Oct. 2, 2023 - The Tucker Carlson Show
33:20
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| If you've ever wondered why it's taken you so long to figure out what's happening now in American politics, don't blame yourself. | ||
| It's not your fault. | ||
| It's hard for most Americans to comprehend the total dishonesty of American liberalism. | ||
| Virtually nothing the liberal says is true. | ||
| And the lies are not ordinary lies. | ||
| The lies are so brazen, so aggressive and unending that it's difficult for a normal person to understand what's happening. | ||
| Thirty years ago, for example, liberals began to lecture us, softly at first and then in an increasingly high volume, about tolerance. | ||
| How could you have known then that they planned, in fact, to usher in the most intolerant age in American history? | ||
| They've done that now, but few people saw it coming. | ||
| We shouldn't make the same mistake again. | ||
| Liberals are now telling us they plan to protect American democracy, and that's the clearest possible sign that they intend to end it. | ||
| Thirteen months from this week, the United States will hold a national election. | ||
| In a democracy, citizens can vote for the candidate of their choice. | ||
| That's not just a feature, it's the defining fact of the electoral system. | ||
| The people rule. | ||
| They can send anyone they want to Washington because they're in charge. | ||
| But this year, in the name of protecting democracy, liberals have decided to strip Donald Trump's name from the ballot in states across the country. | ||
| Trump is the frontrunner in the presidential race. | ||
| He's currently beating Joe Biden in the polls. | ||
| Yet liberals have decided that you should not be allowed to elect him president. | ||
| That's not democracy. | ||
| It's the opposite. | ||
| It's totalitarianism. | ||
| Just this morning, Donald Trump appeared in court in New York in a civil case brought by the state's attorney general that was designed explicitly to keep him out of the White House. | ||
| That case is part of a larger legal barrage against Trump that so far includes a total of 91 felony counts, every one of them politically motivated. | ||
| But today's civil case is especially absurd. | ||
| In fact, it's hard to overstate its ridiculousness. | ||
| In sum, Trump stands accused of inflating the value of collateral used to secure loans, loans that he has already paid back with interest. | ||
| In other words, there is no injured party in this case. | ||
| The biggest banks in the world assessed the risk and they made a profit, as they almost always do. | ||
| Not a single person was defrauded. | ||
| For this non-crime, Trump and his children are in the process of losing their homes and their businesses. | ||
| Here's MSNBC's live coverage of the hearing today. | ||
| And as you watch, pay special attention to the judge in the case, Arthur N. Gorin. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And there you see President Trump, the former president, I should say, next to his attorney. | |
| And that's Chris Kyes, who we expect to make the opening statements here. | ||
| And then this, I guess, is Judge Angoran. | ||
| There he is, the judge, mugging like he's on stage in a middle school play, grinning, preening for the camera. | ||
| Arthur Angoran is thrilled to be on MSNBC. It's nauseating. | ||
| This is not a legal proceeding. | ||
| This is a grotesque parody of the system that our forefathers created, the fairest in the world, that in the years since has been seized by power worshipers like Arthur and Gorin. | ||
| This is a dangerous moment. | ||
| Without a legitimate legal system, people will no longer follow the law and the country will collapse. | ||
| This is not about Trump. | ||
| This is about preserving the United States of America. | ||
| But Trump is at the center of the story. | ||
| And so today, for an overview of what exactly the strategy to prevent Trump from running for president and to end our current system, we turn to Victor Davis Hanson, who joins us now. | ||
| Professor, thank you very much for joining us. | ||
| Thank you for having me, Tucker. | ||
| Before we get into the details of the legal assault on Trump, which in my view isn't really about Trump, tell us what you think is at stake here. | ||
| What's the overview? | ||
| Well, I think they've come to the conclusion that Trump represented an existential threat, and by association, half the country did to their vision of what they want to transform us into. | ||
| And so they feel that any means necessary are justified by their noble spiritual ends. | ||
| And therefore, they call it critical legal theory, just essentially, Tucker says, There's rules against stealing only because rich people don't steal and therefore it's okay to steal. | ||
| And modern monetary theory says print as much money and eventually rich people will have to pay higher taxes or have their 401ks appropriated. | ||
| Same thing with the border. | ||
| Short-term, everybody's mad at the border, but in dark rooms, they're saying to each other, in 10 years, everybody's going to appreciate what we did. | ||
| We brought in 10 to 15 million new constituents. | ||
| And I guess to put it all together, they feel that they're at a stage now where their agenda does not appeal to 51% of the people, and they either have to bring in new constituencies or change the system, the entire system of which we are acculturated to, to retain power. | ||
| And that's what they're willing to do. | ||
| And there's no such thing anymore as theft or lies or any of these things because they're just constructs and they're just anything that's useful to gain power is considered legitimate and anything that's not useful is illegitimate and that's how they define morality and I think we're very naive, Tucker. | ||
| We don't realize that we're in the middle of a revolution. | ||
| We think that we're still playing within the same sidelines or parameters, and it's not. | ||
| Everything's under negotiation, whether it's the Senate filibuster, the Electoral College, new states coming in the size of the Supreme Court, voting IDs, the genders, the foundational data of the United States, pronoun usage from the trivial to the existential. | ||
| We're in the middle of a cultural, economic, political revolution, and I think we've got to wake up. | ||
| I mean, I suppose the danger is that if the average person decides that the system is illegitimate, it's not fair, it doesn't have any meaning beyond the political desires of the people administering it, then what prevents the average person from resorting to violence? | ||
| In other words, if you have no power, if your vote means nothing, if the system is BS, then why don't you take up arms? | ||
| Seriously. | ||
| Well, two things I think have precluded that so far. | ||
| One is I call it the monastery of the mind. | ||
| A lot of people just say, you know what? | ||
| I'm checking out. | ||
| I don't want to watch the Oscars. | ||
| I don't even know what the Tonys or Emmys are. | ||
| I don't watch the NBA. I have nothing to do with Hollywood movies. | ||
| I've just created my own reality. | ||
| And the other is... | ||
| Under our federal system, we're having millions of people. | ||
| This is the greatest exodus diaspora we've ever seen in our history, where people are fleeing these blue states and blue cities to red states, and they feel that I'm going to recreate America as I once understood it without having anything to do. | ||
| And so far, that's kept us sort of viable, but for them, that's not enough. | ||
| It's never enough to have... | ||
| Two million illegal entrants or three million. | ||
| They've got to have eight or nine or ten. | ||
| It's not enough that Joe Biden is corrupt. | ||
| It's not enough that he's non-composmentes. | ||
| It's not enough that his agenda doesn't make sense. | ||
| You've got to accept more and more of him. | ||
| And I think they keep pushing the envelope. | ||
| And these safety valves that I just mentioned, I don't know if they're going to be enough already. | ||
| But right now... | ||
| I think there's one last effort on the part of conservatives that are going to say, you know what, we're going to speak up as we've never spoken up before. | ||
| We're going to go after Target. | ||
| We're going to go after Disney. | ||
| We're going to say that we're going to go after the three-gender movement, and we're going to try to win this election. | ||
| We're going to try to win the House. | ||
| We're going to try to win the representative. | ||
| We just have to unite behind. | ||
| And we'll see if that works. | ||
| I'm really afraid. | ||
| Everybody says democracy is in danger, but I think if... | ||
| They feel that they have the majority of the people, and I think the majority of the people are against this progressive Jacobin agenda, and they still can't find power, then we're going to be in new territory. | ||
| We're in new territory now. | ||
| And so there are legitimate efforts to rectify and stop this madness, and let's see what happens in 2024. But I don't think it works anymore just to migrate to a red state or to drop out of the popular culture. | ||
| You've got to get control of the... | ||
| Political apparatus of the country through elections, and your worry is legitimate. | ||
| If you can't do it through fair elections, then what do you do? | ||
| So I think this election, I know everybody says that, that each election is paramount, but this one is very important because we're in the middle of a revolution, and it's our only avenue to a counter-revolution to return to normality. | ||
| What would you say to the people who stopped paying their cable bill and moved to Florida? | ||
| Feel like everything's fine because their neighborhood is fine. | ||
| Why is that a bad strategy, dropping out and moving? | ||
| Because they can find you. | ||
| And by that I mean Florida or Tennessee or living in Texas is a great advantage than living in California or Michigan or Oregon or Washington or Maryland. | ||
| But eventually the federal government is not satisfied to leave you alone. | ||
| And so when you go on your Google search, it will be calibrated by an algorithm to make sure that you have results that don't represent reality. | ||
| And we're in a federal system where we have $33 trillion in debt, and there's only three ways to get out of it. | ||
| You either have to inflate all of our currency, which we're trying to do, I suppose. | ||
| Or we're going to have to appropriate capital, which they've talked about, you know, giving credit to Social Security years by taking 401k money. | ||
| Or you're going to have to renounce the debt. | ||
| And that's going to affect all of us. | ||
| And I don't need to mention that a lot of this crime is going across state lines. | ||
| And you can be in Red State, Texas. | ||
| And the federal government can say you can't protect the Texas border or maybe it can redefine the American border as the border with Oklahoma instead of Texas. | ||
| You're not sending your illegals northward, but you're not going to be able to stop them coming into your state because we've targeted you for radical demographic change. | ||
| So it's a stopgap sanctuary, but it shouldn't lull us into the idea that it's a solution. | ||
| The solution is To take back the Congress, to ensure the Supreme Court is a traditional Supreme Court, and to win the presidency. | ||
| But unfortunately, the Republican Party, which we all look to, I don't look to it very much anymore, has lost seven out of the last eight popular votes. | ||
| Hasn't won 51% since George H.W. Bush did it by bringing in Lee Atwater in 1988. And then we decided we don't want to ever win that way again. | ||
| It was too ugly, they thought. | ||
| So I guess the idea in the national level is to lose nobly and never to win ugly. | ||
| But we've got to change that attitude because we're dealing with people that are not democratic liberals in the way that we used to define them as Bill Clinton or Harry Truman or JFK. This is a new generation of, as I said, Jacobins. | ||
| And they believe that any means necessary are justified morally to achieve their morally superior aims. | ||
| What happens if Democrats win the presidency in 2024? | ||
| If they win the presidency, that means they'll keep the Senate and they'll probably take back the House. | ||
| And then I would expect that we would see another 10 or 15 million illegal immigrants come across the border. | ||
| And there would be efforts to confine those immigrants from going to northern cities. | ||
| They would stop them somehow. | ||
| I would assume that we would probably have advisors in Ukraine, and that would be charitable. | ||
| I think people really do want to intervene in Ukraine with U.S. manpower. | ||
| I would assume that what we see in the big cities crime-wise would extend, but it would also Extending the civil sphere, as we see with Donald Trump. | ||
| That lawsuit that you mentioned is very important, Tucker, because it shows you that critical legal theory is not happy just to let people ransack, smash and grab, carjacking without consequences. | ||
| They really do want to go after private capital in the civil sector, and they will start filing lawsuits, as you wouldn't believe. | ||
| And I think we'd also expect that the FBI... The CIA, the DOJ would have a referendum. | ||
| I guess they would think the election was a referendum on them and they're free to do what they have been doing but at an accelerated rate. | ||
| So I think it would be a disaster. | ||
| And I think racial relations would get a lot worse as well. | ||
| They're getting bad now once we gave up the idea of ecumenicalism and turned to racial essentialism as what the Democratic Party is... | ||
| It's going to be scary if they win because that means they'll probably take the House and the entire Congress. | ||
| And there won't be any redress of grievances. | ||
| I don't see it. | ||
| But I don't think they will because they don't have any popular support. | ||
| Every single one of Joe Biden's issues, economy, crime, energy, foreign policy, the border, he's polling 30 or 40 percent. | ||
| And the only way they're retaining power is through the legal system and the administrative state and our institutions, media, entertainment, sports, education, K-12, universities. | ||
| And it's kind of an artificial way of getting power without popular consent. | ||
| That's why I think you were right on when you said they don't believe in democracy. | ||
| In fact, op-ed writers in the New York Times will say that now, that democracy is a flawed idea. | ||
| Because it doesn't any longer ensure the result that they have to have. | ||
| Like good Bolsheviks or good Jacobins, they eventually always turn on elections. | ||
| They don't want them. | ||
| And so we'll see. | ||
| It's going to be a very explosive... | ||
| I hope everybody can keep their head because I think the next 12 to 18 months are going to be the most explosive in our history since the Great Depression. | ||
| Do you think Trump is leading now? | ||
| What do you think would happen if 11 months from now, Trump were still leading? | ||
| Yeah, well, we're on charter. | ||
| We have no idea about this election, Tucker, because first of all, we've never had a president running against an ex-president, number one. | ||
| Number two, we've never had an incumbent president that is utterly corrupt, like Joe Biden, and has lost all of his or most of his cognitive facilities and is very unpopular. | ||
| And yet we've never had a challenger who has been the victim of lawfare and is facing 91 indictments. | ||
| And every time people say they wouldn't dare do this. | ||
| Fannie Willis wouldn't dare. | ||
| Latina James is just an absurd prosecutor. | ||
| She wouldn't dare. | ||
| Alvin Bragg is a buffoon. | ||
| He wouldn't dare. | ||
| Jack Smith is a partisan. | ||
| Every time people say that, they do. | ||
| And so I don't know if there's a strategy to keep Donald Trump either out of a gag order or out of confinement at Mar-a-Lago or out of jail. | ||
| So you can see where we're headed to. | ||
| Joe Biden isn't really a viable president anymore. | ||
| He's a construct. | ||
| He's being used by the hard left, by the Obamas and the Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders squad wing of the Democratic Party. | ||
| And it's getting to the point of character. | ||
| So you put all of those things together and add in a Kamala Harris that frightens everybody because we've never had such an incompetent vice president, I think, and one so unfit to be president. | ||
| And all bets are off. | ||
| It's like putting all sorts of ingredients of explosives into a kind of device, and it's going to blow up, I think, somehow. | ||
| But I don't think we can predict what's going to happen. | ||
| It's just too volatile. | ||
| I think the left feels that they want to push the envelope. | ||
| They want to take the leading Republican... | ||
| Candidate. | ||
| And they want to create charges against him, which they know they would have never lodged had he just said, I don't want to run for president. | ||
| They would have let him alone. | ||
| So these are patently political. | ||
| And they want to destroy him psychologically, financially, and, of course, politically. | ||
| And they think they can get away with it without a pushback. | ||
| And we'll see. | ||
| I think the other candidates are going to be... | ||
| I don't know what they're... | ||
| What their line should be, Tucker, but I think it should be, if you want to vote for me, I am going to be viable, and I'm going to make sure that they never do to Donald Trump what they're doing now, and I'm in a better position to help Trump than he is. | ||
| That's the only, I think, legitimate argument to make, that this involves everybody, and if you're going to run for president and you feel that you embrace the mega agenda, you should say that... | ||
| I will not be in jail. | ||
| I won't be exposed to the same degree. | ||
| And if I can survive, I will change the system and make sure Donald Trump is exonerated and no one else has to face this. | ||
| But otherwise, it's going to be a very complex, bizarre, baffling period. | ||
| I don't think the founders had... | ||
| This is their worst nightmare, 2023-24. | ||
| I don't even think you'd have to support Trump's agenda or Trump the man to see this as an assault on a centuries-old system that's worked better than any other. | ||
| And I wonder why almost nobody in Washington seems to see that or be willing to say it out loud. | ||
| Yeah, the only question I have about that is I don't know why they did not go to the same extremes. | ||
| They did go to extremes. | ||
| Against McCain and Romney, etc. | ||
| But there was something about Trump, his personality, that was an affront to the bi-coastal standard of, I don't know, what they thought was acceptable or desirable. | ||
| Or it was his agenda. | ||
| When they looked at the particular MAGA agenda and they said, my God, we have sizable investments in China and they are a partner. | ||
| They're not an existential threat. | ||
| This is really scary. | ||
| We have this idea of global ecumenicalism. | ||
| We can't have a border anymore, and this guy wants to bring back a border. | ||
| Or we have this idea that how we look or our race is essential, not incidental to who we are. | ||
| And he would want to bring back this crazy melting pot and destroy the entire woke movement. | ||
| So I think it did represent to them a DEFCON 1, and they said... | ||
| We can't have this, and it would have been all right, Tucker, had he been a third-party Ross Perot. | ||
| They dealt with people like that in the past, and they'd already been able to handle them. | ||
| But he won the Republican nomination, got elected, and now he wants to be back. | ||
| And they just said, we're going to do everything possible, and we're going to even reject our prior Democratic-Liberal... | ||
| Heritage of, you know, ACLU, free speech, and transparency, and the church committee, all of that's off the table. | ||
| We don't want to do any of that anymore. | ||
| We're going to do anything necessary to destroy this guy's vision and the other candidates who share his vision. | ||
| Because if we don't, we're going to go back to an America that we didn't like when it was there, we don't like now, and we sure as hell don't want to be an America in the future like that. | ||
| I think even people who are skeptical of the claim that the last election was unfair or rigged have concluded that it was in fact unfair and the federal agencies got involved in a partisan way. | ||
| It was not a free and fair election. | ||
| Given that that system is still in place, you think it's possible for a Republican or Trump specifically to get elected in 2024? | ||
| It's very difficult. | ||
| What the left did was absolutely brilliant, Tucker. | ||
| They seized on this Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, Kraken, Dominion voting machines as representative of all of the questions about the election when most people said the election was lost by the time we got to election day. | ||
| Because 70% of the voters had voted not on election day and that never happened in American history. | ||
| It was always... | ||
| 30% absentees, 70% in most states on election day. | ||
| But they systematically used COVID as an excuse and went into about nine states and changed the voting laws. | ||
| And I mean by that, that the error rate for mail-in ballots dropped exponentially as the rejection rate did as they were swarmed by them. | ||
| And they were bragging about it. | ||
| Mark Zuckerberg was bragging about spending $419 million to absorb the work of precinct workers in key states. | ||
| Molly Ball, as you remember in that time essay, just gushed about how they had outsmarted these stupid conservatives and they had coordinated the Chamber of Commerce, the street people, Antifa, etc., to modulate the demonstrations and to suppress free speech. | ||
| You know, when Twitter is being controlled by the FBI to the tune of $3 million being paid off for their own contractors to suppress streets, or Google is manipulating searches and ads and everything, that's what destroyed the viability of a fair election. | ||
| It was done before Election Day, and we were all asleep. | ||
| Some of us, I know you were yelling about it. | ||
| I was trying to yell about it. | ||
| We couldn't get through to anybody that they would be that audacious or that successful. | ||
| Nobody thought they were capable of that, and yet they were. | ||
| So why have Republicans in Washington done nothing meaningful to fix any of that? | ||
| I think the traditional answer to that is probably accurate, that there's a culture that is created and it's kind of a lose nobly. | ||
| Avoid winning ugly profit, both financially and psychologically, the status quo, and they feel that their own constituents, some of the Republican constituents, are kind of out there and an embarrassment to the type of culture and environment that they operate in in Washington. | ||
| And so the sense is I'm not going to be too affected. | ||
| By the left-wing takeover, because I know I can make the necessary adjustments in a way that my constituents can't. | ||
| And so I think there's a... | ||
| Sometimes in the case of somebody like Mitch McConnell, it can be overt, but in other cases, it's pretty clear as well. | ||
| And that's been going on for a long time. | ||
| And the problem we're having now is that... | ||
| You need leaders who are trying to tell people we are in a Jacobin takeover of this country, and the old get-along at any cost does not work. | ||
| And I don't think people want that disruption in their comfortable lives in Washington. | ||
| I mean, if you say to somebody in the Republican establishment, you've got to break up the FBI. You've got to take the headquarters and put it in Kansas City and farm out the divisions to other cabinet posts to... | ||
| Prevent that concentration of really dangerous power. | ||
| You've got to do something with the CIA. You've got to do something with the DOJ. We've got to have massive legal reforms. | ||
| I don't think they're up to that. | ||
| I really don't. | ||
| I don't think they're up to being trashed in the Washington Post or the New York Times or not being invited to a particular guest spot on a network news or being shunned by NPR and PBS. They're just not up to that or having their books trashed. | ||
| By book reviewers on the left. | ||
| They don't want that. | ||
| There's a few that do. | ||
| But until we get a lot of people who say, you know, you on the left culturally have nothing that I want. | ||
| And so when you hate us and call me names and you lie about, I take that as a badge of honor. | ||
| I don't try to provoke you. | ||
| I want to get along with you. | ||
| But you have no cultural influence over me anymore. | ||
| And I'm going to be an advocate. | ||
| For returning to the country to the principles upon which it was founded. | ||
| I think that's what people want to hear. | ||
| And I think in 2024, they'll hear that. | ||
| And they're going to have to, each person according to their station, Tucker, stand up, give money to the cause, write letters to the paper, volunteer to work at precincts, monitor what the left is doing with mail-in ballots. | ||
| You're starting to see that grassroots interest, but the question is, will it be in time and of a magnitude that will stop this? | ||
| So, to the hearing today in New York, the civil case against Trump, my read of it is that it's ridiculous. | ||
| The premise is absurd. | ||
| Am I missing something? | ||
| Is there any merit, do you think, just as objectively as you can, to this suit? | ||
| Well, I mean, In a larger sense, no, because you can ask yourself two questions. | ||
| Would Latita James and the people who were doing this, would they have done it if Donald Trump on January 7th said, conditions have changed, I'm now not going to run for office? | ||
| I think the answer is no. | ||
| And then the second thing, are some of the giants of New York finance and real estate... | ||
| Do they operate in a way that is completely different than Donald Trump? | ||
| They never overvalue an asset? | ||
| And I think the answer is no. | ||
| And then the third question might be, now that you've picked on Donald Trump, are you going to systematically look at the bank applications and loan applications of, say, 50 or 60 of the largest developers in New York, especially on the left-wing side? | ||
| I don't think so. | ||
| And especially, you made a good point that... | ||
| The bank is not filing suit and saying we lost all of this money. | ||
| And then we have to juxtapose it, Tucker, to what we're witnessing on the other side with somebody like Sam Bankman-Fried that was put on house arrest on the Stanford campus. | ||
| We now know about his parents, two renowned Stanford law professors that were grifting off their own son and siphoning money from his company as it was collapsing, which was a big... | ||
| He's a bundler and provider of millions of dollars for the Democratic Party. | ||
| And nobody in the Democratic Party seems to be upset about him. | ||
| And we have Hunter Biden looking at him. | ||
| We're just looking at this. | ||
| And you want to ask Latita James, do you really? | ||
| Are you really going to do anything or do you think that Joe Biden should face consequences for again and again and again telling the American people he had no knowledge or participation in any of Hunter's business when you know that was untrue and money was coming to his address and so it's a very strange time Tucker when you have all this evidence both to exonerate Donald Trump because of this asymmetrical treatment and the fact that there was no damage but Also, | ||
| when you're looking at Hunter Biden or Menendez and all these people, and you think, how can they, with a straight face, tell us that there's not a shred of evidence that Hunter and Joe were acting in an illegal fashion? | ||
| And the President of the United States, as we talk, you and I are talking right now, the President of the United States is pretty clearly, as Vice President, was utterly corrupt and has never accounted for that. | ||
| And nobody on the left... | ||
| He cares about it. | ||
| And more importantly, the judiciary or the prosecutorial arm of the United States government is protecting him. | ||
| Let me ask you one last question. | ||
| So I want to put up a clip of, as you know, there's a lot going on. | ||
| And no matter what side you're on, I think if any aware person sees that this is a revolution, our most basic systems are changing for good or bad. | ||
| And yet the news coverage I mean, not only is it partisan, it's also incredibly shallow. | ||
| Here's MSNBC's coverage of the civil trial in New York, the case against Donald Trump. | ||
| Just one clip of it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
As of this order, several of the crown jewels in Trump's real estate empire, the properties upon which he built his brand, those properties are now in limbo. | |
| The precise impact of today's ruling has yet to be seen, but Trump could lose control of properties. | ||
| Including Trump Park Avenue, which is his luxury skyscraper in Manhattan's Lenox Hill neighborhood. | ||
| He could lose control of 40 Wall Street, the historic tower Trump owns in the financial district. | ||
| He could lose control of his Seven Springs Golf Club in Bedford, New York. | ||
| Even his apartment in Trump Tower, the gilded bunker in which he has sought refuge in his home city. | ||
| Trump could lose control of that. | ||
| Maybe even the golden toilet, too. | ||
| So here, they're going after this guy on the basis of a non-crime. | ||
| They're not even alleging that there was a crime or that anyone was hurt. | ||
| And they're taking his home and his businesses and MSNBC's coverage. | ||
| Is that? | ||
| Yeah, I mean, what MSNBC just told us is that we are not only fine with But we promote the idea that government can go in to a business, all of the business, and appropriate it and destroy it without cause. | ||
| And we think that's not only good, but funny because we're going to throw a little fill up about a golden toilet. | ||
| Ha ha. | ||
| And the idea is that we now have the power to do this. | ||
| And because we have the power to do it, it's moral and right. | ||
| And if you don't like it. | ||
| What are you going to do about it? | ||
| And the answer is, what are we going to do about it? | ||
| And the only thing that I can think of is we're going to have to humiliate and defeat these people at the polls. | ||
| I don't think it's going to work, Tucker, to win the Electoral College in one branch of Congress. | ||
| You're going to have to have a 55% presidential win, both supermajority and the Congress, to get anything done. | ||
| We've come so far. | ||
| And you're going to have to defeat them and humiliate them the way that we did it once with Reagan and it lasted for about eight years. | ||
| But this leftist revolutionary spirit is like rust after a rain or it's mushrooms in your lawn. | ||
| It's always there. | ||
| And you can't allow it to grow and to expand and accelerate as we have. | ||
| We've been complacent and culpable for allowing it to do so in the universities and all of our institutions. | ||
| I think now... | ||
| Everybody, according to their station, is going to have to say, you know what? | ||
| There are two pronouns. | ||
| I don't care if you get angry. | ||
| The date of this country is 1776. Got it? | ||
| That's what it is. | ||
| And there is a border, and we're going to enforce it. | ||
| And just say no to all of these things, and then welcome the opprobrium and the attacks that accrue accordingly, and wear that as a badge of honor. | ||
| Because what's the alternative? | ||
| There is no alternative unless you want to see the United States dissipate before your very eye. | ||
| Yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah. | |
| And living in Naples with no TV will not save you. | ||
| That is exactly right. | ||
| The incomparable Victor Davis Hanson, thank you. | ||
| Bless you for that. | ||
| Thank you very much. |
Export Selection