance. They can't enter the building. I am for all of the above in whatever approach it takes in the short term to stop the madness. I talk about this a little bit in the book where you've got system dynamics and inside of this massive sprawling system, you've got these reinforcing loops that continue to grow and grow and compound. It's almost like compounding interest and then just explode in size and strength. Yeah, I think you've got to start stopping these little reinforcing loops like revoking security clearances and

So I think there's a whole variety of... Sorry, you're talking about American Leviathan? American Leviathan. Leviathan's a sea monster. It is, but also the second definition is a massive, sprawling bureaucracy that borders on totalitarianism. Yes, but the Leviathan is described in, I think... Job and Isaiah. Right. Yeah. In the Old Testament, yes, as some sort of not quite...

defined but terrifying sea monster. Yeah, quasi-demonic sea monster that God eventually conquers, that Yahweh eventually conquers. But the second definition is definitely about a massive sprawling bureaucracy that tends to be authoritarian and totalitarian. And that's what we have. I mean, this is the one thing that I just... It kind of started dawning on me years ago. Like, there's a serious problem with how DC operates. I mean, I was at the White House. George W. Bush, don't hate me for this. I wrote for him.

Which was a really interesting experience. You know, whenever you get to write for a president, he's signing your stuff. That's awesome. While my dad was in the House voting against all of his major pieces of legislation. Yeah. Which was pretty, when you go, when you're young and you go to D.C. and you're kind of new to what you think all Republicans are created equal. All the red guys are good guys and all the blue guys are bad guys. And then you start to realize, like I said earlier, not all Republicans are created equal. There's definitely like different shades along the way.

And I remember my dad having to take some pretty strong stances in the House and voting against a lot of these major initiatives from George W. Bush because he strongly believed they were not conservative at all in the least bit. In fact, one of the biggest ones was Medicare Part D. This is one of the, my dad is- The prescription drug benefit. Yes, the prescription drug benefit. I think it was 2003, right before the 2004 election. They really wanted it because they felt that it would help the senior vote.

And there were about 24, about two dozen holdouts in the House and the Republican caucus that said, we're not going to vote for this. We're just not going to. They brought him down to the White House. They had Dick Cheney and all the senior White House staff kind of have a little chit-chat with them. They all came back and said, we're still not voting for this. And then Bush was overseas and started lobbying them directly. And I remember him calling my dad and saying, I really need this vote. And my dad was like, you know, you're doing a great job representing us overseas, sir. Jim, I really need this vote. I'm not giving you this vote. Click. Click.

That was it. That was the end of the conversation. And yeah, my dad fighting tooth and nail to try and prevent that from passing. It actually passed by one vote because they kept the house floor open for an additional, I don't know how many hours, and eventually got someone to switch their vote in the like 3 a.m., 4 a.m. hour. Yeah.

This was a Karl Rove project. It was. Yeah. You realize compassionate conservatism is just another name for big government. And this is, so this is the other thing too. I make this point. Remember when people treated Karl Rove like a genius? Yes. The thing, the thing that. How low are your standards if Karl's a genius? The thing that's, that Donald Trump, again, and why he's viewed as such an existential threat by permanent DC is he rejects the premise. Yeah.

Nixon and Reagan rejected the premise that the administrative state was legitimate. And I think actually Watergate is really more a story of that than anything else. I mean, when you go back and look at the story of Watergate, Richard Nixon had just won 500...

520 electoral votes. Biggest victory in American history. 49 states, won by 20 million votes in the popular vote. It was massive. And he talked very clearly about what he intended to do in the second term in restructuring and dismantling administrative state. And then lo and behold, Watergate happens and there's a lot of questions about what actually went down. Not questions or answers. The deputy director of the FBI was deep throat. Yeah, Mark Felt. Goes to his corporate propagandists, Woodward and Bernstein.

And Woodward was a former naval intel officer. And uses them as the mouthpiece to then take out the duly elected president of the United States, who was an existential threat to the administrative state. Lipsided the coins, Russiagate. Same thing. Because the first Republican president since Reagan to reject the premise that the administrative state is legitimate was Donald Trump. George W. Bush, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush were like,

We're okay with it as long as we get to run it. And this is what always worries me a little bit about Republicans who like, well, it's okay as long as we're running it. No, it's a poisonous tree with poisonous fruit. You cannot reform it. Richard Nixon should have held. I mean, he was an institutionalist in a lot of ways. Nixon, he was like too responsible for his own good. But if he had just held a primetime news conference live.

And said, let me tell you what's actually going on here. CIA and FBI have colluded to kick me out because I'm a threat to permanent Washington institutional power. And that's just a fact. And here are some details that you might like to know, you know, that five out of six of the Watergate burglars were actually CIA employees. Like, yeah, exactly. And the guy, this reporter from The Washington Post is actually replying.

worked in the White House. He was sent over by the Pentagon to work in the White House as a naval intel officer two years ago. This guy's not a reporter. Bob Woodward's not a reporter. It's also fake. Why didn't Nixon do that? I don't know, but that shows you

who Donald Trump is as a person. Right. No, you're right. I mean, Nixon could have done that. He didn't. Donald Trump basically has. No, he hasn't. No, no, no, no. That's not the truth of what's taking place. No, you're right. And he stood up and he said, this is completely politically motivated. They're trying to take me out because I'm a threat to them. That's such a smart...

The description of the difference between Donald Trump and Richard Nixon is that Trump said aloud what was actually happening. And I think that's why they tried to assassinate him in Butler, Pennsylvania, among other places. So thank you for that. Let me ask about something you alluded to, which is. Can I say something really quick? Of course, please. The amount of courage that it simply took to say something out loud that people would consider verboten. Yeah. That's part of Donald Trump's.

great power he'll say stuff out loud the people you shouldn't say that or you you you can't be saying that but he needs to say and he should say it because of situations like this where he has the ability to say and sometimes you know he says things that you know maybe they're not the most helpful but a lot of times he says things out loud

That in the past, people would have said, you can't say that. But it does raise the question, like, why can't you? I know, why can't you? Why has no one else said that? Right. And why has no one ever explained what the UFO program is about? Or who killed Kennedy? Or what happened on 9-11? Like, just the obvious things. Nobody, why is no other president, not that Trump has revealed the truth about any of those things, but. Hopefully someday soon. Yeah, but I think we're getting closer just to knowing what the government's been doing for the past 80 years. But you have to wonder about all the other presidents. Yeah.

Like the amount of things that every American president has not said. Right. The amount of things that people just very obviously lied about. Like, why? What are they so afraid of? You just got elected by the population. Right. The most powerful country in the world. Why do you care? You got your army behind you. They're your voters. Why? Why can't you tell obvious truths about things? Like, what are you afraid of exactly? That is. Yeah. If you want to understand people's behavior. Right.

Look at it through that lens. What are they not saying? What are they not doing? What are the limits they're imposing on themselves? And why are they imposing those limits? Why are they doing that? What exactly are you afraid of? You control the Pentagon and the FBI. Right. It's not like you don't have bodyguards. Right. You've got tens of thousands of bodyguards. It's a great question. Donald Trump, again, has said...

I reject the premise that I have to be quiet, which I think is a very refreshing approach. And the question is, how far will he go? And I hope he does go. I totally agree. But it would be interesting to know what the control mechanisms are. And if you last thing, I'll shut up. But the last thing I would just recommend anyone watching is to go pull the audio of Richard Nixon in the Oval Office speaking to the then CIA director about this.

among other things, the Kennedy assassination and the fear or the sort of deference that Nixon has is very striking. Nixon's a pretty brave guy in a lot of ways, but like,

You know, you're talking to your employee. You're talking to your housekeeper. Like, you don't need deference? What? Answer the freaking question, pal, or I'll fire you. There's none of that in his voice. None. No, I know. Because... You've got employees. Would you tiptoe around when you talk to them? Like, did you finish the assignment? Are you embarrassed to ask that? No. They're your employees. Because the power structure has been constructed over the last hundred years...

How do I... There's a couple of threads I want to go down with that question. He's not really talking to his employees. He's not talking to his employees. He's talking to his masters, actually. Yeah, he's talking to the real decision-makers inside of our government, which was the whole point. It's crazy. No, I mean, in American Leviathan, the people have to understand...

The progressives hated the Constitution. They wanted to destroy the political and moral authority of it. They wanted to do away with the machinery of the republic. They want to do a separation of powers, all of these things. And in its place, put in this massive administrative state, this massive bureaucracy filled with unelected bureaucrats who they thought are elected representatives should subdelegate governing and legislating to because they thought the bureaucrats should actually be doing the business of governing and running the country.

the country. So people, I think people are a little perplexed when they see behavior like this of where the unelected bureaucrats, like Chris Wray. Remember that hearing with Grassley with the oversight committee hearing and Wray informs him

Hey, I got to go. I got to get on my plane. I've got an important trip to be at. It was a family vacation, by the way. He told off the Senate that was supposed to be providing oversight. I have to leave. And he goes on the FBI jet to his private vacation home to enjoy a little downtime. He was telling off the people that were supposed to be providing oversight because it's not really how it works anymore.

But that was the always those people never threatened. Okay, but that was the point from day one Chris will defund you I mean why is that this is what I say so we're not gonna build you a new building the whole point was for these I don't like to bureaucrats to be doing the covering to be doing the decision-making It'd be nice if Congress said you know what we hold the purse strings. We're not going to fund you anymore We're just simply not going to find the Speaker of the House sign off on a new FBI building. Great question. What's that?

Can we just, okay, let's just be totally blunt now. What is that? The Republican Speaker of the House, who strikes me as like an out-of-the-closet liberal, out-of-the-closet liberal, more than weak, working for the other side. He's the best speaker Democrats could hope for. So what... I'm not a fan, and I kind of understand some of the political dynamics of why Trump is pushing for him.

to avoid, what was it, 17 votes or whatever it was, let's get down to business that we had last time. So I kind of understand some of that. At the same time, I mean, could Democrats hope for a better speaker right now with them being in the minority? I don't think so. Mike Johnson is one of the best things they could hope for right now. He gives them whatever they want to. I think this recent spending bill, the initial version of it, really shows the true nature of who someone is that allows something like that to go to the

to come out and be in public on this 15, 1600 page monstrosity. I think that was the true illustration of how weak he actually is. But yeah, I mean, these guys have been performing political lawfare inside of our government against not only the president, but I would argue members of Congress and for years.

And you're going to go ahead and reward them with, I can't even remember the cost for a new FBI headquarters, but it's not millions. It's hundreds of millions, right? Of course. Why are you rewarding these people that have badly abused our system? Who, by the way,

I don't think right now in the current iteration, the DOJ and the FBI, you know, we always consider them the guardians of the rule of law. And one of the basic pillars of our society was rule of law and the equal enforcement of justice that all stood equal before the law. And the DOJ and the FBI were going to enforce that and make sure that happened. Now they're just a Praetorian guard of the administrative state.

Why are you funding them? Why are you rewarding them for this behavior in which, quite frankly, I would go back to self-preservation. If you really do believe in self-preservation as a party and as an opposition party, because the DOJ and the FBI and the various parts of the administrative state are protecting the administrative state and they view Republicans, for the most part, as a threat to that. Why are you funding them to continue doing more damage to you and trying to destroy you? Are you insane? Makes no sense. What's the answer?

I think they're weak. I don't think they understand what time it is. I don't think they fully come to the clue. I don't think they want to maybe fully examine the reality of what is. They seem afraid of their enemies, but not of their friends. Yeah. They seem more eager to please their enemies than to please their allies. But what ends? It hopes that they'll get eaten last? This to me is at some point you have to wake up to the reality of what's going on. Yep. And if you don't,

It might be too late. And that's why I think Donald Trump being reelected is a huge step in the right direction of hopefully he can instill a little bit of a spine. Who's he going to pardon? Backbone. Who is Trump going to pardon? Well, I hope they won. It's all the January 6th. I think that's right. I mean, listen, there are so many different questions that have now risen. I had questions when it actually happened.

Like, what, this, this, something's wrong here. You can't, I mean, the whole, all the chaos, there's something wrong. Well, now we just know it was just a setup. It was a setup. Yeah. I think he has to go out and not only pardon them, I would hope that they get good lawyers and they get massive settlements from the government for all the abuse they've taken over the last four years. Significant settlements. And I hope all the media people I used to work with who hated me for saying that

apologize because now they haven't apologized they haven't apologized for russiagate no they didn't apologize for using a fake dossier and saying this is proof of russian collusion when quite frankly i think a lot of them well some of them didn't because they're not smart enough some of them knew that it was fake they just viewed it as a useful weapon to take out someone they hated i think some of them actually believed it because they're dumb

So he pardons the J6 defendants. Amen. I think he will. He said he will. Yep. Immediately. But is I mean, Biden just pardoned a bunch of murderers, including people who murdered children and drug dealers. So, I mean, there's a precedent for, you know, big pardons. Do you think there's a lot of people are going to get pardoned?

I hope so. I mean, I couldn't give you a list of names, but I... But the victims of lawfare. Yeah, I would think that he can go through and just go for the last four years or quite frankly, eight years. Everybody that has been abused by this political lawfare, who's been abused by the DOJ and the FBI and every other aspect of our government, full pardon. And again, go back to not just the pardons, not only do you get your freedom back and your lives back, but I hope that there's significant settlements.

I mean, I hope that these people get paid out significantly. And I don't like to see more taxpayer money being sent out to people. But in this situation, I'm all for it. Yeah, I am too. Speaking of spending, so you said the goal has to be

to uproot the tree, not just pare down its branches. Right, the American Leviathan. This is the tree. If there is a debt crisis, and I think everyone is, whether they say it out loud or not, really concerned about it. Yeah. What are we, 36 trillion? And by debt crisis, I mean specifically the reluctance of other countries and institutions to buy our debt. Right. Because then we're really hamstrung.

Could a debt crisis, which is probably coming at some point, be used to uproot the tree? Because it's very expensive to have a government this big. It is. It's unsustainable. Right. I mean, this is at some point, and I think we're coming to that. I think we have come to that point. I think we came to that point a long time ago, actually. But now it's becoming unsustainable. I mean, at one point this last, was it last year or two years ago, we were growing it by a trillion dollars.

in 100 days, every 100 days or something, the national debt, it's just, it's exploding. I think Trump thinks he can grow us out of some of these situations. I don't think that's the only, I don't think that's the solution. At some point, you have to address the underlying of what are we actually doing with this government that continues to grow, that the DNA and its DNA is perpetual growth. Again, going back to, if you believe government, if you believe the state is salvation,

and it should invade every aspect of your life. Well, until every aspect of your life is saved, government will continue to grow. You have to completely destroy this to stop the spending, to stop the growth. So I think he has to go down that dual path. Yeah, we can, you know, growth in our economy, but at the same time, the underlying cost for the debt, the spending, has been this state.

And I think we have to have a conversation. This is the one thing where it feels like the American people, we never actually had a conversation with the American people about what form of government they wanted. It was just a slow-moving regime change, I would argue, a slow-moving revolution against the republic over the last 100 years. People are under the illusion we have some representative democracy, constitutional republic, when in fact we don't.

What is the government that we think best fits, that is best suited for a government of buy-in for the people, that provides the most amount of freedom and liberty and the most amount of prosperity for the American people? And we've really, I don't think we've really had that conversation over the last hundred years. It's just kind of been slow moving, and all of a sudden we wake up to find ourselves in 2024, 2025 now, going...

I don't think we ever had a conversation about this. Right, because the country was rich, and as long as you're rich, you don't worry about details. And the economy was growing, and life was great, and we're just going to continue on. This will never end. But that's not how history works. That's not how... At some point, the music stops, and people have to have hard conversations about what are we actually doing to make sure that we...

This is sustainable in the future because what we have is not sustainable at all on any level. Are you ready to make getting a good night's sleep your New Year's resolution? It's a worthy resolution. Cozy Earth completely transformed the way we sleep, and it's made the difference. Everyone on our team agrees. They got bamboo sheets set. It sounds weird, but it's awesome. Ask anyone who works here. They love them.

Cozy earth sheets made from 100% premium bamboo derivatives are soft and breathable and they get better with every wash. Again, sounds weird until you try it, in which case you are hooked.

Cozy Earth also prioritizes quality and care with 100-night sleep trials. So that means you try their sheets for up to 100 nights. If you don't love them, you send them back for a full refund. We're not going to ask what they do with those sheets, but you get your money back, so there's no risk. A good night's sleep is essential. Visit CozyEarth.com slash Tucker. Use our exclusive code Tucker for up to 40% off. And if you get a post-purchase survey, mention you heard about Cozy Earth from this show. We'd be grateful.

You were a backer of Kash Patel for FBI director. Yeah, I mean, I lobbied Trump on it. Why? And what do you think? What do you think it's a good idea that he's going to run the FBI? So I was deeply concerned about, you know, people somewhere, somewhere inside of Trump world, someone was pushing Mike Rogers, which I thought was a terrible mistake. Who's Mike Rogers? Former FBI agent was running for Senate, was a member of the House.

A former FBI was a member of the House, I think, Intel Committee, then was running for Senate this time around, lost narrowly. And then someone was pushing him to be FBI director, which I think was the wrong take by like a country mile. You don't need an institutionalist to go in and run what I think is one of the most corrupt institutions in our country today. And I told Trump, I was like, as much as you need a loyalist running DOJ, times it times 100 running the FBI. It's a pit of vipers.

and you need somebody like cash patel we talked about rick reynolds cash patel but you need somebody that's going to go in there and be fearless to say we're we are we are not doing this anymore in fact i i would kind of like i know cash has said this again we'll see what happens but you know he's he said that day one he'd shut it down and turn it into a museum for the deep state um the fbi in its current form its current iteration needs to cease to exist and i think cash patel has not only the

the intelligence and the skills, the courage. Who's going to commit terror attacks if we don't have an FBI? Yeah, I know. This to me, I think we have to, what has been the point of the FBI? They started what, 1908, I think is when they originated. What are they actually doing? What is their purpose right now? Besides being Praetorian guard for the administrative state. Recruiting Tim McKay. Right. And looking at potential people like Donald Trump as existential threats and trying to destroy them. Mm-hmm.

what what and then we continue to fund it blindly this is writ large with our government administrative state what i find one of the most interesting things about republicans today and have for quite frankly years elect me i'm going to go to dc i'm going to change dc they get to dc they accept budget recommendations from these very department agencies go ahead and pass those fund them

do these four or 5,000 page bills, send them over to the bureaucrats who with their statutes and regulations actually put a fine point on how this is actually going to look in reality. So they're doing the real governing. So they've not only given them all the funding without any real oversight, they just give it to them. They've then sub-delegated their legislative authority to these unelected bureaucrats and then go home and say, you need to send me back. I know those, those, those

People at the EPA or the FDA made some terrible regulations that are ruining your lives, but send me back. I'll fight the system, and I'll make sure that doesn't happen again as they get reelected to then fund those people again to then send them forward 5,000-page bills to then do the statutes and regulations that actually govern us. The whole system is completely bonkers, and it's actually very beneficial to most of these elected representatives, experts in self-preservation, because they don't have to make the hard choices. Right.

They don't actually have to do the really hard decisions on legislating because the statutes and regulations that have the binding effect of laws is what's being done over here in the Article 2 branch by these administrative state bureaucrats.

At some point, I do have some hope that we're going to have a chance, not only with Donald Trump, but the Supreme Court. The last summer, there were a couple of cases that I think gave us real hope. Yes. It was not only Chevron deference, where the Supreme Court said- My favorite case. 40 years, this is a disaster. We're not going to have judicial deference to these bureaucrats.

regulations and statutes. I think the other one that wasn't discussed as much that should have been is when the Supreme Court said the SEC tribunals, you can't have those anymore. The SEC cannot have its own private administrative law tribunal in which 90% of the time that SEC tribunal ruled in favor of the SEC. The Supreme Court said,

First of all, it calls into question the idea of an independent judiciary because you're taking the judicial role inside the Article 2 branch, not the Article 3. And you've annihilated our Seventh Amendment, which is right to trial by jury. We're not going to do this anymore. Which was, by the way, I mean, you look at some of these things that we're dealing with today and look at where the founders started. They wanted an independent judiciary because they saw what the British courts were doing in rubber stamping King George III and his ministers and parliament's edicts that they viewed as very deeply unfair to them, but they were just acting as a rubber stamp. So they said, we're going to have an independent judiciary, right?

And then with the administrative state, obviously it's annihilated the separation of powers and you have Article Two branch doing a lot of the legislative, a lot of judicial. I think Supreme Court stepping up and saying we're not going to do this anymore is another step in the right direction. But at some point, I would hope that members of Congress would find it within themselves to have just the smallest bit of political courage to say, I'm not going to blindly fund this stuff anymore. And that's a step in the right direction, for example, with the FBI.

We're not going to do this anymore. We can't do this anymore. For our own sakes. For the sake of the country. I think it's important for the White House to lead on issues like that. Just how about no? How about no? I would very much like Donald Trump to say the FBI does not deserve a new headquarters. Yeah, that and a lot of other issues, you know, just like... Just make statements. Yeah, exactly. What happens to Kamala Harris now?

Where does she go from here? Where does she go? I know you're not a Democrat, but... The ash heap of history? But like, you know, typically you run for president and you lose on the Democratic side and you get, well, John Kerry's our climate czar, I guess. Right. And there's always a soft landing for the loser. I don't think so. Not for her. Tell me.

I think she was such a disaster. They got stuck. I mean, first of all, they boxed themselves into a corner of their own making. Yes. Right? They knew Joe Biden. They got a DEI candidate and they lived with the results. Right. And then all of a sudden realized in June, this isn't going to cut it. I'm glad they didn't make her like a commercial airplane pilot. I mean, America got out pretty easy. We did.

And I think they got stuck and they realized this is the only horse we've got to ride. They tried to pull it off. It looked for a couple of weeks, maybe they've got a shot. And then all of a sudden, obviously the reality of who she is, a lightweight, intellectually a lightweight, so far in over her head. It's clear that she's just been going up the ranks as a DEI advancement for her whole life. Yes.

I think they're going to be very happy for her to fade off into obscurity. I mean, I saw some... Do you feel sorry for her at all? I do not at all. I kind of do. Maybe I'm the liberal here, but I feel like she's a victim of self-esteem culture. And I think... She's allowed herself to be that, though. She had... I mean, she's been a beneficiary of it. She's had...

She'd be vice president of the United States. Well, I'm saying based off, being completely honest, based off her talents or lack thereof or her skill sets, she's had a pretty freaking good life. No, she had. Great life. Far above and beyond what she should have done. Yeah. No, you're right. But that's true. But she's also just a...

a vessel for the ambitions of others. Like she's almost like an innocent bystander kidnapped off the street, just, just human trafficked into her current position. Do you know what I mean? It's like, you just, you just look like the kind of person. I don't know if I've ever heard it described that way. No, I'm going to have to think about that. But I just, she's so dumb and you just could, what is that phrase they use? Imposter syndrome? Yes. Where you sort of know that you're not qualified to be doing what you're doing. And

People say they feel that way, but her whole life was that. She has no future in national politics. For sure. So will she be the head of the Douchebag Foundation or wherever they sort of put people like that? I don't know. I really don't. It feels like she has completely just, even though she's still, you know, vice president for a few more weeks, it feels like she is already gone.

been relegated to obscurity. And I think that's going to be the rest of her... She just disappeared. Yes, can be the rest of her existence. I'm sure that somewhere or someone will find her a nice gig at a foundation, but...

I think this is the last time you're going to see any serious conversation about her. I think they should be required to keep her in the public eye. Like George Floyd. I always felt like once we... Remember we declared him Jesus? I don't know if you remember that. We deified him. I wanted to keep talking about George Floyd. Why don't we have George Floyd Day? Let's talk about his porn career and his drug addiction and his armed robbery conviction. I think they are more than happy for her to just simply fade away. Yeah, so I don't think they should be allowed to do that. I don't think they should be allowed to memory hole...

Carmela Harris. Yeah. Like she should have to explain how her first name is pronounced and why and why she doesn't do so consistently. I think she should be forced to talk a lot more just to like make them live, like make the dog return to his vomit. Right. That's what we should make them do. We should. Like where is Carmela Harris? She's like the greatest joy spreader this country's ever seen. How did she disappear? I think they will do everything that they can to avoid that. I think they will do everything they can to make sure that we never have a conversation about her again. She should be president of Harvard.

I think, no, I'm serious. You should take their most beloved institution, the most rotten, corrupt, disgusting, overrated. You should start a petition on this. For real. Like she's such a genius. She's so incredibly accomplished. She's the most accomplished woman who ever ran for president. She should be required to be the head of Harvard. How great would that be? I like that. Yes. Sure, let's do it. We could start a campaign together. Don't you think? Let's do it. But in real life, like she's just going to fail. She's gone. Yeah, she's gone. What about Jill Biden?

Dr. Jill? Dr. Jill. Sorry. I'm so sorry. I didn't mean to be sexist. She has an education degree from the University of North Delaware or whatever. You mean our first female president? Yeah. Come on. I think the scary part to me over the last four years is that we knew... Some of us knew sooner than others, but I think a lot of people knew this guy had...

early cognitive decline. He was already in some stage of dementia. His sister was telling people I know that before he ran for president. Right, from pretty much day one of him being sworn in. I mean, this to me is one of the great scandals of however many generations of political history. Ever, yeah. That we had...

Joe Biden in the White House in cognitive decline, early dementia, whatever you want to call it, who was actually running the country for four years. I mean, this to me is like it's a Woodrow Wilson replay, right? Where his wife and his chief of staff were actually running most of it. Tony Blinken, I think, was running. You think Blinken? I do. Yeah. But certainly the meaningful parts of it. And then everybody covered it up. Yeah. Wait. Joe Scarborough. This is the greatest version of Biden ever. So...

Yeah, I don't, you know, Dr. Jill, our first female president, should have a bright future in front of her, whatever she wants to do. The one thing I always liked, well, there were actually, honestly, a couple of things I always liked about Hunter Biden. I know you're not supposed to say it, but, you know, I knew him well and I always kind of liked him. And drug addiction was his real, was the, you know, he became a monster because of cocaine and pills, as many do. But, yeah.

But he hated her. Really? Oh, he thought she was a screaming bitch. And he said so in person and he said so in writing on his laptop. Oh, yeah. He said that she was a bitch and stupid. And I think that's a fair assessment from someone who spent his life living with her. Like he would – if anyone would know what Dr. Jill is really like, it's her stepson, Hunter, who started dating his dad when he was like four or something. And I don't know why Republicans didn't make more of that.

And everyone wanted to focus on the crack and the toe sucking and everything, but Dr. Jill is stupid and a bitch. Yeah. I don't know. I thought that was great.

Republicans aren't used to, again, going back to what we discussed earlier, they're not used to fighting bare-knuckled, brawling style. And they think that would have been beneath them and undignified. Undignified. And these people were... These people for four years... Undignified. And this was not... I mean, I think we have to have the... You know, when we talked about immigration and our foreign policy and the inflation and economy and all these things were taking place. This...

When there's a series of coincidences, it ceases to be a coincidence. Yes. It was all systematic. We're just going to continue to destroy this country. We're going to completely remake it with massive illegal immigration. I mean, this to me is why I can't understand. These people hate this country. They hate the country as originally founded. They hate the original constitution. Yeah.

They hate the idea of the freeborn American people. They hate whites, if I can just say. There's a lot of things that they have hated for a long, and they intentionally and systematically were seeking to destroy us and our way of life. And Republicans, a lot of Republicans in DC are going along with it going, oh, they're really not that bad, are they? Yes, they are. They truly are. And they would hope, their goal, I think, is to see this country cease to exist as

as it once was, and to create some new order for this country that has nothing to do with where we came from at all. I think people feel that. But they wouldn't fight. One of the brights... No, they wouldn't. One person who I think is a true bright spot in the Republican Party, there are a couple, but the brightest of all, in my view, is J.D. Vance. Yes. Who has a gut-level understanding of everything you just said is...

legit smart smarter than I think people understand like actual high IQ character not a ton of those in politics and also a decent person kind of normal person um so he's now vice president what does that mean I have to tell you one of the most you've known JD longer than me I met him when he was thinking about running for Senate yes in the primary

Got to know him. I obviously lobbied Trump to endorse him in the primary and Senate. Good for you. So got to know him a little bit there. Obviously lobbied a little bit for him to be VP. I know you and Don Jr. did a lot more on that front, but it was like, this is the future of the country. I texted him.

The most impressive part to me is having known him, seeing where he's come from. You get put in pressure cookers like he was put in over the last year. You either collapse, you rise. He's gone next level. I mean, this to me is, I mean, obviously he's an intelligent person. He's very talented. But you get put into those situations, you either collapse or rise. And he rose. And I think he's gone to the next. Wait, did he? He's gone to the next level, which is extremely impressive. And I think the thing that was really important for me in who Trump picked as his VP is,

was the future of what does america first look like after i'm gone he's got four years he's done right that's it and i think a lot of people in dc permanent dc establishment republicans corporate you name it we just have to outlast him for another four years and then he goes in and now jd's 40 but he was 39 at the time and goes tell you what i'm gonna do i'm gonna pick a 39 year old vp who's going to be the heir to america first when i'm gone he's going to be around

for a long time. Like, this is the few... I'm going... I'm pushing all my chips in. This is an all-in move on America First. You're not going to just outlast me for four years. I'm going to make this into a permanent, long-term political movement. That, to me, was what he did with J.D. And J.D. got put into that situation, pressure cooker, rose to the occasion. And I think he has really... It's been extremely impressive to me. I mean, everything that he has done... I mean...

having done a lot of tv what he would do on the sunday morning shows not one or two but sometimes three on a given day going in and dismantling each one of those antagonistic hostile hosts i i'm so impressed by what he did and was able to do i feel this not easy and he did it so well and rose to the occasion every time by the way which you and i i mean i've done enough tv sometimes you have when you're like that wasn't the greatest

It seemed like every time he went in and did this, I was just like, that is so freaking impressive. Well, it was amazing. I spent my life in TV. I can tell you that. I mean, I don't think that beating someone, a lot of these people are stupid, like beating George Stephanopoulos or Margaret Brennan or something. Have you come to the same conclusion I have? That if you're a corporate propagandist, you can't be intelligent or smart because you can't be a free thinker. And you have no dignity. You have to accept. Right. No self-respect. Right. But what I found amazing...

as someone who did it for a living my whole life was not just that he won the arguments he's smarter than they are is that he did something that I could not do which is remain kind of cheerful calm charming calm yep retain you know she has enormous self-control and I couldn't do that I think I could probably beat Margaret Brennan in an argument I hope right but I would come off as like sneering and angry and anti-women or so you know what I mean but no I know JD was amazing oh I could not do

that. No, I couldn't either. I get fired up and kind of get a little snarky and very pugilistic at times. And he's very calm, dignified, very rational, highly intelligent. But I think that that to me is again, going back to what Trump did with him. We're all in on this, a young VP who hopefully we're going to have a very successful four years with Trump. He's going to use JD effectively set up JD in the future. And then all of a sudden, because Trump

Going back to what I said earlier, you don't fix what we've been going through for the last 100 years in 18 months. You don't even fix it in four years. I think we need no less than 12 years of political power with the right people in D.C. to actually bring about the fundamental change necessary. So you have to set yourself up for at least 12 years of political power, four years of Trump.

Eight years of JD. And then all of a sudden you've got the ability with the right people doing the right things to actually bring about the right reform necessary to restore the republic. This is about going back to, and I totally agree with you about political power has to be in the right hands doing the right things to achieve the right ends. But this to me is why we have to achieve and retain political power for no less than 12 years in TC. If you're still using Verizon, AT&T or T-Mobile, obviously our condolences, but you're going to want to hear this.

Our cell phone company, PureTalk, gives us the exact same service you're currently getting from those big companies, but for half the cost. Not a joke. There's no reason to spend $85 or $100 per month per person on your wireless bill. Now we can get unlimited talk, text, and 15 gigs of data with mobile hotspots for just $35 a month. You don't have to be a math major. The average family of four saves about $1,000 a year with PureTalk.

You enjoy America's most dependable 5G network, support small businesses. We would know that because they are now powering TCN. It can probably save you money too. So cut the fat out of your wireless bill. Switch to PureTalk by going to puretalk.com slash Tucker. You'll save an additional 50% off your first month PureTalk, America's wireless company. Can I just use this opportunity because I can't control myself to throw out something that I'm legit concerned about? Yep.

Not directly related to Trump or even politics, but I, so we've had all these problems with the labor market and COVID made them much worse, paying people to stay home. So they did. So a lot of the service industry is being replaced by robots. Like you check out at the airport, at the kiosk and you, you know what I mean? There's no one there. Automation.

So I've watched for the past four years as the left systematically has destroyed law enforcement and order in our cities. And like, who would want to be a cop at this point? It's too hard a job. You don't have the legal protections you had. It's physically dangerous and everyone hates you and you don't get paid anything. So you're going to have a massive crisis. You have a massive crisis in law enforcement because no one wants to be a cop. Right.

That void will be filled by technology. It'll be filled by drones. And it'll be filled by other technology. It'll be basically replaced by a

tech surveillance state that will make civil liberties absolutely impossible. You can't have civil liberties in a pan-omnicon or whatever they call it, in a world where technology knows everything that you're doing and saying and maybe even thinking. And I don't feel like people are worried enough about that.

Like you could make New York City safe with drones. Right. You could prevent any traffic violations whatsoever with robots. But what's behind it? There's nothing neutral in life. What's total control of the population? It is. Through technology. So I... We're moving toward that. I don't hear anybody saying anything about it. I remember having a conversation with the head of a tech company, pretty prominent one. Molly Hemingway was there with me.

talking about the algorithms and how biased they are. Man, is she a smart chick. She's very smart. And a great person. One of my favorite people in DC. Me too. I totally agree. And we were sitting there talking with this person. He goes, no, algorithms are neutral. Afterwards, I looked at him, I was like, he just lied to us. Nothing is neutral. Nothing's neutral in life. That to me is one of the things that I think is the greatest. It's neutral. There's nothing. Like science. It's neutral. Take the COVID facts. So that to me is, there is nothing neutral in life.

at all. And so whatever influence is going behind the AI and the technology will be biased in one direction or another. And then you have a situation of who's controlling the controllers, who controls that technology, what is their end goal, what do they believe about human rights, what do they believe about civil liberties, what do they believe about basic freedom? I'm concerned about the whole AI singularity. Oh, of course. This to me, the Sunsoft Bank guy,

So he spent tens of when he announces you're going to spend 100 billion to create jobs here in America. I'm like, please go away. I don't want you anywhere near this country. He has spent tens of billions of dollars trying to advance and accelerate singularity in which AI is really truly doing the governing of this world. And we lose a lot of our time.

Humans are not running the world. It's singularity. It's AI. It's all this technology. It's actually doing it because they'll do it better. It defeats sovereignty and free will and therefore humanity. That's what I'm saying. It completely annihilates the idea of humanity. And this is the guy that's been doing it. So I think this to me is...

I know Elon has said some things that, you know, we need to have a conversation about AI. I don't think we're having a deeper, we need to have a deeper conversation about AI, singularity, and where we're actually headed and what do we want our future to look like. So you can't introduce any massive disruptive change

really against the will of the population. You need consent. And the only way you get consent is by terrifying them and making them feel like your solution, while imperfect, is better than what they have. We're not giving them the truth, but keeping them ignorant. What I'm saying is you create chaos. You destroy your cities. State of fear. You create a state of fear. You do to people with crime and immigration what COVID did.

So Michael Crichton... So they'll accept anything. Yeah, Michael Crichton wrote a great book, State of Fear. I actually cite him in the book, in which he was talking about the political science of global warming and how it puts people in the perpetual state of fear to achieve the certain political goals of people, what they want to achieve. But the whole idea of keeping people in a perpetual state of fear to manipulate them into getting what these people want to achieve the future they want, which might or might not be typically not beneficial to the rest of the people.

but it's fear it's a tactic of fear like code's gonna kill you all so you should stay inside your house and wear a mask and be six feet apart which was all made up by the way of course which isn't funny where they say trust the science and then they go well yeah men can be women women men but you only trust the science we say what science is science is what we say it is but in that situation it's not the intellectual incoherence of the left drives me nuts but that's what happens when you kind of

When you cut the cord to the transcendent, this idea of a transcendent creator and natural inherent rights and something above and beyond is infinite. And then you all just devolve into this theater of the absurd because whatever you say at the moment is right. If there's no absolutes, society becomes absolute. So whatever society says in that moment becomes absolute. So men can be women and women men. And you just make it up as you go along. And that's why I think kind of some of this stuff is being exposed. Fauci, well, six feet. Well, you just made that up.

The vaccine wasn't a vaccine. I remember being castigated on a certain network that I think people would have been surprised for saying that I thought the shot at best was a therapeutic shot and you would have thought I shot somebody's dog. Who castigated you? You know, some network that would have been surprising for people. The network that was requiring vaccines, COVID vaccines for their employees, you mean? A lot of people were. Newsmax, by the way, was. Nothing is faker than Newsmax. Sorry.

I have to tell you, I think the COVID tests was a test that many people failed on the conservative side of things because they believed the lies told by the so-called experts. It was a test. They failed miserably. And I actually got texts from people a couple weeks in when I realized this is not... I have real questions here. I don't think this is what people are cracking it up to be.

And they were texting me, "What's up with all your boomer tweets? What's going on here? Like, this is serious stuff." I said, "Why do you accept blindly that the CDC and the NIH

are suddenly peers driven snow when over the last several years we've seen the DOJ and the FBI and other parts of this state be weaponized against and used for political purposes and now suddenly different branch of the same tree is somehow peers driven snow. Like I'm sorry, I just think in my, you know, if you think through this in a reasonable rational way, I think you should really strongly question anything that's coming out of the CDC and the NIH or anything else because I think there's a certain political element to what they're actually pushing.

And I think that's how you had, like, I was kind of stunned when so many conservatives fell for Wharton. Like, why can't you just step back and go, this is heavily politicized. This is probably heavily politicized. I'm not sure. I don't trust them. So why should I trust? I don't trust them either. I've told, so this is another thing that I think we need to start really emphasizing with a lot of us. Like think for yourself? I tell my kids all the time, question everything. Yeah. Except for me. I'm your benevolent dictator. Yeah.

Well, you're the patriarch. That's right. No questioning the patriarch. There's no question. But that's how you get to the truth. You have to question everything to actually get to the truth of what is and don't accept something on its face value. Why should I take orders from anyone who pushed the vax ever again? Yeah. Is that fair? I mean, I don't, that seems like a pretty just simple. I just, I'm just going to, I don't believe you. I'm sorry. I don't believe you until you can actually prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that what you're telling me is true. I don't believe you.

And I think that should be our entire approach to all the government right now. I mean, this is why the Bobby Kennedy nomination is essential. It's like, whatever you think of Bobby Kennedy, I love Bobby Kennedy, but don't agree with him on everything, of course. But Bobby Kennedy was the opposition to that. And he should be rewarded. If we can break the hold of big pharma, I think, I mean, that to me is a step in the right direction.

of of what's going on not only it's just funny that the people who make xanax who should be in prison for making xanax in my opinion kills a lot of people destroys so many lives those people are lecturing me about how bobby kennedy is bad you make xanax right and you're telling me bobby kennedy is bad who by the way also started the opioid christ all the things that have gone through big pharma over the years and your opioids are obvious xanax is very subtle everyone's on xanax

try to get off xanax you know yeah these people i think they're criminals that's my personal opinion i think i i hope that the american people over the last nine years especially everything that's taken place would have a healthy dose of skepticism about anything coming out of our government and our corporate propagandists moving forward and go i'm not going to accept you at face value until you can prove be verifiable proof of what you're saying i think that'd be a very healthy approach for us moving forward

Yeah, I agree with that completely. So just bottom line it for us having spent, by the way, when you wrote this book, like what kind of mood were you in? It must've been felt pretty dark. I was, I was in a mood of my rights as a freeborn American and the country I was promised constitutional Republic government of, by, and for the people has been annihilated, has been destroyed. We have an illusion of it.

And we are being lectured that somehow our betters who are these unelected bureaucrats who are credentialed idiocracy somehow are the ones that should be governing us and ruling us. And I wanted to have a conversation. I wanted to start a conversation with the American people with the book.

of these people do not have your best interests in mind they have taken away your birthright as a freeborn american people they have annihilated the constitutional republic they have destroyed the machinery of the republic which is the best protector of your natural inherent rights this and they did it intentionally i mean the the progressives progressives don't believe in natural inherent rights they're actually vehemently opposed to a rights-based government of course they they

They thought that rights do not... I mean, Frank Goodenow, who was really one of the guys that structured the administrative state through administrative law, said that an individual does not possess rights from his creator, but from his society. His society is the one that gives an individual his rights. Because they believed the state should give rights back to the people if it was a benefit to the state. You can't have natural, inherent, God-given rights because it becomes a monkey wrench in their progressive...

idea of the state of salvation efficiency towards, you know, progress. All of these things that have taken place and I was just like, we have to have this conversation. And it goes back to what I was saying earlier. We've not had this conversation about who we are as a people, what our birthright is, what our rights are, what our God-given rights are, what government should actually look like today. And let's have that conversation and then have the conversation about how we get back to where we started. I mean, the Constitution is the greatest document, political document the world's ever seen.

And it was written by men who were not perfect, by the way. They had their own share of faults. They got it. They nailed it. They realized they were imperfect human beings in an imperfect world. They were optimistic realists, though. They realized that God had given rights. They were optimistic that even though we knew they were imperfect human beings who should never have consolidated power, they could form a government that protected those natural God-given rights and took none of them away. And it provided for this

amazing small agrarian country kind of on the edge of that Eurocentric world in the late 1700s to become honestly I would say the greatest nation the world has ever seen how does that happen it's not by chance it's because these guys knew they understood human nature they understood they fully understood a transcendent Creator with natural inherent rights we're going to create this Constitutional Republic we're going to create the greatest amount of freedom as possible for the flourishing of freedom and prosperity

And the progressives completely fundamentally rejected that turn of the 20th century and said, no, we don't believe in that. We don't believe that that has the answers to the 20th century. We believe we should put together this massive bureaucracy filled with these unelected bureaucrats who through applied science,

will lead us to a greater future who truly believe in the apotheosis of mankind. They believe that history was on this upward linear progress, that the end of history would be the perfection of mankind. Dead serious. No, so these are some of the poisonous ideas behind what's taking place in this country today. They're also hilarious ideas. They're like so dumb. They're so dumb. Rantings of deluded madmen is what I describe in the book of Woodrow Wilson and Herbert Crowley and...

Frank Goodnow and all of these founders of the progress, John Burgess, who by the way was the founder of political science in America, vehemently rejected a rights-based government. And he's considered the father of political science in America. So we should probably have questions about the whole exercise of political science. So yeah, I was writing this book and we are called deplorables and irredeemables and disruptive simply because we're asking for a restoration of

of our rights. We're asking for a restoration of what we had. In some ways, and that's why I consider myself a restorationist, not a conservative. But going back to what the founders were trying to do during the American Revolution, they were simply asking that we have our rights as Englishmen restored. You have taken them away. We want them restored. And I think we've kind of come to that next, we've kind of come to that same situation today where I am demanding and others are demanding, we want our rights restored.

We want our government restored, our Constitutional Republic restored. We want a government that actually benefits and promotes the interests of the American people on all fronts every day. And we're not treated as an afterthought. We're not treated as the ATM for the ruling class. We're actually treated with the respect that is due us as a freeborn American people. And...

My sincere hope is that we actually have enough leaders in D.C. I think we've got to start. We're going to need more with the political courage to understand the stakes. I think we're going to fight for this. I agree with that strongly. But we're going to have to suffer to get there. We are. Like I said, I think if what I think could happen over the next four years, we could be in for one of the more interesting periods in time that makes the last nine years look like a warm-up act. But it's worth it. The fight's worth it.

Ned Ryan, thank you. Thank you. Thanks for listening to Tucker Carlson Show. If you enjoyed it, you can go to TuckerCarlson.com to see everything that we have made. The complete library. TuckerCarlson.com.