Tucker Carlson’s Vice Presidential Debate Response
01:28:39 Share

For over fifty years, billington s legacy has been great deals on coats for all weather conditions. So before you caught unprepared for the winter weather had to burlington for name, brands, quality items and surprising fits for every family member. Sock up on coats, sweaters and accessory before the, so you can finally stop avoiding the elements and start living comparably warm up at your news, bringing location less than one mile away. Fairlington deals brands. wow.

The most interesting and news or the television show of the year is coming here to t. Cn we are not bragging that's actually true. So a long time produces Justin wells and a team have been embedded no publicly at all with Donald trump on the campaign trail for months, the only through capturing what is going on on the campaign in real time intimately.

They're with trampas y campaigners ency across the country and theyve shot some amazing footage. So would really like in that. So if you're a member, you will soon be able to get this dock series is covering the historic campaign, the follow you never before seen footage from assiniboin Butler towers, pencil anian trumpery.

And a lot more is going to pull back the curtains completely. They are embedded inside the campaign. I can wait, see you personally. But to get the first to a tucker cross and dock com, become a member, the greatest television of that of the year to offer.

So IT was only a week ago that the fabled predictions markets had tim walls at eighty one percent likelihood to win to night's debate, is the same markets are predicted, smooth sAiling. That titanic, apparently IT was not IT to be. That was one of the most unbelievable hour and forty five minutes television experiences I ve seen in a long time.

Course are required to watch the debate is usually help your fidgeting. That was a pure joy to watch from beginning to end. The very obvious top line conclusions.

The future of the republican party is jd events. That's what the future looks like. That's what the part is going.

That's where the voters are. And he is the supremely articulate spokesman for that brand of republican politics. Uh, he is the future.

And the second is that IT is never a good idea to choose anybody for any position on the basis of demographic qualifications. T walls was chosen by the Harris campaign because he's a White guy. He is in a firm of action higher.

And they regretted that tonight, as you usually do in your higher people in the basis of a relevant criteria. So we're going to spend the next while talking what we just be doing IT, with a politician, actually sitting politician, because really they're the best situated to understand a debate. The problem is that most politicians, not we're talking to, particularly members, the united said, senate I first international thousand nine hundred eighty six.

And I can tell you, almost all senators get worse over time. IT is a rare, almost unique few who don't. And the one who is joining us tonight is one of the very few who has, instead of becoming rotten, dying, sold death, as instead become wiser, more skeptical al of government and less controlled during his time in the next state senate.

And so we are honored to be joined tonight by center Mickey of utah center. Thanks so much. Thank you. So what does you think of that?

Well, first about jd, absolutely nailed that. Yes, he walked on. He owned the room and he was the master of the mood.

You have the entire discussion ah he made reason, sound and be reasonable. yes. And he was doing this against an unarmed opponent, somebody who seemed dangerously ill equipped for the task.

And I can't say enough great things about jd vanes performance and enough bad things. About ten walls is now, this is a man who was competing. This was a three on one debate, just as the debate hosted by A B.

C. A few weeks ago was three and one against stana trip. This was similarly A A J events. And yet he pleated, completely dominated the entire event.

He was, his motion controls what struck me most. He's very sport, friend of mine. I know he's very Spark, legitimately hie q character. But he kept his emotions in check in a way that I could never do. He had these shaking liberal narcisse as the moderators, and he had this sort of sad, but also very creepy guy he was debating. And he never one time seemed annoy, not one time.

never once. And this is, uh, something that I was hoping the rest of the country would get to see. Tony, this is the j events. I know as a friend and colleague in the senate talker, I can't tell you like exactly like that.

I can't tell you the number of times when i've seen him be A A quested questioned, chAllenged one way or another by colleagues sometimes it's democrats, sometimes its fellow republicans, but every single time, even when he'd be well within its right to lose this temple a little bit or get frustrated or act anode, he doesn't, he calls a cucumber and and he he responds with reason and he doesn't act the least be annoying yed and truthful I don't think he is annoying yed. He's just taking the opportunity to a illuminate his thoughts on on the topic and he's very rarely wrong. I mean, I 还是 do that。

He acted the way my wife wants me to act, but I can never pull IT off, right? You know.

practice makes perfect, of course, but this also comes from something deeper in this is who is as a person. IT was raised under circumstances that have caused him to realize how deep and how profound how important these decisions are. And he doesn't have tied to us around. He doesn't have any interest in allowing themselves to become so emotionally involved, something that he loses his ability to .

explain IT coherence. Wow, I mean, I I would have lost IT about fifteen different times, particularly, and without focusing on IT. But the moderators, I really hope this is the last time in american history that cvs type assume will be bankrupt by the next election anyway. But did any so called news organizations like this has any role in the debate? I mean, it's a joke.

right, right. And I don't understand how they walk away from this with any sense of generalised self respect or or perception of their own objectivity. Uh what you saw tonight was an indication that they are um for all practical purposes the media communications wing of the democratic .

party they came off so badly do .

a good job of IT no.

And they are charming democrats. Maybe you could find one, but I know both of them. I worked with both of them actually I thought that I mean, I can't imagine their bosses can see that they were that was not a good add for cbs.

And then in the commercial break they started playing some advertisement for a show that is itself an advertisement of a tgi Brown jack whatever. However, she's Brown's er her name on the supreme court. That was a tune bath.

That's what they do. They administer tung baath to the left, and they do IT very, very effectively. But anyway, that I think is causing the american people that get wise to them and and a lot of people, Frankly, to become a noway, even people who historically haven't considered themselves republicans are looking at that saying is something that s not right here. Because in the past, at least war, a mask doing is taking off the mask.

yeah. And they're not impressive. So let's start with what I think is going to be the headline checking my iphone. It's sorted. The headline tim walls saying he's friends with school shooters .

to yeah yeah aren't he's become great friends with school shooters. I don't know what that means, but that was perhaps of greatest presidential or advice presidential debate flop up in living memory. I mean, that's right up there with some of my best friends own nascar teams that just it's not didn't come across as the speaker intended.

I mean, you know saying that you some of your best friends on next car teams does reveal you're in the top one percent for income for sure. But friending school shooters raised a lot of other questions there. A lot good people .

who are friends with mass car team, others, but saying, i'm good friends with mass shooters. That doesn't really have the same time.

Why thought that? And I want to be mean but tim was, I mean, I and I don't think I envy mean, i'm just being sincere. He came across as badly as anyone could at the debut.

He did badly, yes, badly in the sense that he didn't answer question after question after question. Now, fortunately for him, cbs allowed him to get away with IT. But in some ways, they voiced him upon his own patch by doing yes.

Because the viewers can see that, and the viewers can see when they themselves are being mock. Look, I I don't know why this keeps coming in mind, but as I wash him over and over again, I just thought, this is weird. This guys goofy t he came across is that is that guy in the gary larson farr IDE cartoon who while talking to a kangaroo, says, you may be a kangaroo, but I know a few things about more superiors myself. Just everything came across as wrong, just a little bit off. I don't know whether he had back surgery recently or what, but this was off.

Well, I mean, that we maybe, I always have thought, having worked on the television, the camera over time does reveal the truth about people maybe not the whole truth um maybe not a precisely accurate truth, but some version of a reality comes through on the camera I think right that's exactly right.

But lucky he badly mischaracterized a number of things. Perhaps most crucially, his own record on the minnesota law. He signed in the law and denied that a IT reverse protections for babies born alive after bus deorum IT is completely mischaracterized.

So what is the so jd, press them on that a couple times. And he he just said that's not what he says, that's not what he says. Explain IT as you understand .

the undermines sota long um before tim walls changed IT legislation he signed into law as governor, um IT provided protection certain a standards of medical care that had to be given to a baby born alive following up budged abortion. And tim walls signed another bill in the law saying that no longer the law, just removing those protections altogether, and IT replaced them with something.

What is what walls was relying on? There was language providing some level of care. I think they actually use the word care almost unmodified. Some people have characterized that, I think fairly by saying that means that in that circumstance they can provide the equivalent of hospice care for an reinvent ted baby that's really grim and that's not gonna are well, especially when people realized that he was most characterising his own record. He's either unaware of the content of a bill, he said the law, or is lying about IT and neither one of those things .

course he's I mean, you wouldn't take out the phrase life saving without knowing you're taking on the phrase lifesaving you that's an accident that's on purpose and I an controversial the time yes.

And so he expected to be able to go on in this friendly environment of these um is coached cbs moderators and say something that just wasn't true and expect that nobody would catch him on, that nobody would call on IT. Well we've got a different world today. sure. A B C, C, B S, N, B C C N N M S B C used to control the entirety. But today we've got um the tuck question show and we've got x and we ve got a few other channels through which .

people can communicate actual information. Of course, our abortion workers, I mean legal abortion is the most important issue to them. That's obvious. I think it's true as a fact knowing them um and so walls could not have had a more sympathetic you know moderator uh for that section of the debate but even there he seemed uncomfortable. I mean that's like the winning issue for them.

He thinks yes, even there he seemed uncomfortable and even there he was saying things that I think would make the abortion rights advocates trench. He was making IT. Sound there toward the end of his answer as if he's pro life, as if he's not pro abortion.

That seems to be read of the opposite of his message and that of his running made, right. And so that's why a lot of this is going to end with a thought. Like I say, it's consistent with the overall vibe of his his debate performance tonight, which is just a lot of weird stuff. The weird stuff where he didn't answer the question and where they answer he provided had something terribly wrong with that.

I can't think of another reason that they would have picked him other than the common Harris. People are thinking. They think in terms of race like that's how they think about everything. I mean, that's why he was chosen and that's why Jackson made the spring court. We know that because by instance, so I loud repeatedly, and I got ta think that they felt compelled to pick an older White guy because he was an older White guy I don't really seen. And he said that even well.

And at the time he was chosen, remember, IT IT came down to A A sort of a horse race between governor walls and governor superior, right? And the well warn understanding the the well circulated rumor and around washington was they chose walls because he's not jewish, right? But just pia was was too jewish.

I relieved when they didn't choose just perit hard for republicans to. Pero smart, very, very smart, would have made IT a lot of easier for democrats to win pennsylvania for the presidential race and for the for the senate race there. So I was relieved when they didn't. But IT was also weird because I was pretty apparent, yeah, we chose the other guy because he's, you know.

not you, right? I mean, they they have a huge problem with a lot of their voters on the question of israel. In their view of israel is not that different from trumps view of israel, but a lot of their voters have a completely different view of israel, their entire rail so and .

the current administration of which this would be the successor and interest is itself uh dancing a very, very delicate um a dance of regard israel and no one here they want to be seen as co israel on the other hand, they're constantly telling israel ceasefire, somebody attacks them all ceasefire. You're got to stop defending your site, right? That's very, very strange. And you're right. They're doing this as a reaction to a radical element within their own base that is increasingly not only anti israel or israel sceptical, but anti systematic.

One glad didn't choose superior um and he's much more capable than walls and I think he's probably a much worse person even than walls is my person of you but he's certainly a skillful politician.

skillful politician and look no either one of them you out so I can't speak any of those things but what I do know is that the guy they had on the stage tonight surely would would have been outperformed dramatically bug oshiro. This guy was not ready for prime time.

and I showed, I was really surprised that nobody brought up this. The salient fact of tim also's career, which is that he presided over the destruction of the state and its bigger city, mini ampas, on memorial day twenty twenty, yes, that his wife enjoyed IT SHE said SHE injured SHE open the windows of their homes so SHE could smell the burning rubber.

Open the windows of her home so that they could marinate in the smell of burning rubber from overturned police cars and the lawlessness that was going on. SHE apparently love this. Now, this is, this is something you sometimes associate with left us. Mark is like the idea of of people who consider themselves suppressed, a throwing off the established order of things and bring about chaos and violence. But really, do they actually say IT in those terms?

no. This part, no. This is like winning mandella neck sing know, I love the smell of burning rubber as our opponents were murdered in the street. That never, how could that not come up? Means the governor of of mesa .

come up tonight. yeah. I mean, to come on elementary, that's obvious. And IT didn't come up because they were too busy holding J. D. Vance to account for why republicans are to blame because obviously, republicans cause climate change.

And climate change caused hurricanes, including the hurricane that americans have been dealing with for the last few days, especially in states like ford, north CarOlina. And they didn't want to have to hold democrats to account for their handling of those things. So naturally, they blame IT on climate change.

And climate limit is changing. Climate is always changed. We had the glaciers not that long ago, ten thousand years ago.

Um the climate is changing. There is no proof that carbon emissions are changing in climate. What does no one ever say .

that there is certainly no proof that what they're proposing, what they always want to do, which is tax carbon yeah generally shut down carbon based sources of of of energy, face them out over the next, you know, couple of decades or so. There's no proof at all of that. If we do all of that, that that will change global temperatures by even fraction of that.

They have no idea. These are all based on projections, and those projections are extremely cost that we're talking about many, many tens of trillions of dollars. But I ll have to be pumped out into the economy, out of the economy, out of otherwise productive uses, into non production, less productive uses, so that they can sort of a remake the economy and there. But I don't .

understand why republicans more broadly don't chAllenge this so called science, since there is an actual science behind that. I think you could say climate is changing seems to be um IT is always changed. IT seems to be accelerating in the way that IT is changing, but the solutions and even the cause of IT know there's no can scientific sensus on that. why? Why does not even say so?

right? And I saw picture the other day is a picture of some bath constructed during the the height of the roman empire in the coastal city somewhere in europe. And he pointed out that these baths are exactly at sea level as they have been for two thousand years, rain and they have not changed, even as a carbon emissions have, of course change significantly to see level there and elsewhere has not changed. So um this subtotal order that they're asking us to Carry, they're asking us to improve ourselves to rely on less sufficient, less stable sources of electric power and means of of powering our vehicles and things like that without an approved. They're asking us, as IT were uh to accept an almost .

religious belief. We're sitting right now covered by a mile of ice at a time when this content had hundred thousands, may be million to people living on. I mean, this was a heavily populated content and during last ice age and there were no, that we know if there was no carbon emission, I mean, from people. I mean, none of this makes me, and then IT warms sufficiently that all .

that I smelt right? what? All without carbon. But, you know, apparently the coke brothers came along and secretly injecting a lots of carbon into the and of course, they don't take into account changes in solar activity, the strong spots, things like that, that that have an obvious uh, likelihood to impact global temperatures. And so when you view all of this is nearly as they view at the becomes a little bit like there they're holding a hammer or everything starts to look like a male.

And was sure. And if you're telling me that bulldoze forests to build solar farms is good for the environment, cutting off the top of mountains to build windmills is Green, I, you know, I I nothing, I won't believe if I except that.

right? Leaving behind mountains and mountains worth of waste, of course.

some of which is not all that playing trees. If you think the line, if carbon is the problem, then why you build those in force, which they are doing, I mean, millions of makers to, why wouldn't you plant trees instead? I don't really understand .

the ultimate virtue of signal. Nothing signals virtue, quite like baldos and trees and the solar farms.

not not in my world. But doing trees are only virtuous about that at all. One of our plans we started, T, C, N, was to run great long form content, documentation and topics.

The other people were ignoring what we have the best so far. It's called wine in the sand. And it's by James of the brave journal, brave, embedded with tels as they moved migrants engaged in human traffic.

The larger scale and modern times, from latin amErica to the states, embeds with the cartels with hidden cameras and results. Is this document wind the sands? We are proud to run exclusively on tc one. understand? October tenth. Highly recommend .

on junior. Here guys are you are receiving letters from the IOS claiming you go back taxes as penalties and interest fees piled up. The irs gives, you know, clear path to a resolution.

Don't speak to them on your own. They are not your friends. To reach a team of licensed tax professionals that can, to help you reduce, settle and resolve your tax matters, go to T N U S A that come and check out, solve your tax .

problems today one eight hundred seventy eight eight eight eight eight or visit T N USA 点 com。 That's one eight hundred seven eight zero eight eight eight eight. At a public urinal, IT just feels like you're standing there too long.

What used to seem like a high pressure hose filling a bucket, now it's more like a trickle. You notice a weaker flow and urge to urinate more often. Sleep is in a, did my multiple trips to the bathroom? And IT is steadily gotten worse.

You didn't think about going to a doctor for IT. They may call IT in large prostate or B. P. H.

I mean, no one talks about this supposed to suck IT up, right? That's what we do, but we know we need to do something or life is you going to be different, but what can you do about in large prostate? The good news, there is a minimum invasive procedure covered by most insurance called the year live system.

Men, forty five and order, go to help B, P, H, now dot com to find a year lift system trained duck near you. Most common set of extra temporary can include discomfort and urinating, urgency, inability to control the urge, palpi in some blood in the urine, rare side of acts including bleating and infection may lead to a serious outcome and may require in intervention. The ear lift system may be an alternative to medications or invasive surgery. Go to help B, P, H, now dot com to learn more and find a eulie system. Train doctor near you.

Hilda college offers many great free online courses, including a recent one on marxism, socialism and communism.

Today, marxism goes by different names to make itself seem less dangerous. Names like critical race theory, gender theory and decode ization. No matter the names, this online core shows its the same marxism that works to destroy private property and that will lead to famines, show trials .

and gulags. Start learning online for free at tucker for hills dale outcome. That's tucker F O R hills dale dot com. For over fifty years.

berlinton's legacy has been great deals on coats for all weather conditions. So before you caught unprepared for the winter weather had to burlington for name, brands, quality items and surprising fits for every family member socked up on coats, sweaters and accessories before the so you can finally stop avoiding the elements and start living comfortably, warm up at your news, bringing location less than one mile away. FAiling ton deals. Friends, wow.

Let me ask you specifically one of reason so grateful that you're here. J. D.

Vance, of course, is a senator. t. mos. Is running with a former senator. A lot of the discussions, toni, revolved around things that are happening in the body where you have served for a long time. There was a moment when tim walls describes ed, the border, the so called border bill, the immigration bill that died in the congress is the tough is to ever what you were there. What was that bill?

Everything he said was wrong. So here again, tim was also either um lying, meaning he knows the truth and he's not sitting IT or he's been deceived by somebody else, didn't bother to do his own homework and check IT up in the first place. The reason we have a crisis along the southern border has everything to do with effect, that the current administration refuses to enforce laws as they exist on the books.

Already, the biden Harris team has done a phenomenal job, but selling alive the lie is that we, we really wanted to fix the border crisis. We just couldn't. So we had to have changes in law in order force to enforce the border.

Republicans refuse to go along with that. So sorry, we can't do anything. All of that is a lie. Existing law allows them to stop the problem. They don't want to do IT. So they came up with this bill and now this bill was negotiated um by two or three people in the senate only one of him was republican my friend and colleague James k for great senator from okay, I really do like James lanpher teos disagree with among this bill but which my condo assigned him to negotiate that bill with democrats and at the time he did that, a lot of us told them, look, 我 the best thing you could do with this bill is find a way to negotiate something but says， um we want to tie biden's hands and democrats really want to funding for ukraine a lot of republicans like myself didn't want to do that.

Republicans really wanted to secure border so the idea was maybe we can force them to secure the border by time job iden's hands so he can just continue to have the open boards immigration policy couple of months go by. Linford puts a lot of time into a, but what he negotiates doesn't tie biden's hands. And if anything, IT would make IT a lot worse.

Now there are some good provisions in there, but there are a lot of provisions that, especially in the hands of a biden Harris administration, would have made things a lot worse, like the fact that they they would have to a under section two forty four b of the bill. There are some indication they'd have to let in about fourteen hundred people every single day. Remember jay Johnson, who served in the obama administration in the department of human security, had said that we reach crisis levels at four hundred migrants per day. This would have system a, uh, as as high as fourteen hundred per day. So this is one of the many examples within .

hundred day a of what .

they would have the process. And then we've also got this um uh section thirty four o two within the bill that would have provided billions of dollars, what was at two point three billion dollars to this global initiative to facilitate migration, including to the united states.

facilitate facilitate .

that and and also to provide legal services, I kid you not, legal services lawyers paid lawyers for illegal immigrants to have them represented in their immigration.

perceived about if you're not invited, you have to leave immediately. What thought drop you and tea one. And the mexican government, which hates us, has to deal with.

It's what literally every other civilized county on planet earth, and most of the non civilized .

countries on partly in .

on civilized countries, but all of the countries that we are aware of have some kinds of restrictions like this. Why would the united states abandon those? And the truth is, a lot doesn't do that.

It's president biden has been manipulating our our system of law to find ways to refuse to enforce IT. So that was the biggest flaw in this border security bill. Number one, IT presuppose that we needed to build, which we didn't have to have on IT would have been nice to have on that forces hand.

But number two, IT didn't do what we as republicans, we're demanding. Now I don't I don't know why that didn't happen, whether which mcconnell not specify that to James length ford as the minimum negotiating standards. I wasn't the room.

They had all those conversations. But I do think this is a problem. I think somehow a message, uh, I got through to send a langford from MMA. O don't worry about forcing joe biden's hands, because that's what we got out of this bill thing.

Why would the the head republican in the senate want to bill like that? Facilitated illegal immigration that gave lawyers paid for by taxpayers in in an increasingly poor country to illegal aliens. Why would miss my condo be for that? Look.

I obviously I can't speak for him. I can't get into his head. I don't know what he was thinking. Knowing much mcconnel dought, he would have thought, yeah, go and do all those things. Maybe he didn't realize the extent to which I would have this effect.

I read MIT macos position in the circumstances is being focused much more unless just do whatever we're going to do to fund ukraine, to send more money to ukraine. He wanted to get that done. And so if he could find .

some kind of the .

other worry that if something can come up, then they'll get our funding for ukraine, we can dad's cash most, move, Carry on.

will all go home happy. Look, I don't serve in the, I just watch, but that sounds exactly right to me just from watching um from the outside. What do you think that is not focus on ukraine. It's like a religion. Yes.

IT IT is almost like a religion. It's some of my life will actually get a little little when speaking of ukraine as if they were talking about their their beloved aged sibling, who is going through something awful. Now, look, I, I, I understand the ukraine gone through some horrible things and and I deeply sympathetic to the plight of the ukrainian people.

Nonetheless, I am, it's motivating. This is something much more sinister, whether people realized IT or not, those who have gotten enmeshed in this had become part of the military industrial complex and guarantee that no matter what, we can pump a whole lot of money into that. Let me let me explain what I mean there.

Um you can sometimes tell what people are thinking by what they say when they're defending something. A lot of my colleagues, especially on the republican, when defending their votes to send what is IT now close to two hundred billion dollars to ukraine for a war that is not hours. We will say things like this.

A lot of this money, you see, is actually going to a go to the U. S. Job market. It's gna fund up the, the, the arms companies, the people who are building the arms being purchased by ukraine to create american jobs here. That is really unsettling.

I find that unsatisfactory, and I find IT morally repugnant, that we would justify prolonging that, that both the duration and magnifying the severity of somebody else. War, half a world away with a nuclear armed power. Yes, no less. For the simple reason that don't worry, IT don't makes some people here on the for age on that is what I would call immoral and sick. Best to think that way.

Well, I would do. And also, I mean, everyone laments the decline of american manufacture, but you don't want to live in a country whose only manufacturing center is weapons?

No, yeah, that's why I talk about but but I I I would put a grow, but I I would put IT more strongly than that. I obviously, we're not at or anywhere near the point where are only manufacturing sector as weapons. I don't want to go anywhere near the point where we're funding somebody else were making IT longer, making IT more severe against the nuclear on power, no less the one that hates us um uh just on the basis that will will create some american jobs. That's wrong.

That's not who we are. I wonder how people like mich, my condo, or your colleagues, or earn anybody in the media, the whole media is this way, get away with pretending to be the defenders of the ukrainian people when they have beat the slater of the ukrainian an entire generation, hundreds, thousands of people.

And then, you know, zen, skii, their guy has just change along ukraine so foreign entities can bye ukrainian farmland so they're na lose their population and their land. There will be no recognizable ukraine in ten years, thanks to these people. How do they get to be the defenders?

No, that's exactly right. And they have good reason to resent the american people, particularly those who have facilitated to the ukrainians.

do for the reason.

We came on the same in the minute, we started spending money to the tune of now close to two hundred billion dollars. In just a couple of years, we took piece off the table for them. There really were peaceful off rams for this thing in the earlier months of the war, particularly during the first year of of this party war in two thousand twenty two.

Those were taken off the table as we started dumping all this money on them. And is so yes, if I were a, if I were from ukraine, I would deeply resent the U. S.

Government for what we have done. There is prolonged the war. It's made IT more severe .

as taken piece of table. And yet they get to parade around like they're driven by compassion and love for ukrainians .

and meanwhile, a number of government leaders in ukraine and those who we are close enough to centres of power that they can profit off of IT. I'm going to bet, tucker.

that there are a lot of very wealthy people in ukraine area mania, you know, any other countries that border ukraine and theyll tell you, you know that all the luxury car dealerships have sold out. I think there are a lot of rich people who fled ukraine. By the way, i'm not not even judging that. I'm just saying that's a fact whether people who couldn't afford to run away and go buy a bently in dubai have been killed in the war that we created.

That's what that there's this old phrase um a lot of foreign aid is about poor people in rich countries being forced to give money to rich people in poor countries. I certainly happened here and that's something that I appreciate, by the way, about jd vans. Yes, jd vans.

You know, it's somewhat uncommon for a new senator to come in and display as much confidence, respect for colleagues, respect for the system and the process, and complete fearlessness as he had from j events. But he did IT all in a way that was on assuming, that was on offensive, that was always respectful to to, to members. But talking about ukraine makes me remember this aspect of J.

D. vance. He came into the senate um at beginning of two thousand twenty three brand new senator and he already was one of a few people who was willing to be bold and asking questions that needed to be asked about ukraine.

He's shown that consistently through the entire thing. And as recently as just a few months ago, he and I and a small handful of others state up all night on the senate floor pushing back on the ukraine supplemental. We had a lot of people, including members of our own party and the other party swore at us and we're unhappy or with this for that.

But j events then, as you saw tonight, was respectful back to them. IT didn't allow IT to affect his mode and just kept right on going. That's the kind of vice presidents we're going to have.

How is he viewed in the senate?

He's viewed as somebody who is frequently smart, who brings receipts. And so if you argue with them, you've got ta be prepared. He's always going to be nice and respectful about how he does IT, but you will in part because he's so nice and respectful about IT. You will look like a fool if you show up and you haven't .

done your homework. That's why I was a little shocked when Linda gram went out of his way to savage attack j. Evans to trump back in july, the day before trump is making this decision.

People are very cruel about vance off the record. Of course, no one in public, but I know for a fact that they did IT. What was that about a kind of was a personal way you know.

I don't know, I don't know to money. He has never said that publicly.

I haven't heard him speak that way of jd in let's let's assume that he or others are were in fact saying those things about IT um there are those who feel so passionate about the ukraine issue that some of them might take such great offence to someone like jd coming up, yes, and asking questions, saying should we really be doing this and jd comes at this uh, from the vantage point of somebody who speaks with a fair amount of experience, you know, listed in the marines es, he went to school on the G. I. Bill, and he's got a really good head on his shoulder. And so a lot of people probably resent him from that. And and if if some of my colleagues on the republican side of the I were saying things like that, I suspect you .

rain had a lot to do with IT but IT but IT sounds like he gets along with people in general day. I mean, there are ideological differences that are stark, but from what you're saying, he doesn't never want to personal mies.

right? Well, he ask people who mistreat him. But what I love about jd is that even after someone publicly uh, mistreat them and and i've seen some of our colleagues, including some of our republican colleagues do that the next day, jd fans will be sitting next to the lunch, smiling, laughing, not necessarily pretending that the whole thing didn't happen so much as showing that they're not gone to get under his skin. He's not gna let them influence his own behave .

and I wish I had that quality. Don't so there was a moment, I think, have the tape um where he did not allow the contempt behavior of the moderators to infuriate him. He just kept going. I thought this is one of the cools moment i've ever seen an debate here here .

is I don't talk about my faith, a lad, but mah u twenty five forty talks about to the least amongst, as you do to me. I think that's true of most americans. They simply want order to IT.

This bill does IT. It's funded, is supported by the people who do IT. And IT lets us keep our dignity about how we treat other people.

Thank you, governor. And just to clarify for our viewer, springfield, ohio does have a large number of haien migrants who have legal status temporary protected. Well, thanks so much to get to think it's important, the the the rules were got a check and sense your fact.

I think it's important to say what's actually going on. So there's an application called the c bp one APP. Or you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole and be granted legal status at the wave of a commonly heras open border wane.

That is not a person coming in applying for a Green card and waiting for ten years. Thank you. Thank of a legal immigration, and thank the legal. They have so much to get your senator so much. Thank you.

They want to have that has not been on the books.

gentleman, the audience can hear you because your mikes are cut. We have so much we want to get to thank you for explaining the legal process.

It's really kind of hard to describe about awful Margaret brennan and marrow donor R I think amErica just saw but that was masterful. I thought there was so much .

to unpack there. You absolutely right. IT was master ful by J. D, uh, first of trudeau to C, B, S for allowing, uh, governor walls, to quote Matthew twenty five forty, without interrupting him and saying, i'm sorry, that's an attempted and bringing in foreign disinformation campaigns .

and we can't accept that made those .

words burn on your tongue I T the new estimate. Maybe you should acknowledge that some of your policies aren't exactly compatible with that, but setting that a try for minute, yes. Jh, J.

T S, invocation of this problem with the C B P one APP. I've gonna build to fix this problem, and and i've been calling this out for a long time. Jd, and capsule ted, that much Better, more concisely than i've ever been able to.

But they have developed this application that people can use on a smart phone, which they always, migrants seem to have. They can go on and just fill in their own biographical information, and that then serves their defective passport. When they get here, they can do whatever they they want.

They're admitted into the country using that APP and is one of many examples of a how this administration has actively nurtured, Fostered, cultured environment in which migrants come up by the millions were talking at least ten million people who have entered this country illegally a since january of two thousand twenty one. In the meantime, what we've done is we've enriched international drug cartels to the tune of tens of billions of dollars a year. We've also brought in a fatal uh potentially to kill up at many tens of millions of americans.

And it's been traffic in on the on the backs of women and children, many of whom are being sex traffic. So this is what we have to think the bitten haris administration for. And this is really how it's happening. But points, we ve had this APP on .

the smartphone APP since nineteen ninety OK.

since they've had .

a four smart phones .

that kind of cried. How did people use a smart phone APP in that era before this happened thirty four years?

Because we've had this up for thirty four years again.

You know, there there have been computers, of course, that long, but these were not computers that were in the hands of millions of people entering the country unlawfully. And it's been during this subminimum tion that they have .

used this particular. There was no meaningful internet for for most people in one thousand ninety.

No.

I was here. I remember exactly yeah. In the other, of course, effect is that it's completely you up ended american society.

So we have this. There's pretty amazing clip from twenty twenty two, two years ago from two walls bragging about how many refugees minnesota has. And I just want to play.

It's really short. I think it's just says a lot about the attitude that inspired what we're saying. Now here's to walls. We have more .

refugees per capital than any other state. That's not just morally a good thing. It's our economic and cultural future, this beautiful diversity we see out. And where the ten when i'm there, you see fifty languages spoken in the school.

So everything about that is a lie actually the states become poor um under walls uh and much more chaotic and more a violent but what this what struck me was we see fifty languages spoken in schools as beautiful. Diversity is the opposite of beautiful and is not diversity. It's chaos.

IT means people can understand each other. There's nothing that unites people. IT means a fractured society.

And if you think chaos is beautiful, then I mean, i'm sorry, you know you're uncertain team at that point. CS is not good. Nothing to understand. Other people is not good. I was that good.

But remember, talker, this is a man who lives in a home where they think it's beautiful to open the windows so they can smell the perny rover. So they do think this is beautiful. Now i've never been to worthing ton, minnesota, but when I hear him say there are fifty languages spoken in the public schools, I think chaos, right? I think power of people.

Now, the tower of people, the resulted the way IT did not as a blessing to those involved in IT, but as a course, as a punishment. Because when everybody speaks different languages, they can understand each other in tray OS. And people suffer as a result.

And how do the kids get educated? I guess he doesn't care that he was an educator.

They don't. And through this process of social promotion and the teachers unions facilitating the social promotion, they paper over IT and they make IT look like everything is okay when we know it's not. This is before we even get to the a more dire human cost of the people who have been raped, who have been murdered when he suffered through home invasion robbery, robberies, been assaulted and battered as a result of people coming into this country who didn't belong here to begin with.

given that there's zero support that I can detect in polls for these immigration policies, which are permanent, change the country forever. How is democracy functioning if something this central to a nation's identity, hod lives in the country, is taking place without any input at all from the citizens? Or I live here taking .

place not only without their meaningful input, but also setting things up so that non citizens can and will vote in elections. why? I ve spent months at last few months trying to push the save out, trying to attach IT to the spending bill.

The same act would make IT so that you can't vote in a federal election without showing some type of of proof that you are you citizen and they've for eligible to go be against all democrats. All democrats are against IT. Now IT passed the house actually with bypass san votes.

All the republicans plus uh a handful of democrat voted forward over there. All the republicans in the senate supported IT, but senate democrats blocked IT. Now they blocked IT spicing first and foremost.

Well, non citizens don't vote. They can't vote. And anybody who says otherwise, no. Misinformation campaign that which is what they say about anything they don't like.

Well, then what's wrong .

with banning IT? Well, that was my question to them. If IT doesn't happen that we're planning something that doesn't have it's already illegal. Yeah, it's all illegal, but there are all sorts of things that are already illegal that are too easy to Carry out. And that's why you need to have a some penalties attached, which is what the same that does.

IT would require the states to ask for a some type of proof of immigration status and require the states to call through their voter registration files to remove non citizens periodical and then imposes a criminal penalty for anyone who knowingly gives a ballot or a voter registration to a non citizen. So here again um what we've got our laws that have been easy to circumvent this would have fixed IT. And they said it's not necessary because they don't vote, because they can't.

Only every day, tucker r becomes more and more apparent that people aren't getting onto the voter registration files being non citizens because of the supreme court's interpretation of the national voter registration act, where they said, the states cannot as for proof of citizenship, and where in all fifty states now you can apply for and get a driver's license as a non citizen. And when you do that, if you fill up the M, V, R, A part of the form, you check a blocks and sign your name, then you registered voter, even though you're a non citizen. And so this is troubling. Meanwhile, you've got the american people were being .

ignored with in all fifty states issue .

licenses to non citizens. All fifty states do in roughly half of the states, a little more than half of the states. I believe they will also issue them even to illegal aliens. But in all states, as a non citizen, you can apply for a driver's license.

Now the purpose of the one hundred and ninety three uh, national photo registration act, motor voter, motor voter, uh, was to make IT easy to fill out a driver's licence application and simultaneously registered to vote. The problem is that makes IT way too easier. We've now got thirty million plus non citizens in this country, and it's so easy to apply for a driver's license today.

You add to that this ring courts bad ruling, a bad interpretation of the nvr, saying the states can ask for voter ID, and you've got a problem. You add all of that to this major overhaul of immigration policy undertaken without the consent of the american people, a contrary to their will, where the administration is basically is effectively rewriting immigration law by refusing to enforce fast walls of them. And that's them as .

we're in today. I mean, you know, how could a republican ever get elected if you've got a brain, new electorate brought in by the democratic party, given all kinds of three things that our citizens don't get made dependent on that party for its life? Like how could mean, how could you not become a one party state?

Well, that's the whole idea. attacker. Remember, uh, the country immediately do ourself. Mexico was ruled by one party, the pre, the pre for a most of the the twenty years century, almost the entirety.

Even IT was ironically called the the revolutionary institutional part of my favorite, neither of any body of the institution. But they managed to do IT. I think the democrats, whether they realize the P.

R. A angle or not by name, I guess what they're trying to do here, think about what they do that. So they brought in ten million plus non citizens. They've then ship them strategically to different parts of the country. Many of those will end up being able to vote since they save act, uh, much to my dismay, wasn't attached to this spending bill.

If that happens, they may will seize control of things they wouldn't have otherwise control like I hope that won't happen, but I could once they're in, if democrats clean, you know, have a clean sweep, meaning they get the White house, they keep the senate, they take back the house. Representatives are commonly, Harris made, known, horrendous, to nuke the phillip ster in the senate. And with karson cinema and joe managed out of the picture, it'll be easier for them to do that if they would ve got the majority.

Once that happens, they pack the supreme court. They will pass voter registration ah and and voter reform bills that will take a lot of the discretion to draw legislative districts away from state legislators though add dc and porter eos states and make a couple of other changes, including to our campaign finance laws that together will make an indefinite perpetual democratic majority and the united states congress our new reality, they'll be the the pre party. But for the united states.

you you really think they would add port reo in the district? yes.

And by so doing, they are they'll get the four additional democratic senator seats for the forseeable future. All for those would be predictably, reliably democrats. And I think that's part of what theyve got in mind. But what they want is to not have a meaningful opposition party. You can already tell that they want this by.

but I thought they we're defending democracy. That would end democracy.

No, look, their conception of democracy um is not actually about citizen input. It's about something else. It's about achieving the size, scope, reach and power of government and general and the federal government in particular. It's about enhancing their ability to Carry out their their progression, the radical progressive markus objectives, and that's what they want to do. They see the rest of us as illegitimate and as obstacles to that task, and therefore people who are deserving of being cancelled, of having our votes deluded and not counted.

Hey, chicago, apple is open for small business. That's right. We're here to make starting and running your business simpler. With privacy and security built on all devices, it's easy for you to protect your customer data. And if you need hardware, software support, you get advice from business experts and no cause whatever.

You can focus more on the and less on, you know, the other stuff at apple, we're open for your small business. Go to apple accounts, small business or visit an apple store to learn more. Brian meals here for, I guess, my hundreds mid commercial? No, no, no, no, no.

Honestly, when I started this, I thought only have to do like four of these is unlimited to premium wireless for fifteen years. How are still people paying two or three times that much? So I shouldn't be victim blaming here.

Give me a try. And mid mobile dot com slash safe whenever you're ready. Forty five dollars up from payment equivalent fifteen dollars per month, new customers on first three month plan only taxes. And these extra speeds lower about forty, gives details.

Do you think that'll happen?

I sure hope not. I pray daily that IT won't. But IT is our duty as citizens at this great republic to sound the voice of alarm when we see a risk that happened.

And I certainly see that risk here. Look, um these really are parallel times and we can't we can't afford any longer to sugar coat what IT is that they're doing. And what they're doing is really, really dangerous. We've just got to be strong enough to stop them.

So you've seen all kinds of um indicators pop up in media outlets that exist really for the people who run the democratic party, the atlantic and the new yorker specifically. And others have run pieces recently saying the constitution is an impediment to progress. yes. Um you heard john kerry said at the other day the first woman is the problem um that's not accidental.

is that no no, it's not accidentally nis IT insincere. These guys mean IT, they genuinely mean IT. Uh because look, uh first and for most, if you view the objective as being democracy, which I I don't think they do, but let's just go with me on this. If they view the ultimate objective is just democracy, pure democracy, as pure as we can get IT, then the constitution is itself an impediment to that. The constitution is designed to be countered democratic in its Operation.

IT is designed to be an intermediate filter of sorts between pure democracy and the rights of the people, as in fact, that's the only reason you have a constitution, is to limit the power of government so that IT doesn't become abusive of the rights of the minority. That's that's the constitution and its purpose in a nutshell. So if the democrats love this idea of pure, unrestrained democracy so much, I don't believe that's really accurately explaining what they want.

But if that were or what they want, then that would make sense for them to try to trample on IT. But of course, what they wanted, something much more sense than that. They want console lidity of the of the power of government, whether the constitution requires, uh, distribution of power. IT requires IT to be defused so that no one person or group of people gets too powerful. And so as a result of all of that um you see them being doubly contemptuous of a constitution protection the constitution protects the rights of minority including heros like you and me who would dare to chAllenge the the um assumptions of the governing woke elite and it's the constitution is also a threat to their own ability to Carry out their Marks. Is inspired far left radical progression.

But if you're attacking, I mean, there we're treasons been thrown around quite a bit over the last eight years. But if you're attacking the constitution, I mean isn't is that trason?

Yes, I believe IT is. Look, I we've all sworn in. Oh, those of us who hold public office in the united states are required under article six of the constitution to take them off to work. And I think if you violate that of, I do think that is treasonous. So those who are taking this position, I think you're taking an indefensible position, one that I think could fairly be described as trasimenus.

How widespread do you think in washington is to view the conclusion the problem?

Well, i'm seeing um some alarming trends in this regard. Democrats are are much more forceful about IT, much more up front. Sometimes you can you can feel from some republicans feeling frustrated about particular provisions, but republicans will at least always pay lip service to IT. And I think with some degrees of sincere, what i'm seeing now for the first time know i've been in the senate now for thirteen and a half years when I first got to the senate nobody elected office would be IT would dare to be cut dead saying something that could be interpreted as contemptuous told the constitution and yet now you routinely ly hear members of congress um democrats referring to features of the constitution as incredibly problematic like for example, of the electoral college. They hate the electoral college.

They absolutely despise IT and they will refer decisively to the to the senate as a non representative as a sort of disenfranchise form of inequality because the whole point of the senate um is that the senate has to involve equal representation among the states, even if you are mended to say that each state will have a different number than two settings. Article five of the constitution, which govern the amended process, says that there is one type of a memory that is presumptively, preemptively and constitutional. You can change the principle of equal representation. They hate that.

why? Well, because how of their voters are focused in a small or handful of states, heavily populated urban sectors. And they think it's profoundly unfair that a smaller state like utah or mine will get two votes. Well, a heavily populated state like alive nia, new york will have only two votes in the salt is .

only they can do about that.

in my opinion. No, I mean, they could. They could amend the constitution. But like I say, your article five makes that the one type of constitutional amendment that is on constitutional. I have this conversation with justice kolia ones who posited to me that maybe they could change, but I would require two successive amendments to the constitution. First, you'd have to amend out the part that says that you can change this, and then you'd have to actually change IT regardless.

Amending the constitution to change, to undo the electronic college or to change equal representation in the senate is something that is nowhere near having the kind of support you would need right now to change IT. But I do worry now that you've got one major political party that is openly contemptuous, so at least those two provisions of the constitution, and becoming more contemptuous every day of the first to memory, including not only the freedom of speech protection, but also the freedom of religion protections. I worry that a chill wind blows in amErica when you've got a major political party that is still being taken seriously, when IT hates the constitution, especially provisions as fundamental as those.

So I mean, packing the supreme court would solve the problem. Me don't have to amend the constitution, you just change its meaning.

the old fashion way. And what f dr figured out was that um f dr could threaten to pack the court and so threatened the court that some justices would change their votes. I write about this in a book I wrote a couple of years ago called saving night.

He threatened to pack the court. IT didn't work. But one of the reasons IT didn't work is that IT worked in a different way.

IT threaten the court into adopt lock, stock and barrel ftr loose interpretation of the commerce laws. And we've never been the same sense. That's what they want to do.

They want to either force the issue to the point where they can change a lot. Now in the case of court pack, IT doesn't actually require a conversational memory. Its simple legislation, but is that type of legislation that, while not on constitutional al technically, could undo the whole constitutional al structure? And that scares me to death.

And you think is possible? Yes.

not only possible tucker, but if if they get the majority in the house and keep the majority of the senate and they give the White house, they will do IT, and they will do IT within the first hundred days there in office. That should scare every american if there's anyone with them. The sound of my voice, who is thinking about voting for which hair will increase .

the number of seats on the court without question.

Absolutely, I believe the grounds. Well, talker, democracy, of course. I know they'll come up with something democracy because they think that answers everything.

They'll say climate change, or they'll say racism, racism or A A lot of them will say things like, well, we've got more circuit courts of appeals now, so we've got to increase IT reflect that. That's nonsense. Look, there's not a lack of human resources among the nine justices on the court. That's not an issue. They just want to increase the number of justices for one simple reason because they don't like the fact that there is a court now controlled by a majority that's content with reading the constitution based on what IT says rather than on the basis .

of what progressive democrats wished that in the first hundred days you'll .

think they'll do. I mean, I think I about if they have the opportunity, meaning if they run the claim sweep, where they control all three lovers with him, the two political branches, they will do IT.

Well, they're not too far from that really.

Yes, IT wouldn't be all that hard form to do IT. And that's one of the reasons why have been so worried about this election. And making sure that it's actual us citizens were voting is because this election really is consequence of just given how different the two competing visions of these two political parties happens to be.

We saw that on display tonight in this debate in great detail. I mean, I would ask you the same question. Do you think that we saw contrasting vision from the two parties? Because, in my view, tonight we saw greater contrast between these two candies. And we've seen in a long time ever.

ever, ever.

certainly in our lifetimes.

And just the level of thinking, I mean, really is the only shape. IT is true. IT really was three against one.

And the one out shown the three with ease, just done something as small as that. That was not small. But as specifically is the housing crisis, the increase in the cost of housing in the united states.

And J. D. Vance makes us very obvious point that, you know, more people means higher costs because there's a thing called supply and demand.

More people want something, its Price rises ready, the limited supply, growing demand. I mean, it's just like the most, it's first great math. And tim, tim walls goes, well, you know, can you find a study that shows .

that .

j and then J D says, well, actually I think the fed just did a today the other day that shows that in great to tale but you need a point to a study.

Is that yeah .

but then the atoms of study, I don't know. I mean, you're going to set, you know, that takes a year to build a house. You got twenty five many new people like, of course, look, it's true in every country in the worlds, true in canada right now, true australia. It's true everywhere. So like anyone who demands a study to prove something that obviously a absolutely.

and especially when they asked for IT and it's already been provided by the federal reserve bank, which democrats generally loved. By the way, I love that entire exchange. I loved how jd handled IT.

IT was a great example of what we've been describing of jd being the master of the the mood of the debate, the master of reason and of this passionate but persuasive reasoning. I thought IT was fantastic. I I also love the fact that he began his answered there by plugging a proposal that i've interduce called the the houses act.

And the houses act would require, under certain circumstances, for the federal government to sell surplus federal land for the purpose of building single family affordable housing. A single le family all of to live in a big high ride in your pod. And they've been pushing this for ten years, this horrible program called the affirmative ly, furthering fair housing programme, where they're trying to make the us. Department of housing and urban development this sort of major planner, masters, zone and commission for the entire country, and giving benefits to local government entities that embrace their zoning, their high density zoning plans, and punishing those who want what. I mean.

you could actually solve these problems in a day if you destroy a list of, and I can give this epcot if you want, but let's just say, marthe's ventured aspin bethea's, maryland newton massu sets know the high density.

I think these are good places for high density housing.

I want to see. And all the ms. Thirteen baby mom is, get free apartments in the new places. So like.

don't deserves much, much. Very .

easy to do. We can do any identity housing unless martis has been near to aspin, but has to and newton and get IT first. Like that would ended immediately. Mccain, one hundred percent.

Yeah, exactly. like. So those guys hate IT because they hate single family housing. They don't like that. Tim walls also interjected.

I think the single family .

I don't know like but I think that has something to do with the fact that they don't really like families .

that much and human autonomy .

yeah their family policy is something rather um the opposite of a pro family policy. Might say tim was an inter jack bicsg well, but in some point is there's not of that much federal land. Okay, fair enough.

But in a lot of states, there is a lot of federal way. In fact, some of the greatest housing crisis that you might find of the united states can be found in the western united states, where the federal government owns most of the land. The government owns almost seventy percent of the land in my state.

And if you took just a tiny fraction of that, we're not like half of one percent of the federal land in my state and used IT for the houses x housing plan. You could in a fairly short period time, roughly double the the the supply of single family affordable home just by adapting that legislation. So I really don't like IT, and they'll have you believe that all federal and only then he also threw in this quip about or are you going to be building houses from the .

place of the park, putting condos in the yellowstone?

He's never been to the western united states. These guys think that everything is delicate arch. I can tell you there is a whole bunch of land that is neither beautiful nor um the home to some natural wonder is just owned by the U.

S. government. So we can't tax IT. We can't .

what they doing with seventy five .

percent of your land. They use IT to bliss. They use IT to compel us to an undo obedience to the federal government.

But what are they doing with IT? I mean, is that one big biolab? Or what is that?

Most of IT sits fellow. Most of IT sits without being used for anything. Now there's not a property owner on planet earth who can afford to own that much land, especially in a developed country like hours and let IT sit fellow, but they get away with IT because they don't have to pay taxes on IT. And that far further in publishes states in the west, like mine, where the federal owns most of the land because they don't pay property test.

This is not, these are not national parks. No.

now we we don't fight the stuff on the parks. We like our park. Of course, the parks are also a tiny, tiny fragment, a tiny segment of a vast empire. You know, the federal government owns close to thirty percent of the total landmass of the united states.

Uh, people east of colorado are hardly aware of that because the federal government, in most cases zones percentage of land can be reckoned the low single digits in those states. But in the west, this is a big, big deal, and it's costly. But the good .

stewards .

of they're terrible IT. Actually, they do IT all in the name of environmental conservation. They claim that if they didn't all own all this land, that would be an environmental, the post apocalyptic health cape of I arable and managing well.

The federal government is poison the air and water more than anybody. Yes, look, look at campus. You name any military base is filled with pcb.

That's right. But but you don't even have to go to the pcbs or you'll see something like that on the military installation before seeing that the hotoke macs have poor start. Just look at what they do to unpopulated, unused federal land.

They mismanaged to the point that they allow fuel build up, meaning a trees, H I know, brush, to become overgrown. They refuse to allow any kind of temper harvesting or for for you to cut sort of a firewall swap in the middle of IT. They refused to allow the locals to treat for bark beto infestation, for example. Then forest fires happen. The forest fire destroys the air quality IT destroys the watership and IT destroys the interest of a jacon land owners.

Also, a massive carbon emission more than your suburban.

exactly. So look at if these guys cared about the environment, they would not want the photo of owning thirty percent of the land of the united states. Sure is. I wouldn't want them owning seventy percent of youtube.

So maybe it's about power, not conservation.

IT is one hundred percent about power. They love the idea of something as fundamental as land being managed by distant burek rats, not elected by the people, utterly unaccountable to the people two thousand miles away from the people who then become more and more dependent on the federal governments. For that reason, this stuff has been talking about IT has been warned of since the time of the consular convention.

In fact, on september third, seventeen eighty seven, IT was raised at the constitutional convention and exchange between Albert gary and hubert ris. They talked about this risk of this power. What if we give the federal government of this power over these federal lands? They could use IT to manipulate the states into an undo obedience to the general government. We've been ignoring those risks for a long time. It's one of the reasons why we need .

reforms like the houses act. So you heard walls make reference, something I am embarrassed was not aware of comment. Harris planned to build three million housing units.

Yeah, I think this is either just before or after the unicorn arrive and the unicorns, you know, being posted there with these magical equality, I can print money without .

causing in place.

I look forward to the unico orn plan.

I don't know anything about IT, but I am dead certain this is a payoff to their developer donors, right? That always is its high density housing in your neighbor. D because they hate you. Andrew neighborhood and their friends are getting richer. Ment, I just know that that's true.

And rest a short tucker that because comm is going to be handing out twenty five thousand dollars cks for anyone who gains access to any of that housing, that the cost of housing will end up going up by .

exactly annual debt service this right?

And just to pay the interest on our that, so how where .

do we get the money for all this stuff?

They have not answered that question.

When does the amErica go round? Stop spinning.

Well, look, in order to have more money because we are the world's reserve currency, it's been fairly easy for them to effectively print money. Now there's is a little more complicated than that. They have to go through a treasury auction process. People buy the bonds, then we print more money. But the problem is as we get more, more in debt and as we have to pay, you know, just a few years ago, we were paying three hundred, three and fifty billion a year and interest.

It's mushroom in the last couple of years as we've been spending so much more money sooner or later, you get to the point where you can't issue enough bonds to keep up with that, not without paying much, much higher a yield rates on your bonds. And that's where the money really is going to run out. And that's where we could, in very short order, see the us.

Dollars status as the world's reserve currency dropping into the atlantic ocean, never to be seen again in our lifetime. And then that's truly scary. Well, then we as a people enter one of the single greatest upheavals that our country has ever known and one of the greatest economic of people that any group of people could go through. Because when you've been used to the blessings, the benefits associated with having the world's reserve currency be your country's currency, uh, all kinds of things happen and IT becomes harder and harder, uh, for people to gain access to money, they need to start a business or not.

This gold is at twenty six hundred box.

absolutely. And I expect we are nowhere near seeing the end of that trend because people will be sending their money not just in the gold but in any other asset, uh, because the U. S. Dollar is is losing its value like crazy. Much as they're trying to hide IT, they can't hide from the fact that housing and groceries and gasoline is they've all gone up by somewhere between twenty and thirty one thirty two percent as even according to their own numbers, which are probably understating .

the problem is there anyway, to avert this disaster.

Sure, we could avert IT by electing government officials who are willing to say, you know, we don't draw in from an unlimited well of money, just isn't there. So we've gotta stop pretending like we can. That was one of the great frustrations I had with him, walls throughout this entire debate.

He kept on approaching everything, everything, as if I were a problem for government to solve. Every government problem as if IT something that the federal government in particular could solve. They know no limits on that. And the problem with assuming that it's like the principle that you heard the expression, if everyone's family, no one is, if everything's urgent and a matter for the federal government, then there is no urgency, there is no importance, it's just one big mess and or not able to do anything effectively. That's where we are today.

Well, me just ask you to summer, what you think this night means for the race were about a month out.

I believe tonight was a big night for the trump vans campaign. I think jd vans came in in a very big way for Donald trump. And I think j events brought about one of the best debate performances i've ever seen from any republican in any ever, this that was stack against him, and yet he dominated every second of that debate. So if there are any j events, they yours out there I point to tonight is the moment that you need to change.

This seems like total indicate I an obviously personally investing in this because I love jd personally, but IT does seem like a total of indication, one hundred percent.

one hundred percent and not a way that tucker is not just a indication for those within the republican party who were doubtless but I think there are a lot of people who are going to be pulled onto the trump vance ticket who are going to vote for president trump because they saw the debate tonight. I think IT was that powerful. I think he has the ability to move.

People look, remember his background and what he's been through. He's live through circumstances made worse by federal policies made by people in washington, D. C.

Who convinced themselves and their constitutions that they were making the world a Better place by making a small handful of people in washington, D. C. More powerful.

He's experienced the pain that that can cause, and he's a living example of somebody who who has overcome those things but has overcome them without forgetting. For once he came without forgetting what IT is that helped him overcome some difficult circumstances in his life. It's those people who he has in mind. It's those people who animated him in the first since it's a run for the united states senate and then to fight like crazy once he got there for what he sincerely incorrectly believes would benefit them. And that's a government that's more accountable to its people and more accountable that based on core principles in bedded in our constitution.

So I said this one last question. I do one one last question, which is a deep interest to me as a lifelong resident of you're one of the very few members of the senate who seems less sympathetic to washington, more skeptical after more than a dozen years there. Why is that?

Look um in washington dc, you see a lot of things that have gone wrong. The closer you get to that, the less attractive IT is you see everything works at all. And I became a as a Young man as a teenager.

I was a republican. I went on to serve the two year mission from my church along the us. Mexico border.

And IT was during that time period, even though politics aren't relevant to missionaries service, I saw an experience, things there that turned me from a republican into a conservative and it's a lot of the same things that get events is experiencing that have caused him uh to come out a deep skeptic of the federal government because I saw federal policies that were locking families into poverty for generations, federal policies that were causing people uh to make rational decisions that were harmful to their families in order to continue in that cycle of poverty perpetuated by that. The longer i've served in the senate, the more of that i've seen washington, dc. Is perpetuating the very problems that the constitution was designed to protect us against.

They all involve the dangerous accumulation of power in the hands of a few. We seen that power, uh, taken away from the people in two steps, from the people at the state local level move to washington within washington, from the people's elected lawmakers to unelected on a candidate burek rap, who now make most of our laws hundred thousand pages a year, and we can't vote those people out. j.

Evans sees in them, sees in that corrupt, that corrupt system, what I see in IT, and what has caused me to be more skeletons, al, of washington, dc. By the day, which is that the american people are great. They are strong, and they are different than their government. And their government is different from the government that are constitutional stable.

But you haven't only answered the question. You mean IT, why do you mean that when so few others mean that after thirteen years in this?

okay. So if the question is, why do so do others see IT the way I I see I think there well.

they might say something similar to what you just said. I mean, your if I use you're like a legit constitutional scholar okay, so you're make reference to the constitution from a position of knowledge and you're more fluent in the details than I would say most in the same. And you are more fluent, but there are others who are fluent in everything that you are flu. I mean, there are other constitutional experts in the senate, but they don't seem to mean that this as much as you mean that. That's my real question.

They mean I T more on warm .

days than on cold .

ones that ying um yeah, it's an interesting question. I I can't speak for anyone else is I can't get into their head, but I will say this talk I I I understand how a lot of people get drawn into the competitive s vertex of big government and of consolidation ted power because we've all been raised every american any american whose alive today has been raised entirely in an environment in which a the a primary and secondary education establishment, the higher education establishment um increasingly most of corporate america, the news, A A media establishment and the entertainment media establishment have all bought into the progressive vision.

And the progressive vision is itself fundamentally at odds with the constitution. The progressive vision is all about concentration power, giving IT to so called experts, even at the expense of democratic input from the people. But the more they catch the vision of what's gone wrong.

And the fact that what's gone wrong is indexed, ably tied to our deviation from that founding document, a document that I tend to believe was written by wise men, raised up. I got to that very purpose, even the U. S.

constitution. I think more people are seeing that every day. And whether they know what is a constitutional doctor not, they know something is dangerously wrong in washington, because by their fruits, you should know them. And the fruits of washington, D, C, are such that the american people are poor. They are less free than they have ever been because they're living under a the oppressive yoke of a government that makes laws with impunity in a way that would make king George the third blush.

That's true.

This time we don't have to have uh, A A revolutionary war to change that because our law already protects us with the things that we need. We just need to know what those things are, what the protections are. And at the whole point of the constitution is to make the federal government less powerful and therefore less easily abused. But they're waking up to that every single day. Donald trump doesn't necessary speak in the same terms that I do IT doesn't necessary put IT in terms of federal m separation of powers and and this .

doesn't necessarily the struck the .

version of power. But he gets, he gets IT because he cares deeply about the american people and seize that they too are suffering under that oppressive yoke of government. That's why we ve got a real singular opportunity with this election. And I hope and pray and have every expectation that the american people will do what they have to do to restore the question. And that's by voting .

for trump and that center mick of utah, by the way, not words I thought you would have said eight years ago, just it's been amazing to watch you IT with great abortions. So thank you.

Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

But that we've a documentary series that starts right now. tonight. There will be six episodes total. The first one is now available.

Its on T, C, N, called to the surge, we ve head someone embedded with the trump campaign, about to people bet with the trump campaign and they've got a ton of amazing footage that you will see nowhere else true that's on t. cn. Thank you're joining us tonight. We will be .

back tomorrow.

Thanks for listed the tucker crosson show. If you enjoy IT IT, you can go to tuck crossing that calm to see everything that we have made the complete library .

dock croson dcm.