Ed Martin on Dan Bongino vs. DOJ, and Republicans in Congress Secretly Plotting Against Trump

An all-American and veteran-owned company, Freeze Dry Wholesalers is offering Tucker listeners a lifetime discount of 15% off with code Tucker at checkout.

Using proprietary freeze-dry technology, Freeze Dry Wholesalers is the only company in the industry that can freeze dry whole steaks, entire pork chops, and more.

With a diverse line of products lasting for the next 25 years, Freeze Dry Wholesalers is the perfect option for hiking, camping, or stocking up your emergency supply.

Receive a lifetime discount every time you use code Tucker at checkout.

Go to freezedrywholesalers.com today and be prepared for tomorrow.

This woman came up to me screeching in a way, I mean, she can't know me.

She didn't know me.

I never met her.

Screeching, screeching, screeching, swearing, and then spitting.

That suggests that your mere physical presence evokes an emotional response.

DOJ is a bigger mess even than some conspiracy-minded people on the outside like me imagine.

Some people that say, what's Dan doing, Bunge?

You know, he's going hammering tongs at this stuff right here.

The scope is bigger, and it is, therefore, much, much worse than people think.

Why would Tom Tillis be the instrument of your destruction?

He railed on J6.

He said, How could you represent J6 people?

How stupid do people have to be to go into the Capitol and blah, blah, blah.

The Republican Party tells you they're one thing, but they're actually another thing.

Right now, it's Trump's party.

It's just that some of the elites don't want to let go.

Exactly.

You want your kid to go to Georgetown.

Oh, he goes to Georgetown.

It's way more than that.

People just have no idea.

The CIA small arms training facility was on their campus.

It's an arm of the deepest of the deep state, way worse than Harvard, actually, I think.

Thank you for doing this.

So,

I don't know why I'm laughing.

I saw a very angry young woman spit in your face on camera two days ago.

That suggests that your mere physical presence evokes an emotional response.

Why?

D.C.

is in trouble.

I'm from there.

I can vouch for that.

You're going to fix it.

What exactly do you think, from your perspective, was the resistance to you?

Well, first, I'd like to point out, Tucker, because I've been accused of having a signature piece of clothing now, like in the old days, the bow tie, you know, the jacket that I wear, the sort of raincoat.

Yeah.

The New York Times called it my signature.

Well, that was it.

It was very effective because the spit went on the raincoat.

It was able to be cleaned up.

It's very old school watergate, by the way.

Colombo.

I'm going Colombo, not as my kids said, Inspector Gadget.

I thought that was degrading, and I've indicted all three of the four of them now.

All right.

So,

look, I did the job.

President Trump Trump gave me this incredible privilege.

Usually a U.S.

attorney is nominated and then they get confirmed and then they come into office, right?

So it's usually like October and you finally get somebody in office and that whole time you have the Sally Yates problem.

Remember Sally Yates who is acting?

You have some acting person that's either undermining you or is not totally into the job.

Exactly.

Okay, so I said to the president a while ago, if you want me to do this job, can I have it on day one?

And he agreed and he put me on day one.

And so day one, we started swinging right away at all the things that we needed to swing at, right?

We, first of all, day one, we had the pardons, 1600 pardons.

Day two or three, we had two pardons of cops.

Day three or four, we had all the face act pardons.

It was a busy first week.

But more importantly, as we were talking about affair, I started swinging.

We started actually going for it.

We said, okay, we're going to, we're going to weaponization.

You know, Chuck Schumer's a bully.

And we went at this fight, hammering tongs, and everybody noticed.

Everybody noticed.

Chuck Schumer noticed.

Dick Durbin starts firing off letters of complaint, all kinds of things.

And that's how you're supposed to do the job.

I wish it was consistent with the president's mandate since he was just elected by the majority of voters.

Exactly.

Right.

It's called democracy.

It's called democracy.

And he actually put some, you know, he put, he signed orders.

He signed what he gave us the direction he wanted us to do, executive orders, said, stop the weaponization, go look at this.

And then, by the way, Attorney General Bondi got in.

She gave us an even more specific list, right?

So, but more importantly, Tucker, if it was 100 years ago, maybe you could just be genteel and prosecute the cases as they came along, right?

You could sit around and say sooner or later it'll all work out.

It's not 100 years ago.

And the fight right now is a fight over everything from information to accountability to healing, right?

So that's the fight.

And U.S.

attorney is on the front lines in Washington, D.C.

when they're going after Elon Musk or Judge Boesberg.

They went after both.

And I gave both of them a letter that said, hey, I got your back.

If you even threaten these people in a way that goes over the line, we're going to indict you.

You're talking about the mob threatening with physical violence.

The mob threatened Elon and the Doge guys.

The mob threatened my prosecutors.

The mob threatened Boesberg.

And I said, any of these things, we're going to put a stop to it.

But what happens is,

I've not been able to try this out.

I'll try to see if you like it.

The Schumer smear.

Schumer was so mad that I got into office and I said, hold on a second.

You're not allowed to say the whirlwind is coming for Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

And then a month later, Kavanaugh's got a guy with zip ties and a gun.

Remember this, this is this?

Very well.

And so I said, hold on.

The statute of limitations is coming five years.

I'm going to investigate this.

And I'm going to ask Chuck Schumer, what did you mean?

You cannot mean that you're allowed to stand and threaten justices, right?

And so I put that out.

He refused to answer.

He said it's offensive, all that stuff.

And then he went on

a jihad inside the Senate.

He got opposition research and he went member to member and said, this guy, Martin, you can't vote for him.

This guy, Martin, you can't.

And so it's the Schumer smear.

Then they call me names in the Washington Post.

You know, the Washington Post bid something they've never done before, Tucker.

Underneath the line, Spencer Hussu, he put a thing that said, if you have any tips on Martin, send them to us.

They've never done this before.

We want to get Martin, send us the tips.

I sent a letter to Bezos.

I said, hey, I'm not sure this is how the newspaper is supposed to run.

He hasn't responded yet.

But my point is, President Trump said, fight for the future of the country.

And that fight can't be trapped in the Article III gentility of 100 years ago.

It's the fight we got right now, and that's what we're doing.

So I think they hated me.

And this woman came up to me screeching in a way, I mean, she can't know me.

She didn't know me.

I never met her.

Screeching, screeching, screeching, swearing, and then spitting.

You know, I don't know.

Who was she?

What happened to her?

Well, they've identified her, and I guess they've,

I don't know if they've picked her up yet, but they know exactly who it is and all that.

And so, as you might imagine, I'm not involved in the case because, you know, I'm the victim in this case.

So it's got to be processed.

But I think that, you know, Marshalls and FBI were right on it and they've, they've got it figured out.

So do you think the genesis of the opposition was your request to Chuck Schumer that he answer questions about encouraging violence against the Supreme Court justice?

Well, I think that the role I am played was

epitomized by that, right?

Public and willing to fight for the right things.

And Schumer certainly

took it to heart and made a big deal out of it.

And then they just made me into somebody who's the Washington Post had me on the front page of A1 or B1 every day for three or four weeks.

Like

Wild, a U.S.

attorney.

Dick Durbin sent me 561 questions.

District court judges don't get that many.

You know, no U.S.

attorney has ever gotten that many.

Question after question, accusing me of this and that and the other thing.

So they obviously knew they didn't like something about what I was doing.

And the public picks up on it, right?

And they worried what you would do.

Well, I think that's fair.

So, um, the U.S.

Attorney needs Senate confirmation.

Um, Democrats control the Senate by a huge margin.

Is that correct?

Something like that.

Yeah.

Oh, no, that's not true.

Yeah, no, no, that's that's not quite true.

No, look, I would have won on the floor, but the Judiciary Committee, Tillis, Tillis, Tom Tillis, decided to block it, and the Judiciary Committee Democrat from California?

Yeah, well, something like that.

And no Republican from North Carolina, right?

Right.

So, why would Tom Tillis,

who was elected in maybe 2012,

14, something like that, ish,

but a lot of money spent on that campaign.

A lot of Republicans mobilized to get that guy elected in a swing state even then.

And, you know, a lot of hope residing in Tom Tillis.

Why would Tom Tillis be the instrument of your destruction?

Well, look, I think,

you know, I've got to say, the Senate's got a process, respectful.

For process, all that stuff.

Right.

So check the box.

I did that with you.

So

I met with the guy for 90 minutes.

You know,

by the way, for about a decade, I've done work when Phyllis Schlafly, the late Phyllis Schlaffley for whom I worked, one of the things she cared a lot about was patents and protecting individual patent holders and inventors.

So for years, we've had patent events.

One of the participants in the patent events is Tom Tillis all the time because he's good on that issue and we would work with him.

So not a stranger in terms of policy stuff to me.

So when I met with him, 90 Minutes, he railed on J6.

He said, how could you represent J6 people?

How stupid do people have to be to go into the Capitol and blah, blah, blah.

And I said, sir, you know, look, I've looked at this closely.

It feels like you're not quite paying attention to what happened, right?

That's correct.

Yes.

And look, here's the thing.

You know, Tucker, this is what I mean by this is the fight we're in.

This fight for the future of our country.

Millions of Americans fall victim to the hoaxes, one after another.

And if you fall victim to the J6 hoax, that it was an insurrection armed and this close to the end, then you might act like Tom Tillis and you might rant and rave and say things like that.

And that's what he did.

But if you're, I think if you're not under the spell of the hoax, you say, oh, wait a second, lots of people were waved into the Capitol.

And maybe you could charge them with trespass, but you can't throw them in jail for three years,

three and a half years, right?

Because of, and then the Supreme Court, bipartisan Supreme Court, throws out the charge that was used.

It's called the 1512 charge.

When I got in my office as U.S.

Attorney, I said, first week, we're going to look at the 1512.

Who charged it?

And of course, it was charged by Merrick Arlen and Lisa Monaco right across.

It wasn't the guy in my chair.

He was an empty suit there to just carry water as they went in.

Right, DOJ directly.

All the way.

Right up, right up, of course.

I mean, look, 1512 is an Andrew Weissman creation, right?

This was Andrew Weissman advocated for 1512 charge

in the Mueller investigation.

And the Mueller investigation.

Andrew Weissman's one of these lawyers who is at NYU right now.

He goes in and out of government, and he's basically at the center there's about six or seven of these people that are at the center of coordinating the weaponization of government against the people right now and every time you turn around you know i love i'll give it to you the guy that was the prosecutor in kosovo before jack smith you know a special prosecutor forget his name right now he he left so jack smith could come in where'd he go one guess nyu to andrew weissman's shop perfect so when you watch andrew weissman's at mueller he says in mueller we need 1512 we can charge trump in the watch this we can use 1512.

We're making it up, but we can get away with it if we build it out this way and just get everybody to go along.

He fails at that, Mueller.

You know, Barr says, and Jeff Jensen, no, Barr says you can't do that, right?

You can't do it.

We're not going to do that.

Shuts it down.

And then along comes Andrew Weissman, Lisa Monaco, all these same people.

They say, charge the 15-12.

Tucker, the 15-12 charge, right?

Your viewers may not track it well enough, but 15-12 was an addition to the law about 20 years ago after Enron, because Arthur Anderson, the accounting firm, was destroying documents.

Enron was the target of the investigation.

Arthur Anderson was destroying documents, wasn't the target.

And there was no law to say, if you knew there was an investigation, you shouldn't destroy documents.

So they passed this law, okay, 1512.

It said, if you know there's an official proceeding, you're not allowed to destroy documents.

Okay.

You got it.

Okay, that's it.

All these years later,

Weissman is saying, we'll use

obstruction of official proceeding.

We'll expand official proceeding.

We'll call it, oh yeah, we'll call it the Electoral College count, and we'll go after everybody.

But first, before we go for Trump, let's drag a couple of hundred people into jail.

We'll make them plead guilty.

We'll try them with a bad jury.

We'll make the judges roll along, and we'll make sure we put them in one after another.

We'll say, see, 1512, it's a good charge.

Judges went for it.

Everybody went for it.

And then we'll get Trump.

And one judge said no.

Then it went up to the Supreme Court and the bipartisan Supreme Court said, hell no and threw it all out.

So we watched American citizens rotting in jail for years for walking through the Capitol and 1512.

And that's why Tillis is okay with that.

And Tillis is, well, Tillis is saying, oh my gosh, he said anyone who's dumb enough to go into the Capitol should be charged with everything under the sun.

I said, well, if a cop opens the door and you walk in and you walk out, you're going to charge him?

And anyway, so.

What did he say when you asked?

Well, he said, you know, you know.

Because that's about what I, that's almost what I was about to say.

Yeah.

That we now have videotaped Jake Chansley, for example, a QAnon shaman, led into the Senate chamber by a cop.

Right.

Wanders around and then leaves and then goes to prison.

Right.

I don't understand.

And I want to be charitable to Tom Tillis, who is obviously very liberal, and there are things about him I don't like.

But I want to be fair, but I don't understand how he couldn't know that.

It was an insight into the mind of people that are trapped in that understanding.

The other thing they all said to me is, oh, you must like people that hit cops because you defended people that hit cops.

Who said that?

Oh, everybody, the New York, the Washington Post, all these people, because lawyers are supposed to defend.

You know, we defend the sort of worst to the worst, always.

That's the system.

People who've been charged with crimes.

Right, exactly.

Isn't that the way it works?

Isn't that the way it works?

But so I say, look, nobody's for hitting cops, right?

Nobody's for hitting cops.

My office, my predecessor, did not charge.

cops, did not charge assaults on police officers because they're only misdemeanors in the stupid DC laws.

And I said, new law, new rule, touch a cop, getting charged with assault, right?

So

stipulate, we're all against hitting cops.

After that, what happened on January 6th?

Forget about even the day of it.

Watch what happens.

Liz Cheney and Benny Thompson run a $50 million

misinformation campaign to tell the world this is what was going on.

And that's what Tom Tillis is believing, I guess.

And meanwhile, the rest of the world is.

But that's like MSNBC-level lying.

It's like transparent.

It was an armed insurrection.

Police officers were killed.

None of that is true.

Yeah.

Right.

And I, again, look,

I'm past it now, except to say this.

The weaponization of government against the people is what we see over and over and over again.

And when the leaders either acquiesce to it or fall for the hoax of it, we see it over and over and over again.

Whether you pick a FISA court, you know,

we just watch this over and over.

And you don't have time to say,

was your heart in it?

Was your intent?

Are you lying?

It's just you're willing to buy into that worldview.

It's destroying the country.

Can I ask you one?

I couldn't agree more.

Can I ask one last question?

Did any member of the U.S.

Senate or member of Congress

suggest how many federal agents were in the crowd that day?

None of them seem interested in that.

Yeah.

That seems like a baseline question.

Did any members of the Senate, I mean, in my, in my,

probably not in the conversations I had, but I, but you bring us to a point.

Does anyone care?

Well, you bring us to a point where, as I started this out, is

we're in a fight

for about information, right?

And we're told, get over it and move on.

It's like the 2020 election.

The people say to me, they say, I was a stop the steal organizer.

Well, I ran the election board in St.

Louis, back in St.

Louis.

You know, I ran the election board.

I know how elections work.

The 2020 election, there were lots of things that were really off base.

That's why I've always said it.

I maintain it today.

Doesn't mean I haven't proved that, does it mean that I've proven the election was stolen?

No, but I know there's things that were off.

Well, you weren't allowed to say that.

Remember, you're not even allowed to say that out loud.

And you go forward.

And so they say, oh, you were stopped to steal.

So I said, wait, isn't that the system we're supposed to have?

And we keep seeing information

government weaponized to stop information flow.

And most of us move on, right?

You move on to the next thing because the way the world is moving.

And one of the things this effort to do to focus on weaponization is to get the truth out.

So to your point, we still don't know the answer to that.

We do not know how many agents.

How can we not know?

I mean,

I'm going to get it out or I'm going to die trying.

Pipe Bomber.

As a prosecutor, I've got the Pipe Bomber case in my office.

The FBI, Bongino, said to the FBI, change all the agents.

Everybody look at it again.

It's been going on for about five weeks.

It's like

Keystone cops.

You know, they didn't interview some of the people that were, that you would have said, that might be a suspect that hadn't interviewed him.

I mean, so the question becomes, what's happening here?

Is it incompetence?

It feels worse than incompetence, right?

And so

that information does.

It does.

What do you think?

Well,

I think it's worse than incompetence.

But I think the only way forward is to not describe what I think of the motives, but to expose over and over again what's happened.

If you expose what's happened and the truth gets out, then accountability is possible.

If you don't expose what's happened, the accountability looks looks like targeting right so you got to do this one to get to this one and the other side just does this and then they count on the media to tell us it's okay we have to do this and this and that's my answer to some people that say what's dan doing bungee you know i talk to him every week or so he's going hammering tongs at this stuff right here you you can't arrest everybody the first month but you got to get this going and it's a challenge but i'm glad people are holding us you know pushing everybody it's good but it's uh it's harder than it looks it really is i believe that my informed, well-informed sense is that DOJ is a bigger mess even than some conspiracy-minded people on the outside like me imagine it is.

Like, I think it's actually a mess.

Is it?

I would say that look, I worked.

For FBI specifically.

Yeah, look, I worked for the Catholic Church, right?

I worked for the Catholic Church.

I'm pretty attuned to bureaucracies, right?

And I've seen the scope of them and see the institutional inertia, like the momentum that they get.

And I think my office was

my U.S.

Attorney's office was about this big, Tucker, and it took me 120 days to get this much of my arms wrapped around this much because this is how big it was.

Cash's job is this big and DOJ's is this big and the presence is this big.

So my answer is the scope is bigger and it is therefore much, much worse than people think.

And

I just think it's a, it's a, and by the way, one of the reasons I say information is so key, you can't, we can't win the Article III battle fast enough.

We can fight it and we can eventually win lots of them.

You can't win it fast enough to get the progress we need in terms of our.

So you've got to be doing the information first.

For people watching, what's the Article 3?

Yeah, the Article 3 means like the federal courts.

We're in federal courts.

The president says you can't let people come into the country and then the courts say nationwide injunction and you're not allowed to do that.

And you're constantly in court.

You know, the U.S.

Attorney's Office for D.C.

has all of the cases of

when the government is sued, you know, the president sues, they all come into our office on the civil side.

And so you see all that stuff coming in.

You know,

during the Biden administration, the conservatives were suing in Texas.

It was friendlier judges.

Now it's in D.C.

So you're in the courts fighting to get the truth out, fighting to make these things, prosecutions and all, but they take a longer time than just getting the word out, right?

Getting the information out.

I just, I feel like it's a different moment in history.

And that's how I was U.S.

Attorney.

That's why you saw people saw so much outfacing action because I wasn't just looking at courts.

I was looking at making an argument for the public so they could see the policies.

America has thousands of colleges and universities.

And a lot of them, unfortunately, are basically just scams.

It's one of those things nobody really wants to talk about, but everybody on some level knows that it's true.

What's an impressive college in 2025?

There aren't many at all.

Hillsdale is one of them.

It is the exception.

They cut straight through the woke garbage.

They give their students a real education, an actual education.

Meet a Hillsdale student and ask yourself, is this the best educated 22-year-old I've met in a long time?

Yeah.

Because they don't have propaganda in their education, just the truth, facts, history, English, math.

If you think it sounds good, because it is good, think of this.

Hillsdale is offering over 40 free online courses you can enroll in today.

There's no catch at all.

You don't have to pay anything.

I'm not going to hit you up for anything.

It's free.

You can learn about the Constitution, the Bible, the basis of Western civilization, Rome's rise and fall, early Christian church, things that actually matter, not one dime.

Free.

They have a new class called Understanding Capitalism that teaches Americans basic economic ideas, describes our own system, a system that is falling apart.

A lot of people want you to hate, but for 250 years has been the best and most productive in the world.

You'll understand the basis of our economy from founding till president.

Hill's not afraid to preach the message our country has forgotten, which is freedom is good.

Christianity is good, markets are good, and they make this country better by raising well-educated students.

We endorse this.

As a college hater, I love Hillsdale.

Go to tuckerforhillsdale.com to sign up for Understanding Capitalism Today, the course understanding capitalism, zero cost, just the truth.

That's tuckerforhillsdale.com to enroll for free.

Hate to brag, but we're pretty confident this show is the most vehemently pro-dog podcast you're ever going see.

We can take or leave some people, but dogs are non-negotiable.

They are the best.

They really are our best friends.

And so, for that reason, we're thrilled to have a new partner called Dutch Pet.

It's the fastest-growing pet telehealth service.

Dutch.com is on a mission to create what you need, what you actually need, affordable quality veterinary care anytime, no matter where you are.

They will get your dog or cat what you need immediately.

It's offering an exclusive discount, Dutch is, for our listeners.

You get 50 bucks off your vet care per year.

Visit Dutch.com slash Tucker to learn more.

Use the code Tucker for $50 off.

That is an unlimited vet visit, $82 a year, $82 a year.

We actually use this.

Dutch has vets who can handle any pet under any circumstance in a 10-minute call.

It's pretty amazing, actually.

You never have to leave your house.

You don't have to throw the dog in the truck.

No wasted time waiting for appointments.

No wasted money on clinics or visit fees, unlimited visits and follow-ups for no extra cost, plus free shipping on all products for up to five pets.

It sounds amazing like it couldn't be real, but it actually is real.

Visit dutch.com/slash Tucker to learn more.

Use the code Tucker for 50 bucks off, your veterinary care per year.

Your dogs, your cats, and your wallet will thank you.

Mama, Papa, mi cuerpo crece a unrino alarmante.

Y la ropa que me compre nora, me que dora muy pe queña, muy pronto.

Pero subilletera yetera no tina que suffri por la moda con los precios vajos de la vuenta clas de Amazon.

Amazon, la estamenos sonriemas.

Can you go back?

And I'm sorry, I've gone far afield as usual with me.

But

so you have to be you're nominated by the president to be U.S.

attorney in D.C.

It has to go through the Senate.

You offend Chuck Schumer by asking inconvenient questions.

He sends out the word, destroy this man.

That process begins.

And then in in the end, it was Tom Tillis, because the Republican, joking aside, party does control the Senate, supposedly,

who killed it.

How do you account for that?

This is like a central job for those who are not paying attention.

This is like an ⁇ if you're going to drain the swamp, if you're going to end the weaponization of the legal system, if you're going to make good on all the promises the president made while campaigning, you need to fill this job with a capable person.

And Tom Tillis winds up torpedoing torpedoing you?

Like, well, you know, I worked for Phyllis Schlafly.

Yep.

Right.

And so when she wrote A Choice Not an Echo in 1964 and all the way through her career, and then the last 10 years of her life when I worked with her,

you just, you come to know about the party, right?

The Republican Party is

probably more problematic in certain ways than the Democrat Party is obvious opponents, right?

So

when Phyllis writes about 1964, what they did to Goldwater at that fight, or she writes in, she wrote about 1980 when they forced H.W.

Bush on Reagan.

I mean, she, she wrote about, but she also wrote about, by the way, about the Bilderbergs.

She's the first one to use the word Bilderbergs, about the globalists when they were meeting.

But Phyllis would say, you know, and taught,

look, she backed Trump.

She backed Trump early.

And it basically...

Well, it caused a rift in her family.

One of her children was a cruise person was against her.

It caused a rift in her organization.

And I remember asking her, I'm like, kind of seriously, is this worth it?

And she said, of course course it's worth it.

She said, you know, this is.

And so that was on our side.

That was on the sort of conservative side.

So I'm not surprised by any of it.

I was on the RNC when they did the autopsy.

Remember, you know, Romney

Romney loses and they spend nine or $10 million.

And the same people got paid.

Go back and look who got paid $9 million for the autopsy on the Republican Party.

And it said, speak in Spanish and don't talk about social issues and we're just going to win everything.

And they made the mistake.

They asked me a microphone in my first meeting of the RNC, what do you think of of that?

And I said, what do you think of your report?

And I says, not my report.

I didn't go for that.

That's crazy.

They will lose every election.

So the Republican Party has always been that way.

It's just better than the other one.

And the question is, right?

Well, it's better in some way.

I mean, I've never, you know, I don't vote Democrats because I'm pro-life.

So I'm not going to vote for pro-choice, period.

So that's.

Right.

And I think there are a lot of Republican voters who feel that way.

Right.

So the Democratic Party is just off the table for me, but I'm not sure the Republican Party is better

because I think it's more deceptive.

The Democratic Party's like, yeah, we're the training trainy illegal alien party.

Okay, that's who you are.

I find that repugnant, but the Republican Party tells you they're one thing, but they're actually another thing.

That's what bothers me.

Well, no, I thought, yeah, well, it's the same thing Phyllis talked about, you know, back in the day.

It was the establishment, on the Eastern establishment, Eastern elites who were trying to control the party and did a lot.

Look, right now, it's Trump's party.

It's just that some of the elites don't want to let go.

Exactly.

And so the question is, will they be able to hold on?

And when you heard the president say, he didn't say Ed wouldn't get confirmed.

He said, that's not worth the fight right now.

We got other things to do.

And, you know, we knew we knew we'd get somebody good in that spot, to your point.

And we knew there's a place for me to play a role.

So, you know,

but the Republican Party is Trump's party.

It's just some people aren't ready for it.

So it's really, it's not left versus right, moderate versus conservative, populist versus globalist.

It's really reform versus corrupt.

I mean, I think there's massive corruption in the U.S.

government in our system,

more broadly.

Trump was elected on the promise of cleaning it up.

You were his instrument to do that.

So I think it's fair to say people who oppose that are against reform.

Well,

if I can, I'd say two things about it.

One thing I think, as you've talked about before, and lots of issues, President Trump represents a different view of America first is the way it's characterized, but this notion of believing in ourselves, our citizens, more than other things, including wars and globalists and all that.

And I think that's a big pivot.

And people feel that, as voters obviously did.

But I will agree with you on this.

The corruption is not one party i mean trust me i'm the prosecutor for

it's not one party you know that but i'm your viewers it's not one party um when you see uh 6.7 billion dollars transferred from the epa uh to an organization set up uh a year before set up by the same leftists left-leaning democrat supporting folks that ran the housing tax credit boondoggle from the 90s it's the same people 6.7 billion when you see that transfer of money it's that this is this is not one party that both parties are at the trough.

And the question is, who gives us the best chance to try to

take this country back and to fight for it?

And it's clearly been Trump, but it's an everyday battle.

What other Republican senators opposed your nomination?

Well, it's funny.

As soon as Tillis blocked it, then a guy like Senator Cornyn said, I'm for him.

You know,

did he really?

We weren't sure until then.

And then I think Collins said, I'm looking at it.

I'm thinking about it.

So

I will say that.

But Collins says she was thinking.

We know that's not true.

Yeah, well, actually, I had an issue up here.

You know, the U.S.

attorney has so much interesting

role for D.C., the D.C.

U.S.

Attorney.

I went to the DEA and I said, hey, guys, what are we not doing?

I would go to all these law enforcement and say,

what is somebody not doing that I could do to help you guys?

And the DEA guy said, we got all these marijuana farms in

Maine.

And so they said, we can't get it under control.

And the U.S.

attorney up there won't do anything.

And I said, I'll take it.

I'll take the cases.

I said, let's figure it out.

So I wrote a letter to the Maine governor and I said, what are you doing about these pod farms that the Chinese are running?

You know, we got to take a look at this because it's impacting what's going on.

And so nothing's progressing.

What did Governor Mills say?

She had some milquetoast response about something, but no.

No, we're looking into it.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

But I mean, you know, when you look close, it's a disaster.

And she and her administration is really not just looking the other way.

They're allowing chaos in this state.

Her brother is benefiting.

Yeah, it's probably the most corrupt state outside of New Jersey out of 50.

So, but were there any other senators who went on the record?

No, no, they were doing a dance.

Look, I mean,

McConnell is, in fact, McConnell's staff was talking to me about pitching him on the, because they weren't a no, a hard no at the beginning.

But at that level, in that process, they're all playing a game, right?

Until they have to, look, Senator Hawley, I'm from Missouri.

Senator Hawley said, if you get to the floor,

you'll definitely get the vote.

They're afraid to vote against you.

Right.

But he said they're going to be all kinds of machinations beforehand.

So to your point, I don't know if Tillis was, Senator Tillis was taking one for the team, if he was, you know, killing me to help other people or what, but

he was the obvious one that decided.

To the extent you know, what do you think the real issue was?

Why wouldn't Republican senators form

a blue line in support of you?

Like, what was it that made them?

You know, I...

9-11, you said.

I mean, rather, 9-11.

January 6th.

January 6th.

I would say

that a number of times it was clear that I was not going to be sort of controllable, that I was going to do exactly what I thought and what the president had let me loose to do.

And I think that that's for the for the, you know, the sort of ruling class, that's the wildest of wild cards.

And so

a prosecutor who's willing to do the not controlled by corrupt interests?

Yeah, that's the scariest thing there is.

Right.

So, you know,

yeah, but I don't really know.

I mean, I, you know, I would have bet that I would have gotten through because President Trump wanted me.

Yeah.

Um, so, you know, it's, it's hard to know.

I thought some of the other guys that got confirmed had a lot more checkered past, but I don't, you know.

But it's not about that.

Yeah.

Of course.

It's, it's never the liars who get in trouble.

It's the truth tellers who are the threat, of course.

Maybe.

For sure.

Okay.

I don't know.

For sure.

They don't care if you lie.

They lie.

They love lies.

Their father is the father of lies.

But

you are staying on in the administration.

Yes.

I mean, it's, I hate to say I got a promotion.

I don't want to be too Pollyannish, but I kind of got a promotion.

I mean,

U.S.

Attorney's Office, to be clear, it's the greatest prosecutor's office in the world, really.

It's got all of the city-level crime.

It's like a DA.

It's a great DA office.

And then a huge U.S.

Attorney's Office with cases all over the world and all sorts of complicated, interesting stuff, and a huge docket.

I can get to all USAID.

All the USAID falls within us.

So when you see the fraud that's going on in Europe and

this is all stuff that the U.S.

Attorney, and trust me, the U.S.

Attorney is already looking at it.

And you can look at this stuff and say, because of the jurisdiction.

So, but it's a big office with a lot of bureaucracy.

And so

basically, my new job is focused on weaponization.

The docket is the whole world and the country to say where have they done wrong and how do we go and get to the bottom of it.

And so, look, I'm the president, it's a key moment.

It's a key moment.

And the president trusts me to do this.

And so, and Pam Bondi has been great about directing us on this.

So I'm excited to go over there and fight.

It's amazing that someone in D.C., so anyone who lives in D.C.

knows that the city is mismanaged by Muriel Bowser, the mayor, but it's also kind of falling apart.

The real estate market has collapsed because of COVID, but also because of crime.

Yep.

And like they need law enforcement in D.C., and they don't really have it.

And yet this woman was so mad at you that she

spit on you.

It just tells you the power of the propaganda that Schumer unleashed.

That's right.

Well,

I want to brag for a minute.

We shifted a lot of our resources to fight crime.

You know, you know this, but 720,000 people live in D.C.

Yeah.

650,000 live in poverty in a tough setup.

And

frankly,

they've been getting stuck by both parties forever, right?

So you walk down the street in Anacostia and you're like, I went to do an interview in Anacostia and we pulled up and there's an ambulance and all.

And I said, what is that?

And I said, somebody was shot there laying there and we went in to do the interview it was like oh yeah so he's not going to die he's going to be fine so they what we did was we turned all of our resources on that side to getting rid of the guys with guns the bad guys with guns and we dragged them to federal court now that sounds like it's not that revolutionary but you start to get in march we got uh 18 and in april 24 arrested arrested with guns and off the streets for 700 000 people what they mostly need to know is somebody's trying to help them make it better right and trying to make life better and crime is down 25% and the basics are going the right direction.

So, but no, no, that's that woman screeching at me and spitting on me was, that's a fruit of the environment that says, make anyone who's doing something important into someone toxic and will get people to be agitated.

It works.

It works.

Oh, it works completely.

The only problem is our side, meaning I think God-fearing Americans, need to understand, I just told you, we've got to get the truth out.

You can't sit back and say, we're right.

That doesn't matter.

No, no.

Your neighbor is still being inundated by the Washington Post, right?

They're still being told by the Washington Post that somehow it's problematic that I was on RT.

I did interviews on RT and that, oh, this is the end of the world.

Well, I mean, Swalwell's got...

You went on RT?

Yeah, I went on RT.

I did interviews on RT.

Did you have a.

Did you have sex with a Chinese communist spy?

I was just going to say, no, I did not.

I mean, I think I wanted to make clear.

Sorry to ask you personal questions.

I wanted to make clear that.

So, but my point is that.

I loved RT.

RT was a great channel.

I didn't agree with everything, but I don't know.

I've only been told.

You were going on RT or did you, were you the news director?

Are you just a guest?

I've only been told what to say on one network, and that was the communist CNN.

They told me I had to

say that.

Otherwise, so, but my point is,

to your point, we can't rely on the truth.

We are right.

We have to, though.

And this is where I think there's responsibility in government.

We have to expose the truth.

We have to expose it.

And if they're not shamed, at least Andrew Weissman can hear his name.

Andrew Weissman is truly one of the most despicable figures in modern American life.

Mary McCord, Georgetown University, oh, I got in a fight with Georgetown.

You know, Georgetown University is mad at me.

Filthy, filthy organization.

I wrote Georgetown Law and I said to the dean, we're not going to hire your people either for jobs or internships because you're doing DEI after the president said stop.

Yes.

He wrote back and lectured me on Jesuit ideals, Jesuit ideals, and freedom.

Now, he went to Yale and Harvard.

I don't think those are religious, but I went to Holy Cross, slightly, Jesuit the whole time.

St.

Louis Hugh, Jesuit, on and on and on.

And he lectured me.

But here's what happened quickly.

Was he a Jesuit?

No, no, of course not.

He said he's not even Catholic.

Well, maybe he's Catholic.

I don't know.

But he's lecturing me.

And bar complaints are coming in from people saying Georgetown is great.

All I'm saying is this.

That sounds disgusting.

Well, that's sorry.

But more importantly, you talk about weaponizing government.

You got this Rosa Brooks, Mary McCord.

These are the people coming out of Obama land, and they're taking the Transition Integrity Integrity Project.

Remember this?

The Transition Integrity Project.

And they're saying, how would we do an American color revolution, right?

How would we do that?

And they're laying it out.

Remember, game planning?

They were doing this tabletop and they're looking at and participating are all kinds of Americans with security clearances and military background.

And we're supposed to sit here and say, oh, isn't this great?

You guys do all of that.

And we say nothing.

And meanwhile, you get hundreds of millions of dollars in American tax dollars to do it to us.

So I asked them a question.

They got upset.

But the point here is.

And Rosa, I know Rosa Brooks well.

She did that out of Georgetown.

Of course.

That's what I'm saying.

It's an institute still.

She's still doing it.

Georgetown is,

I mean, it's had really unhealthy relationships with the U.S.

government for many, many decades.

I mean, the CIA small arms training facility was on their campus.

I know that for a fact because I know someone who trained there.

Like they have been, Georgetown is one of those things.

It's not a private institution.

It's an arm of the deepest of the deep state.

And like they're scary and they're supported by U.S.

tax dollars.

Like it's not only it's not a college.

Like you want your kid to go to Georgetown.

Oh, he goes to Georgetown.

Go Hoyas.

It's way more than that.

People just have no idea.

Well, and my point to you is,

I agree.

And we have to name it.

Yes.

It's not enough us to know.

We have to say Mary McCord and Rosa Brooks at Georgetown Law.

Oh, I know.

What they're doing is destructive to the country and people should know it.

They're planning insurrection, actually.

They speak of it.

I know, using U.S.

tax dollars and all these, you know, nice, sort of well-meaning Irish Catholic alums around the country who like don't agree with anything that Rosa Brooks says are sending them money and sending them their kids there because the veneer, the skin suit still lives.

Georgetown.

Happy Canada went to Georgetown.

Okay.

Yeah.

It's the fakest place in the United States, way worse than Harvard, actually, I think.

Right.

I'm sorry.

But fake would be bad enough.

It's destructive.

It's sinister.

It's destructive.

And again,

until we have the, if you think it's a debate, if we, if it's a debating moment, then you're in one spot.

If you think it's a battle for the future of the country and the world, then you're in a different moment.

And that's how I look at what we're, what we're seeing going on.

And that's why I think some people probably realized he knows how this goes a little more.

And so they didn't want me in that spot.

But I got another spot, so it'll work out.

It's just so revealing.

I'll just say it one last time because I can't control myself that you were torpedoed by supposedly conservative Republicans.

I gave a speech on Tom Tillis's behalf when he ran for the first time for Senate.

And I sort of think that like you're getting one thing, but almost 100% of the time, the person winds up to be John Cornyn or, you know, like a super aggressive liberal posing as a conservative Republican.

It's so weird.

Do you understand the mindset there?

No,

you know, my wife, who's

like you, smarter than me.

And so she said the other day,

why can't we go back to term limits?

You know, I mean, it's this instinct of

there's something, there's something about when they're in for a while, they seem to have figured out,

they think they figured out what's better for everyone.

I don't really know.

Look, one of the problems I hate is, I know you do, is tell, just tell me the truth to my face.

If this is what you're doing, 100%.

Well, that's what I respect about Tillis.

At least he lectured you in private.

That's right.

He did.

And I like that.

And he unloaded it on me in private.

Well, good.

I mean, good.

I mean, I disagree.

I think a lot of things I've already expressed them, but I admire that.

Yeah.

So, but I don't know what gets the,

well, I do know the system is so powerful and so

alluring and seductive that after a while, uh, you know, I think it's inevitable that even good people are tempted to a worldview that's not as good, even if they're not tempted to pure straight-on corruption.

So

it is a problem.

There's just so much money.

That's right.

That's it.

It's not power, right?

It's money.

It's all money.

It's money.

That's exactly right.

So just quickly, I mean, I'm interested as a former former resident, longtime resident, about the city of Washington over which you would have had jurisdiction as this chief law enforcement officer, because it's not a state, but it's a federal zone.

It's super complicated,

set up in D.C.

But what were you starting to do?

to make the city safer and more orderly and what needs to be done.

Well,

this is really important.

And I hope

I was actually.

Nobody cares because it's a majority black city, by the way.

So like all the liberals who are like, oh, I love black people.

They just don't care.

Yeah, they don't seem to.

I agree with you.

They don't.

All All right.

So there's a couple of things.

One is,

and I was just telling Judge Janine Piro, she's really, she's really kind of.

I should have said the headline, which is.

Yeah, she's kind of into it.

She's really into it, and she's asking me all these questions.

And I'm thinking, ah, she was in charge of it.

She's the nominee now.

Yeah, she's going to be.

Well, she's going to come in and serve like I did.

She's going to serve right away.

So she's not waiting.

And that's very cool.

But I'm a fan of that because why you have this, you know, interso

DC is awesome.

I mean, it's awesome places.

You know, history on every corner, you know, the background of everybody.

I did these ride-alongs with detectives and i'd so go every corner of the place and you see all these different things and and uh and the people people are people right of course they want what they want more for their kids and more for themselves and uh um i lived i'm from st.

louis and in st.

Louis I always lived in the city itself and it feels the same way

A couple things.

One is the violent crime, right?

The guns are, because Virginia's hard on guns and Maryland

and D.C.

are soft, then you can get away with having guns.

Misuse of guns.

Misuse of guns, right?

So all sorts of people people with all sorts of guns.

Can I ask, though, just so D.C.

and Maryland have a lot of gun control.

Correct.

But when criminals use guns,

they're more tolerant.

Of course.

Virginia has less gun control, but it's tougher on the illegal.

What is that?

Yeah, I mean,

that's the whole thing, right?

That's the game.

You can barely get your concealed carry in D.C.

It takes months and months.

I got one.

I know.

It takes forever, though.

I brought somebody in the other day.

I said, tell me how the concealed carry process is going.

They said it takes six months to get an appointment to even get your stuff so this i can get you one immediately can i say one thing about dc which is why it's a great city you when you live in dc it was there most of my life you're mad because it's so inefficient it's totally third world in the way it's run and then you finally realize like wait a second if i just play along grease a palm or two all the right people show respect yeah mr mrs is always stuff like that like life is easy in dc yeah well it's like living not for normal but not for regular people like for people no it's not even about it's like you know, like, why would I, my kids don't have driver's licenses.

So I could go through the whole rigmarole or I could just pay someone 400 bucks to get them a driver's license and you can boom, get a driver's license.

All right, well, that's good.

Okay.

I don't know what to say that except I was like, corrupt.

Let me go back.

Let me go back to what they need.

They need to stay focused on the violence, right?

So the violence is guns.

And, you know, look, cash has given us support to try to do some cold case stuff.

The FBI has the ability to do more DNA testing to try to get, you know, a lot of cold case stuff is DNA.

And if you can go back and look at stuff, rapes especially, and you can do it.

So there's lots you can do.

But I was a DNC employee shot to death in 2016

in Washington, but not robbed.

And

we're not like allowed to talk about it or even mention his name, so I won't mention his name.

But people I know who worked at the DNC, one person at the time believed that it was a political killing, that he was murdered for political reasons.

Will that case be looked at, do you think?

Well, I got briefed on it.

It's now a while ago time-wise, but there's not a statute of limitations on it, but it's cold.

To your point, it's a cold case.

Do you think there's any evidence that that was an assassination, not a robbery?

Well, there's evidence that there was a killing in such a way that, yeah, I mean, that you could say you can't know sort of why the killing happened, right?

It was weird, right?

It was weird, yeah.

Yeah.

So that guy was killed and in D.C., but MPD was taken off the case and FBI took over.

Right.

Why?

I don't know the answer.

It's a good question.

Kind of weird, though, right?

How many days do I have left on the job?

I'll go find out.

I'll see if I can find it.

Sorry.

Sorry, sorry,

things I should have asked.

But one I want to tell you about that, this is important because you're going to see it nationwide this summer, and that's the problem of juveniles.

In all these cities where you have Democrats and liberals in charge, they're soft on juveniles.

So the juveniles get away with crimes and tougher and tougher and harder and harder crimes.

Carjackings.

Carjackings, you know, and worse.

And so if that's the system, it's happened over and over now.

And of course, the community that they are in has a lot of, you know, the schools are bad.

They're not a lot of role models, right?

Life is not in a good spot.

And you churn this.

You've got the situation.

I said to someone, there was an incident down at the Navy Pier, a Navy Yard, where someone was, a bunch of kids, juveniles come in these gangs and they steal wallets and they get around people.

And I said it to a friend of mine, he said, oh yeah, the Navy pier is like that.

And I said, what are you talking about?

It's Navy Yard.

He said the same thing happens in Chicago.

In other words, every urban city has this problem of juveniles.

And the reason why is because we continue to send them back and to keep them in this system that's just so broken.

But you can't shoot them when they come up to you and do this.

No, no, of course.

That's right.

Exactly.

No, it's a disaster.

You can't defend yourself.

Right, it's a disaster.

But I think one of the things that that juvenile question is one that D.C.

has to face because it's really, and the older kids,

if they were girls, they'd be calling it trafficking because the older boys are trafficking the younger boys because they know they won't get into trouble the same way because they're underage.

So that part of it is a disaster.

And that falls right on the D.C.

City Council and the mayor mayor and the current

administration there that hasn't taken it seriously.

Because you just need to lock him up.

And you need to get him out of D.C., put him in someplace you could pay to put him in another reform school or whatever to get him out of town.

Instead, they let him loose.

They don't do that.

The Congress could fix that in a day.

They could.

Because they have constitutional authority over the district.

If they wanted to.

And Newt, whatever you think of Newt Kingridge, when he took over in 94, he took over D.C.

and made it a much better city and created this massive renaissance.

Right.

That's right.

Why do you think they don't?

Look, I mean,

you're asking too many questions about the Republican Party.

I mean, you're right.

And the president, I think, is frustrated by the dynamic.

I think he wishes that there was more action in terms of taking it over, but that's not been a priority.

No, I get it.

I mean, I think it's fair.

I mean, there are a lot of things going on.

Yeah.

I wish they would do that.

You probably heard about Eight Sleep.

Lots of people are talking about it.

It is a company with one mission, improving your sleep.

And it's changing the way people do that the way they get a good night's rest we just got word that their team is launching a new product it's called the pod 5 it's an original and innovative mattress cover plus a blanket that uses precision temperature control to regulate your body's sleep cycles and give you the perfect sleep which really really matters it can range all the way from 55 degrees to 110 degrees meaning that you're covered no matter what.

It's like electric blanket to the next level, but also a cooling blanket.

So it makes you sleep better.

Temperature has a massive effect on the way you sleep.

By the way, it also detects snoring.

And then it adjusts your bed position to reduce or completely stop it.

So there are a lot of ladies in America who are going to be grateful for this product.

Everybody who works here will tell you, because they all use it, that there's no better way to be alert, productive, and happy than by sleeping well.

And 8Sleep really does help.

Visit 8sleep.com slash Tucker.

Use the code Tucker to get 350 bucks off your Pod 5 Ultra.

If you don't like it, you return it within a month.

That won't happen.

We think you'll love it, but you can if you want.

8Sleep.com slash Tucker.

This is Larry Flick, owner of the Floor Store.

Labor Day is the last sale of the summer, but this one is our biggest sale of the year.

Now through September 2nd, get up to 50% off store-wide on carpet, hardwood, laminate, waterproof flooring, and much more.

Plus two years interest-free financing, and we pay your sales tax.

The Floor Stores Labor Day sale.

Don't let the sun set on this one.

Go to floorstores.com to find the nearest of our 10 showrooms from Santa Rosa to San Jose.

The Floor Store, your area flooring authority.

It's pretty obvious now that this country is getting weaker than ever, meaning the population is unhealthier.

That's what Maha is about, trying to counteract this long-term trend that's culminated in a disaster.

Americans are so unhealthy we can't staff the military and it's really, really sad.

Why is this happening?

Maybe because sick people are easier to control.

Whatever the reason, there are answers to it.

One of them is Joy and Blokes.

They are revolutionizing supplements with smart supplements.

They're personalized for you.

They're based entirely on your genetics, your biomarker data.

They're not guessing.

So they use labs, advanced labs that measure up to 110 key biomarkers.

Then their clinicians design a precision supplement plan that's updated as your body changes.

So it's not just off-the-shelf vitamins.

It's much more precise and therefore much more effective.

So there are about 3 billion possible combinations.

And the effect is you get exactly what you need and you get nothing that you don't need.

You also get 60 to 30 minute consultation, depending on how much time you need.

You get access to expert guided hormone care, including testosterone optimization for both men and women, longevity medicine, cutting edge peptide therapy, and you get it all from home.

Right now, new customers get 50% off all diagnostic labs plus 20% off all products and therapies.

You also get a free 15-minute health coach consult.

And the effect is the desired effect.

Stronger, sharper, more energy.

You get it right away.

Go to joy and blokes, J-O-I and blokes.com slash Tucker, root cause medicine.

It's the way healthcare ought to be.

Can I just press you a little bit on the question I asked before?

Cause I think it's interesting.

Why?

So people who are for gun control tell us that guns are dangerous and bad.

Okay.

And I disagree.

I think guns are a tool.

They can be misused, whatever, like a chainsaw or a stake knife.

But those exact same people don't seem as concerned when guns are used in crimes.

They're only concerned when guns are like under your bed or in your gun safe.

They're concerned when law-abiding people have guns, not when criminals have guns.

What is that?

Well, I mean,

part of me wants to engage in some philosophical argument with you about what they think, but I mostly think it's what you said earlier.

So this is the

care about these people.

I mean, I'm the Republican.

I'm the conservative.

I'm supposed to not care.

They say you don't care about these people.

When I get in this job, I look at it and say, poor people, mostly black and brown, are living through hell because of the policies that you have, which is to let bad guys go with guns.

You and I both would agree.

If you're a bad, if you do something with a gun badly,

then you should be incarcerated.

Definitely.

No problem.

Because guns can kill you quickly.

So I wish I could say it was a philosophical thing.

It's that they really don't care about these people.

They don't mind letting the people suffer and letting their communities

get destroyed.

And the rest of it is just window dressing.

There's no other trying to read people's minds.

It doesn't work.

D.C.

is the only significant city that Republicans could really run through the Congress and through the U.S.

Attorney's job.

So I feel like the only shot the city has at reform and in the last 50 years since it's had home rule, the only time it's gotten better is when Republicans take control.

And so I'd just like you to fill out a little bit like what, now you're leaving, but what do you think should happen from the U.S.

Attorney's Office in D.C.?

In D.C.?

Well, we started on guns and then we're going to switch, we're going to switch, keep moving towards other violent crime.

Now, the key pivot in this, again, is down the weeds a little bit, is to take these gun crimes and then down to rape and assault and go down even to property crimes because you can't have CVS have everything behind lock and key, right?

But the two things that we're doing is dragging these cases to federal court because the local court is so bad.

The juries are bad, the judges are bad, the system is bad.

So you get them to federal court, you got a better chance to have real penalties and a bit more stability.

But the problem really is going to be whether you can have the will of the judges to hold these people to the laws, right?

And to put them away.

But you move along that continuum every single day in terms of addressing crime.

The last thing I'd say is that a lot of talk about money.

You know, the mayor wants to do a build a stadium and all these things.

They need more cops.

And cops cost money, but cops also require that you be on their side, right?

Remember when we were kids, being an FBI agent was a big deal.

Being a cop was a big deal.

And now...

Young people don't feel drawn to those jobs, right?

So it is hard to get cops.

MPD is down probably, I think their ideal is 3,800 cops.

They're at about 3,300.

You can say you're going to get all these crimes.

You still got to go get cops and you got to find a way to get people into the system that can be on the streets and doing it.

So if you give me my wish wish list for DC to make it better in the next two or three years, it's continue to actually take real crimes and put them in federal court and then bolster the number of cops.

And you can bolster the number of cops as a U.S.

attorney just by having their back, right?

There's something called the Lewis list, which is what happens if you go to court and you're a cop and somebody claims you lied.

They can put you on what's called a Lewis list, which is a requirement that the prosecutors tell a defendant that this guy testifying has had a problem in the past of credibility, but it's abused by the judges

and the public defenders to hurt the cops.

Well, I said, we're going to stick up for the cops and we're going to try to change that.

So you got to stick up for the cops in lots of concrete ways that make the system work,

but you've mostly just got to get after the crime

and systematically.

Not hard.

You know, Rudy and these famous prosecutors, they did one thing well.

They consistently prosecuted crime.

They didn't come up with social plans.

They didn't come just get a crime, put them in jail, get a crime, put them in certain punishment.

You know, Metro just changed their rules in the district, the Metro,

you know, both the buses and the Metro, the trains, that you can get banned from the trains.

Because once you get banned from the trains or banned from Metro, I can then arrest you for a different charge.

It could be a felony for coming back in on a ban.

Before that, you could go every day.

You could do three felonies, three misdemeanors a day.

You could expose yourself in the morning, jump a fair thing in the afternoon, and whatever.

And so the Metro got serious, and they were changing the dynamic.

That's just plain getting the crimes down and focused on it.

But you got to want to do it.

You got to want to do it every day.

We have to care.

Care.

Well, that's the word.

It's the same thing.

Yeah.

So what other cold cases are you looking at?

Well, the big one that I was interested in is the number of times that you can take DNA that was left behind.

Those are a lot of sexual assault and rape and sexual assault.

So those are the most obvious ones.

There's some DNA cases on guns.

If a weapon on a crime has some DNA on it, as the technology has gotten more sophisticated, but you can instantly go

and using the databases now and technology, get a check on DNA from a lot of...

Why has no one done that?

Well, they are.

It's a process.

It takes a lot of time.

I mean, one of the things you're doing is not everybody's in the database, so you're trying to track back through.

But we are doing it.

I mean, that's one.

A lot of people are in the database.

A lot of people are in the database, but not everybody.

I mean, and

so one of the, well, and so the FBI has been good about, I don't know why they were doing it, weren't doing it before, but the FBI has been great about letting us do it.

And so we're, you know, we're tracking that down.

Can I ask you a question?

The members of Congress, and it wasn't just Tom Tillis, I don't mean to keep beating up on poor Tom Tillis,

an idiot anyway, but like all members of Congress on both sides, they're very threatened by J6.

That's one of the reasons, you know, it was their building, not the people's house that belonged to them.

And they felt like their space was invaded.

They felt their security was jeopardized.

I get it.

But aren't they concerned that there are like murders taking place within walking distance of their office?

I mean, do they care about crime in D.C.?

Did I even mention that?

Well, again, you know, Tucker, and look, I think President Trump is like this, how he approaches everything.

And I mean, that's how I wanted to serve.

And I do.

We did exactly what you're saying.

We said to everybody on the Hill, come to a briefing on safety.

We want to keep you safe.

Because the staffers care, right?

The staffers are getting

assaulted and all.

And so

and people came to that and people want to hear how we're going to do that, how we can prosecute, how, because law enforcement, again, is partly prosecuting, but it's a lot of showing up and showing force so people know you're safer.

And yeah, I mean, look,

I think they care.

The question is whether it leads to policy, you know, and again, my job as a prosecutor in that office is to get after the crimes as I've got them.

And if they're not going to adjust their policies, I can't worry about that on the days, you know, day to day of getting after crime.

But I'll tell you what, when I go to

Anacostia or I go to these neighborhoods, they care.

And they know the U.S.

Attorney is paying attention to that.

And that's probably more important than the folks up on the hill.

I think it is.

Tell us what you did with Wikipedia and why.

Well, you know,

one of the aspects of, you know, weaponization is what I've been talking about with the new role.

I've been on this weaponization working group is when you...

Weaponization of the legal system.

Yeah, weaponization of the legal system, but really the weaponization, weaponization of the law, the use of the law to hide and operate.

So Wikipedia has this incredible 501c3, right, gets a tax benefit from we the people.

It's a public benefit corporation.

You know, in the 1950s, they looked at this closely because the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Foundation had been using their foundations and abusing it.

And that's when the law first changed to have 501c3 become a tax code.

It was part of the shift, right?

So the Cox Cox report or the Reese committee or whatever it was.

But so we have this problem where these Wikipedia has all this money that they use because they're a 501c3, a non-profit that's supposed to be for the public benefit.

How much do they pay a year in tax?

I don't even know.

No, I don't know the numbers.

No, they pay no taxes.

I'm not sure if they pay zero, but they probably say they pay payroll and other things.

They have an answer to that, but they would be tax exempt under the code.

But more importantly, they're obviously biased.

They're obviously, and they're anti-Semitic is the big one, but they're obviously biased in all sorts of other ways.

In fact, as soon as I started taking them on, my Wikipedia page went even worse to hell, you know, in terms of people coming on and editing it, supposedly citizen editors.

So there's bias, again, information war, right?

There's bias here that is against...

we the people in my opinion but certainly it's bias that's hidden from us because they're hiding behind the law in other words they're using the law in a way that is weaponized against certain groups and individuals and so that's what we basically said to Wikipedia is, hey, let's look closely at what you're doing and how it's operating and see who's benefiting or not benefiting and paying a price.

And by the way, as soon as this happens, they get panicked because they know.

We know.

There's another reason.

I wrote to a number of the medical journals and I said, you guys are all 501c3.

You get big benefits from tax exempt status.

How are you balancing

the partisan nature of the work you're doing?

How are you abiding by the laws that say that you're not supposed to be picking sides or or paid for by one donor or the other?

And they lose their mind because no one's supposed to ask.

You know, you're not supposed to ask.

It's like USAID.

We weren't supposed to ask until this last six months.

Why are we spending $400 million in wherever, right?

Why is this?

You're not allowed to ask.

So

that's a part of this weaponization thing that I think is underrated.

And with Wikipedia, it got a huge reaction.

Wikipedia is history now.

I mean, it's how people understand the past.

That's right.

It's in league with Google, so it's the first first result on everything.

Every noun you punch in gets Wikipedia first.

So people don't understand anything that's happened in the world prior to last week except through Wikipedia.

So if it's totally distorted, then you change the collective memory.

I know, but we're back right again.

We started, we're back to the information war, right?

It's a war over information.

And if nobody, you tell me who, who,

well.

Let me say it this way.

A prosecutor saying that about Wikipedia is vastly different than Tucker Carlson saying it.

Well, I agree with that.

And so, and that's the point of the public.

I wish I was a prosecutor.

Well, right, exactly.

And that's why Donald Trump, in my estimation, said to guys like me, go and do this, because the role is not just to find the right guy to prosecute.

We got to do that too.

If it rises to that, it's to make clear how off-kilter the information battle is because the public doesn't know that, right?

They don't have that sense of what's going on.

So, I mean, Wikipedia is a propaganda operation, and one of its founders told me that the CIA or the American Intel community is heavily involved in shaping the message on Wikipedia.

Did you come across evidence of that?

Not yet, but that just started.

And that sort of opening salvo was about three weeks ago.

So Judge Janine will have that one on her plate.

But, you know, where I'm going, the job I'm going to, I don't have to leave any of that stuff behind.

So I can tell you, I thought you were going to go a different direction.

And

I'll say on the weaponization working group, as it's described by Attorney General Bondi and the president's direction, the intelligence community is one of the groups that was weaponized against the people, obviously.

It's obvious.

The question is, how are we going to get to the bottom of it, right?

How are we going to get to the bottom of some of the weaponization of the government, intelligence community, against the citizens?

And that's where I'm going now.

Well, we can't tell you it's classified.

Well, I think it's

now in the system.

Well, we'll see if I can get it.

But again, the point of getting...

See if you can get what?

Well, the point of getting into these positions as a prosecutor is I'm now getting

the clearances to be able to get

to the level where you can look at it.

So I know they're still trying not to tell you, but that's the point of this fight is you cannot win the information battle based on what they let you see.

It's what you have to find, even in our government.

Especially in our government.

And I have to say,

the classification regimen does not seem primarily focused on protecting national security at all.

Right, exactly.

Back to weaponization.

The 51 guys that signed the letter on the Hunter Biden laptop,

you'd have to be a fool to think that's an isolated incident.

In other words, if they're willing to misuse and mischaracterize a letter based on their

status and the advantage that they have as insiders, that's not the only time they did it.

No,

right.

And so the question is, how endemic is the weaponization, right?

And we both know the answer.

This is back to your point.

It's much, much worse than we think.

The question is, how do we continually go about getting to the bottom of it?

I'll probably get myself in trouble, you in trouble, who knows?

One of the ways I ran elections, one of the places I think that is

really problematic that nobody has looked at is the certification of systems, right?

The certification of election systems.

For the record, I'm not saying there's any fraud,

but how do you certify systems?

There's fraud.

Well, I know, but the election system.

But what's at stake?

Exactly.

Well, no, no, but even better.

Look at how much money it is.

That's what we're saying.

Right.

Well, okay, but even just the Election Assistance Commission is the entity that certifies machines, okay?

It has no real teeth, but it controls who's certified or not, which means it controls who has the good housekeeping stamp of approval worth hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars.

What are the chances?

that that has been done.

Everything else we've seen in government is broken, corrupt, messy, incompetent, or something, right?

What are the chances that's the one place where it's totally competent and totally without any flaws?

I'm just saying, let's go look, right?

And

that's what we've got to do to get to the bottom of this.

In the same way that the gun control people are fine with gang bangers having guns,

the democracy is sacred people are very upset when you want to make sure that elections have integrity.

That's weird.

I love when you do this Tucker move.

It's weird.

It's weird only if you impute good intentions for those people, right?

I mean,

It is weird then.

No, you're right.

It's totally predictable.

I mean,

and all around the world, by the way, they're watching this happen.

You know, Poland right now, they're in the midst of, they're trying to take Poland out.

Obama is in Poland.

There's an election in a week.

Of course.

Obama's in Poland.

I had a whistleblower.

Why do you think that is?

Radek Sikorsky and App Obama's husband.

I had a whistleblower come into my office, and they were telling me the story that every couple of months, Samantha Powers would arrive with USAID money to this country.

I won't won't say which one.

And I said, you guys know who Samantha Powers is?

Of course we do.

She was arriving with the money, and they knew it was

sort of the beginnings of a color revolution.

It's not lost on the world, right?

It's not at all lost.

Again, the question is, are we going to get all of it out?

Are we going to name it and then hold some people accountable?

People say, are you going to walk people out in cuffs?

Right now, I'd be happy to have just people know their names, right?

I'd like the cuffs later if they commit a crime.

But right now, people don't even know their names.

And the question is whether we can even get through the information

storm that we're in to get that out.

Well, I mean, the early returns are not good.

I mean, John F.

Kennedy was murdered 62 years ago and the executive order from the president was January 23rd, two days after his inauguration.

And we still do not have thousands of Kennedy assassination-related documents.

No one wants to say that.

I voted for Trump.

I love Trump.

But like, what the hell is that?

Well, that's not in my document.

No, no, I know.

But it's like, I know.

The classification laws make it.

Well, don't make it, by the way.

I mean, you can just rule by fiat, which I think somebody needs to do immediately.

But like, just classify, you know, release the documents or going to prison.

How's that?

But

you can't even get 62-year-old documents released months after a presidential executive order.

Like, that's how hard it is.

to fight these classification rules.

Well, and back to say it again,

that's the big one you can see.

How many are you not seeing?

That's it.

That's exactly right.

That's right.

That's what I'm saying.

This is still David versus Goliath.

And that's the lowest stakes of all because no one connected is still alive.

Right, right.

Yeah, it's not, it's not, it's not crossed by a hurricane, which, you know, no, it's not 9-11.

It's not the 2020 election.

It's not COVID, right?

I was just going to say.

Right.

So, I mean, how many people

in your experience so far at DOJ have your mindset?

Well, most of the ones I work with, I come out of the, I mostly work with DAG off, DAG's office, you know, that's Blanche and Amel Bove and some of those guys.

Those guys,

when they turned the lights on on

the inauguration day, there was only a handful of us there.

And those folks are in the mindset we're talking about.

What about your DOJ people think of it?

Oh, no, no.

They're mostly scared.

I mean, they're mostly scared and nervous.

And

if they're left-leaning or establishment and don't want a part of it, that's one thing.

But most of them are just, you know, they've seen this go on to on, right?

Our side doesn't win ever.

So you're not going to have people betting with the side that never wins, right?

They're not like, oh, my career will be better if I go with those guys this time.

They're like, I did that for a minute back in, you know, 1985 and it didn't work out well, right?

So

that's the problem with that.

That's so true.

It's so true.

How corrupt was Merrick Garland, do you think?

Oh,

the only thing that makes me think he wasn't worse than you can even imagine is he has a bit of a Biden,

a Joe Biden kind of mentality.

There was everything going around him, and he wasn't checked in, it seems like to me.

You know, I'm not saying he was mentally off.

I'm saying he was a caretaker, and Lisa Monaco and others were running everything.

So

when, you know, he was more, maybe, maybe I'm being too generous.

He may have been more clueless than

willful.

I'm not surprised.

Yeah, but

like Mueller was that way too, I think.

Oh, 100% guaranteed.

Yeah.

And when history is written, you know, and I I intend to write a whole bunch of it, Tucker.

So when it's written, you know, you watch this, it accelerated under Obama, right?

It used to be politicized, I think, and now it's weaponized.

That's the pivot that went on, right?

It used to be politicized, somebody's advantage or not.

Bill Clinton, I think maybe I'm being too generous.

He was sort of politicizing things.

It got weaponized, where they're destroying people, putting people in jail,

trying to kill them.

Remember Obama joking about I'm good at killing people, right?

There was a, there was a sense of sort of

real disrespect for humanity that kicked in.

Yes.

And it kicked in and drove through that.

That's what Biden, the Biden term is something

we barely escaped, in my opinion, in terms of that idea and that destruction of citizens.

It's against humanity.

I completely agree.

I completely.

What happened to Lisa Monaco?

Well, I think she's at a big law firm.

I think I probably, I think I wrote to her.

I wrote to her a letter and said, what's going on?

We want to check on things.

Yes, she's at a big law firm.

She's cycling out.

It's all the same.

Andrew Weissman, Lisa Monaco, they all go.

Lisa Monaco went to NYU recently, gave a speech, probably got paid for it.

Remember the Vinmans?

Vinman got a job, the one in Congress, he got a job at Georgetown for $100,000.

He didn't teach, but he was some sort of fellow or something.

Again, back to Georgetown.

This is just a cycle there where they're all very well paid and they talk to each other and then they get ready for the next

effort.

Norm Eisen or whoever tells them this is the next way we're going.

And so

I think the good news is

we do have on our side the truth and we just got to keep fighting for it.

So we're not positive that cryptocurrency is the future of finance, but we do know that what we have now is broken and dangerous.

Debt has never been higher in this country.

Many of our so-called leaders are getting rich, serving you.

It's a scam.

So where does it go?

Well, thankfully, there are options.

Donald Trump has said repeatedly he wants the United States to be the crypto capital of the world.

He's already created the Crypto Advisory Council and recently signed an executive order to establish a Bitcoin strategic reserve.

This could give normal people an alternative to the government's failing system and frankly to the US dollar.

I'm not saying put all your money outside the US dollar, but like, don't be crazy.

Don't be stupid here.

You can see where it's going.

So the people at iTrust Capital can help you get in to this.

It's complicated for people who aren't following it.

They make it easy.

They're based 100% in the United States of America.

We looked into this.

They service only American investors and they operate the only platform that allows you to buy and sell crypto 24-7 both inside and outside of your tax-advantaged IRA.

And it all happens on one easy-to-use dashboard.

They also operate a closed loop system, meaning that bad actors can't access your account and steal your money.

So if you're considering adding Bitcoin, if you want to, or some other cryptocurrency portfolio, iTrust can be trusted and it's easy to understand.

iTrustcapital.com or click the link.

You may have noticed this is a great country with bad food.

Our food supply is rotten.

It didn't used to be this way.

Take chips, for example.

You may recall recall a time when crushing a bag of chips didn't make you feel hungover, like you couldn't get out of bed the next day.

And the change, of course, is chemicals.

There's all kinds of crap they're putting in this food that should not be in your body, seed oils, for example.

Now even one serving of your standard American chip brand can make you feel bloated, fat,

totally passive and out of it.

But there is a better way.

It's called masa chips.

They're delicious.

I've got a whole garage garage full of them.

They're healthy, they taste great, and they have three simple ingredients: corn, salt, and 100% grass-fed beef tallow.

No garbage, no seed oils.

What a relief.

And you feel the difference when you eat them, as we often do.

Snacking on masa chips is not like eating the garbage that you buy at convenience stores.

You feel satisfied, light, energetic, not sluggish.

Tens of thousands of happy people eat masa chips.

It's endorsed endorsed by people who understand health.

It's well worth a try.

Go to Masa, M-A-S-A-chips.com slash Tucker.

Use the code Tucker for 25% off your first order.

That's masachips.com.

Tucker.

Code Tucker for 25% off your first order.

Highly recommended.

Start your journey toward the perfect engagement ring with Yadav, family owned and operated since 1983.

We'll pair you with a dedicated expert for a personalized one-on-one experience.

You'll explore our curated selection of diamonds and gemstones while learning key characteristics to help you make a confident, informed decision.

Choose from our signature styles or opt for a fully custom design crafted around you.

Visit yadavjewelry.com and book your appointment today at our new Union Square showroom and mention podcast for an exclusive discount.

Below.

So what's on your doc?

What's on your

slated priorities?

Well, Attorney General Bonnie, when we started the group, she was, she gave us some real straight marching art.

Jack Smith, what he did, which is unbelievable, unbelievable.

Anyway, the Catholics that were targeted, remember the Richmond memo?

How did that happen?

Jay Six is another one.

There's one of her charges on the working group was whistleblowers, the whistleblowers that were targeted.

You know, you talk about weaponization, Tucker.

Remember,

the guy that's in jail up in, I think, is it West Virginia?

He supposedly Lone Ranger.

He stole all the tax returns and he leaked Trumps.

Remember, he leaked Trumps, but nobody paid attention.

He also leaked four or five or 600 or maybe a little more of the wealthiest people in America, mostly conservatives.

It was funny how that happened.

And then a whole bunch of small businesses, mostly conservative.

And I got a briefing on that, and I said, This guy acted alone.

He didn't tell anyone.

And they're like, Oh, yeah, he's like Snowden.

I'm like, Are you joking?

Are you really telling me he's like, somehow he's like the Snowden of IRS tax,

you know, of and I said, because this was weaponized.

Remember, it was ProPublica that first he went to New York Times, then he went to ProPublica, which was going hammering tongs one after another against all these people.

Again, weaponizing American law against citizens.

So

that's a bit of a digression, but to say the whistleblowers in the IRS and other places that came forward have been targeted under the Biden administration.

So that's another thing that Bondias has to do.

School boards all across the country, when they targeted school board parents, that's another focus for us to look at.

But we'll also be looking at, as I said, the intelligence community and broader, right?

We've got Crossfire Hurricane.

Is it still a big deal?

Obviously, getting to the bottom of that.

They end up overlapping a lot, as you know.

But there's a lot to do.

A lot to do.

When are we going to see the Epstein stuff we were promised?

That's another one I'm not where I am right now.

I'm not.

You're not diving right into Epstein.

Well, no, I'm happy to help.

I'm happy to help in any way I can.

I haven't been in on that.

I've not been on that matter now.

Do you think the Attorney General Barr promised an investigation in Epstein's death in federal custody in Manhattan.

We never got the results of that.

Is there some way for the public to petition?

Like, whatever happened to that?

I don't think there's a way for the public to petition, but I think as you ask about it, people will respond.

I guess I don't.

I never saw that if there was a.

No, it was never.

They never did the investigation.

Oh, they didn't even do it?

I don't think they did, no.

Oh.

That's the first I've heard of it.

I don't know.

Again, I know that when I got into office, I wanted to talk about the pipe bomb and find out more about the pipe bomb.

I also want somebody to ⁇ I'm going to get to the bottom of some some of the January 6th.

Remember the gallows, the fake gallows that were built?

They're built by five guys who

you can see them on video all over the place.

Iconic image used to destroy America around the world that somehow this was a gallows with a with a

noose.

Total fraud.

Total fraud.

What happened to those guys?

I don't know.

We never found them.

We never found them.

We never found those guys.

In a range of facial recognition, we just can't find those guys.

Can't find those guys.

Can't find those guys.

The pipe bomb question is a really interesting one.

And the only reason I think most of us know much about it is a guy called Darren Beattie, who now works at the State Department.

Thank God.

But who reported on it extensively on Revolver News.

But that was so baffling and remains baffling because those bombs, whether they're real or not, were outside the two-party headquarters on Capitol Hill, RNC and DNC.

So you'd think like politicians would really want to know

why the conspicuous incuriosity about that.

I'm with Darren.

I mean,

before I was in office, I kept saying, how can this possibly be?

If you go to any other part of the world and you say the two major political parties had bombs put by their front door,

it'd be the story forever, right?

Sounds like, you know, just before World War II started, there were bombs placed somewhere, right?

I mean, in front of the parties.

So I've never understood it either.

And the bombs were,

you know, they were sort of rudimentary, but they clearly were, somebody knew what they were doing for the look.

I mean, again, it's information.

It was an information.

Whatever it is, it became a piece of information or a play or information that we haven't gotten to the bottom of.

But everyone's sort of like, yeah, whatever.

The pipe bombs outside the party.

It's, you know, whatever.

We've got more important things to worry about.

Really?

Yeah.

Yeah.

We'll get, we'll get there.

Will we ever know

what happened in the 2020 election?

The numbers were weird, I thought.

Well, not just the numbers, everything about

characteristics of all of the election.

And then

there was the admissions that the election was fortified.

It was intentionally planned to do that that in such a way to get results that looked off.

Now, does that mean they cheated?

We don't have that smoking gun, but we certainly have over and over and over again aspects of things that didn't look right.

And we've never had the answers on it.

So yes, we will get to the bottom of it again.

This is the point about

information.

You cannot move ahead if you don't actually know what happened.

And clearly, clearly, the mainstream media and the elites told us you have to shut up.

You're not allowed to talk about that, right?

It's insane.

Oh, I remember it.

I remember it well.

And then January 6th was used, in my opinion, to try to shut off the conversation even more, right?

Oh, I know.

And so, but I do think we'll get to the bottom of it.

No, I played video that was from the U.S.

Senate, given to me by the U.S.

government, and everyone at Fox News was mad at me for playing the video.

It's like, why?

Really?

I thought we were a news company.

No, I remember that very, very well.

Do you think that we will see people held accountable?

Yes.

Okay.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

I mean,

I wish it was faster.

I feel the same frustration, right?

Getting people arrested faster and prosecuted faster.

You know, I wish it was fast.

We're 120 days in, 115 days in.

And where I sit, I can tell you, I was there pushing on key issues.

I'm in the middle of a bunch of them.

Judge Denino, keep them going.

It's harder than you think to move it fast enough.

I agree with all that, but there will be accountability.

There will be the truth will be known.

People will be accountable.

And as importantly, by the way, people that have been damaged will be healed.

They will be given

either pardons like the president's done for a lot of people or other things.

I think, you know,

we have a set of people

that have been targeted by the government that deserve to be

helped.

And that's going to be part of this, guaranteed.

Hmm.

By the way, that did make a man.

I will say this.

People asked me in all my interviews, Senate, they said, are you for reparations?

I said, well, hey, that's a stupid term that was used about, but I am for when somebody gets wronged and destroyed by their government, that they be taken care of, that they try to make them whole insofar as they can.

That's only fair.

By the way, that's not Strzok and Page getting a million-dollar payout, which is what they got.

By the way, that's another form of weaponization of government when you have Biden administration and Strzzok and Page transferring wealth to each other based on an agreement.

That's

completely inappropriate.

On what basis did they get a million-dollar settlement?

They sued because they were hurt about how

their texts were released to the public.

And then the Biden administration.

My texts were released to the public.

No one gave me a million dollars.

Maybe give me a call.

No, give us a call.

But so getting to the bottom of that kind of stuff, that kind of conduct is another part of this thing.

But

it almost feels like it can never end because it's so, you know, the weaponization against the citizens began a long time ago, but we really started to see it under Biden.

And

they accelerated the conduct, as you can see it.

You can see the memos, you know, Merrick Garland and target the Catholics, right?

And go after the school boards and Jack Smith.

Jack Smith took, he used a grand jury in D.C., which is famously,

you know, favorable

and favorable to the Democrats to do

almost all of his work.

And then he flew down to Florida and basically transferred it down there.

For lawyers, this is like unheard of stuff.

And everybody goes, oh, yeah, you know, Letitia James and these, the way the conduct happens and people go, oh yeah, you know, by the way, one thing too, Tucker, to preview, the lawyers, the bar associations and the targeting of lawyers is another way that they've weaponized government against people.

You know, they, they, you know, you can say what you want about Rudy or something.

We've never had the system weaponized against lawyers for doing their jobs, right?

It's never been like that.

Again, it's, it's an indication of something wrong with why are you so upset about the election?

That's a reason.

Exactly.

But also, it's also inappropriate as a matter of public policy.

Those organizations are all 501c3s.

They're all protected by law.

They're all basically monopolies, right?

So you're sitting here where you got the DC Bar Disciplinary Council is basically doing Dick Durbin's bidding.

Every time Dick Durbin says something, he opens a complaint against me.

He'll do it against Judge Janine.

And you're like, wait a second, this is not the system that we're supposed to have.

So that's another one that's

the the weaponization of the law against the citizens to the detriment of the country.

I've known a number of smart, high-testosterone, reform-minded people who come to D.C.

to make things better who get destroyed.

Well,

right?

You've been reading the Washington Post.

No, I haven't been.

I haven't read it in years.

But I've just seen this happen to a lot of people.

So, I mean, just on the basis of what you said over the last hour, I think you're going to be the target for, you know, a lot lot of efforts to destroy you.

It's been going on, though, for a while.

I mean, maybe.

I mean, look, Phyllis Schlafly, for whom I worked, there's this famous exchange where she's given a speech and she says, Clarence Thomas said to her, how do you keep going, Phyllis?

You know, she said, how do you keep?

He said, and she said,

there's a prayer, she says, you know, and she would always say, from the malignant enemy, defend me.

It's one of the Catholic prayers, you know.

You know,

look, we're so blessed, you know, this you have the same attitude to be in this country, to have so many opportunities.

And people deserve, our families deserve to have a future.

And so this is the fight that we're in.

And, you know, they've said terrible things for about a month.

My wife doesn't watch TV, which is great, doesn't read the papers, thank God.

My kids do a little bit now, and they're not quite as convinced that I'm as good a guy as I told them I was before.

But no, no, it's a...

It's a battle.

It's a fight for the future.

And so some of us are going to take a bit of a beating, and we'll we'll keep going.

You wonder where this is going.

I mean, if Obama weaponized the government against people who didn't vote for him and Joe Biden brought it to the next level and just threw hundreds in prison,

what's the next Democratic administration going to look like?

Well, that's fair.

I thought you were going to say something different.

You know, the one thing I tell people all the time is one of the reasons you have to care to de-escalate the rhetoric is it is leading.

You can see it's leading to, I mean, people are spitting on on me on the sidewalk, right?

This is not normal behavior.

Mr.

May she knew who you were.

Well, I know that tells you a lot.

Well, that's a, yes.

I mean, I knew you were, but I, because I follow this stuff.

But I think that the, um

it's le it can lead to

when when the when people start to lose power, you see the desperation, right?

You see the and to me, um,

that's what, that, that's the, the one thing you start to notice.

And so, yes, yes, it could be really terrible on a Democrat administration.

Imagine, you know, what it's like for President Rahm Emanuel when he puts in Attorney General, I don't know, Adam Schiff and what the heck that's like.

It feels like we've gone to the bottom and maybe

finish a thought that I had earlier that I didn't get to finish, which is it feels like a lot of people that were good people before.

You know, 100 years ago, again, back to the 100 years ago, good people.

Just had good morals, cared about each other, fight, fight, fight, but be honorable on the same side.

That doesn't seem as common right now, right?

That there's some people that really are not good people that are just disagreeing.

They're really not good people, and that's dangerous, right?

That feels, you can feel that sometimes, and I think that's a worry.

But it's something that we have to live with and work through and pray about and try to build the community about to see.

Ed Martin, I really appreciate all of this.

Great to be with you today.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

We want to thank you for watching us on Spotify, a company that we use every day.

We know the people who run it, good people.

While you're here, do us a favor, hit, follow, and tap the bell so you never miss an episode.

We have real conversations, news, things that actually matter.

Telling the truth always, you will not miss it if you follow us on Spotify and hit the bell.

We appreciate it.

Thanks for watching.