Matt Gaetz: Ted Cruz’s Delusional 2028 Bid, the ADL, and Identity Politics Taking Over the Right

Tu mereces fruits favorites for menos. Ja sell na Big Mac, McNuggets, or a sausage, egg and cheese, McCriddles, pie tuentojo como un meo ya horra.
Oof, nava comodarto un gustaso por tam poco.

Los extra value meals están de regreso. Gana por la mañana con el extra value meal, sausage, mc, muffin with egg, hash browns, yun cafe aliente pequeño poros se dolaris.
Bara ba ba ba.

Preses y participación pueden varía. Los prees de la promosión pueden serminores que los de las comidas.

Matt Gates, thank you for doing this. Good to be with you.
I haven't seen you in a while.

Especially in Florida. Especially in Florida.
Exactly.

So, I just want to start with a clip that I saw this morning

that I think is amazing and tells you a lot about a lot. This is from the Jerusalem Post-Washington conference this weekend.
The man speaking is a guy called Yehuda Kaplan,

who I don't think I've ever heard of before, but now apparently works at the State Department in the Office to Fight Anti-Semitism, which I guess part of the State Department.

And here's what he said: Watch this: I get off a plane. I am the president's representative, and I am walking off with a Yamulka,

and I have kosher food, and embassies will have kosher food.

It is a game changer, the appointment is a game changer, and it's not about history,

it's about education. And how do we educate? Indonesia has 350 million Muslims living in the country.
How do we change their textbooks? How do we hold the people in Gaza accountable?

That if America is paying for UN textbooks and supposedly the changes are made, why are those textbooks not being used and why are they using their old textbooks?

We have to teach people it's not okay to educate your kids to be a martyr.

Okay? And we have to hold those countries accountable. How do we battle anti-Semitism on the internet?

How are we doing better on algorithms? What companies can we work with?

We are going to have a whole division within the office of the special envoy to combat anti-Semitism that is going to work on technology and working with the greatest leaders in technology, many of whom are Jewish and have offered their assistance.

The office is going to be revamped entirely to be one of the highest profile offices in the State Department. Nothing will convince Indonesia to come our way.

Like sending Rabbi Yehuda is probably my mind. How do we hold the people of Gaza accountable?

So there is truth to the claim that in the pedagogy that is administered in a lot of places, there's incitement. Maya the martyr is a character.
No doubt. And that is awful, and U.S.

taxpayers shouldn't fund it. And we ought to hold anyone accountable who does.
At the same time,

the definition of anti-Semitism in recent times, according to some of the Israel first crowd in the United States, has really migrated.

Like this isn't my line, but I certainly associate it with anti-Semitism used to mean somebody who didn't like Jews. Now it just means somebody Jews don't like.

And that's not a standard that we can live with because

the reason anti-Semitism is terrible. It's against my religion.
I'm totally opposed to it. And by the way, it does result in violence.
I think we just saw that, and I hate it.

But it's anti-Semitism is wrong because hating anyone on the basis of their DNA is always wrong. It's a universal principle.

It does not apply to one group, my group or your group, it applies to all groups. And if it doesn't apply to all groups, then it's not a principle, and I can just ignore it, right?

That's the problem I have here. Yeah, but the U.S.
ambassador to France, Jared Kushner's father, says that anti-Zionism. is anti-Semitism.

And I don't believe that.

I think that you can be critical of foreign policy choices that a country makes without the assumption that you hate the religion or the ethnic group associated with that country.

Like when I was critical of Joe Biden, that didn't make me anti-Catholic. And when I'm critical of Benjamin Nets and Yahoo, that doesn't make me anti-Semitic.
Well, I agree with that.

And I do think there has been a rise, just I can just notice it, in people hating Jews, disliking Jews, anti-Semitism, I think that's real in the United States. But

I

think you could probably fix that in a week. How?

By getting Jewish groups like the ADL,

like the American Jewish Congress, like whatever group Yehuda Kaplan runs, to come out against anti-white hate, which is institutionalized in the United States.

And if you had the ADL and the SPLC and these groups that have fought against anti-Semitism for all these years make the obvious and true point that hatred of anybody on the basis of how they're born is immoral, and we won't stand for it.

And in the United States, the institutionalized hate is anti-white, of course, prevented from getting jobs, prevented from getting federal grants, prevented from getting admitted to college.

That's still in place. But you know why that hasn't happened.
I don't understand. You know what I don't understand?

Well, there isn't a sufficient monetization path there, the way it is when the ADL and similarly aligned groups try to make the American people think that anti-Semitism is hiding behind a lot of people.

Okay, but then so then I know it's not real. okay so if I get up look

if I get up and say it's only wrong when people attack people like me

then

everyone knows that I'm not defending a principle I'm defending a group interest right and I can ignore your group's interests I cannot ignore a universal principle and the universal principle is that kind of hatred is always wrong no matter who it's aimed at so why doesn't the ADL stand up and do that?

I would send money to the ADL if they did that. I would send money to the ADL.

I would. And I despise the ADL because that would be a defense of what's true and so needed.
Why won't they do that? Well,

when you're a witch hunter, you have to first convince people of the existence of witches.

And so I think that for the broad goals of the ADL, they have to make the country believe that we are somehow aligned against the Jewish faith and against the people.

But what they're saying is it's okay to discriminate against white Christians, but it's immoral to discriminate against Jews?

No, it's immoral to discriminate against Jews and white Christians and black people and Indonesians and every group on the basis of their DNA. Period.
Well, there has to be a villain.

And that's what white people have become in

this really threat-constructed environment around identity.

Well,

I've actually reached out to those groups and said, I will make common cause with you. I'll support you.
I'll send you money if you will just defend the principle. And that would include defending.

No, you never heard these people during the DEI criteria. They didn't say one word.
They were for it. They were for discriminating against whites

because those kids who've been shafted by anti-white hate as institutionalized in every big company and every government agency in the whole United States and Western Europe, those people are mad.

And where was Yehuda Levin during that? Where was Bill Ackman during that?

And my point is, come over to the side of universal principles of light and truth, and let's make common cause against all forms of hate. And if you won't do that, then I'm not taking you seriously.

Yeah, and no one should take them seriously because they are an advocacy group for a particular ethnic group. And that is fine.
Well, how's that different from like Elhan Omar and the Somalis?

Well, I think that in a lot of ways, there are similarities when ethno-nationalism is the objective. And obviously, ethno-nationalism is the the objective in Israel.

It's the organizing principle of Israel. That's fine.
That's not our country. It's not a country.

But oftentimes, people are pursuing the policies here in the United States that benefit Israel and our own interests and the interests of our people.

And the plight you described that so many young people have endured is not a priority. White young people.
That's why they're mad. Why do you think they're mad?

Because they've been told that the country they were born in officially discriminates against them. That's ongoing.

I don't think it's just even white people.

I think it's also non-white people who see the attack on white culture, not as an attack on like colonialism, but as an attack on success and progress and order.

I know a lot of non-white people, they're like, actually,

this anti-white activity that's going on is going to make me less prosperous and less safe. And I'm kind of here.

Like for all the criticisms we as whites have taken, we did an okay job setting up an orderly world and we made some mistakes along the way and you've got to reconcile those. But at the end,

what society would you replace with what we've set up in the Western world?

Is there some vision of the way civilizations were built in Africa or the Far East that we would gleefully adopt? So imagine moving here because it's a white country founded by white people

and getting here and being like, yeah, I want to be part of that,

which I get 100%.

And then you get here and the first thing you learn is white people are bad.

Right. I mean, that must be weird.

I think that this is shifting the other way. I really think during the excesses of the post-George Floyd era,

people attached so strongly to identity. And, you know, I sense a real pushback against that.
And like you talk about learning it, right?

The main place people learn still is in the school system. Right now, public education is essentially a failing enterprise.
And all of the innovation is to take people out of that system.

and then people will self-select what they learn and that may be more productive. This is one of my closest friends.
This is Brookie. She's not our only dog, but she's our head dog.
I hunt with her.

She sleeps next to me in bed every night. She's four and a half and smarter than any executive at Fox News.
This is a really impressive dog.

But I think we all think our dogs are impressive and great and we love them. And I know that if anything ever happened to this dog, there would be no limit to what I would do to help her.

And so vet bills can really stack up. Thank heaven she's been healthy.
But for a lot of people, including close friends of mine, it can be crushing.

And so when we started talks with the company we're now in partnership with, Dutch Pet, about how they're approaching veterinary care, $82 a year for unlimited care.

I just thought that can't be real, but it is real. Dutch Pet, if you're watching this right now, use the code Tucker from this show.

If you care about your dogs, if you care about your animals, and if it's, you know, if it's real to you check it out um 82 bucks a year for unlimited veterinary care you'd pay anything but you shouldn't have to dutch pet hate to brag but we're pretty confident this show is the most vehemently pro-dog podcast you're ever gonna 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 this is marshawn lynch aka beast mode checking in this holiday season everybody out here stressing shopping rapping cooking but me trying to kick back marshmallow sports and go green on my pros picks lineups right now prospects is getting into the festive spirit where new users get 50 instant in lineups when you play your first five dollars it's real simple to play.

Pick two or more players, pick more or less on their stat projections, and you could win big. Real simple, real quick.
I'm talking two-minute tops. Faster than heating up leftovers.

Mix and match players from any sport all season long on prize picks. Available in 45 states, including California, Texas, Florida, and Georgia.

Download the Prize Picks app today and use code Spotify and get $50 instantly in lineups. when you play $5.

That's code Spotify on prize picks to get $50 instantly in lineups when you play $5. Win or lose, you'll get $50 in lineups for just playing.
Guaranteed. Prize picks.
It's good to be right.

Must be president of certain states. Visit PrizePicks.com for restrictions and details.

I think you're right. So I think what you're saying.
So I'm, I was,

well, I want to get to the thing that really bothered me about the statement from Yehuda Kaplan, whoever, who apparently now runs the State Department, he just told us.

I did not vote for this, just to be clear, period.

Any of what I just saw, yeah, that guy.

But you're saying maybe I should calm down a little bit bit because, like, who cares? History's passing this whole conversation by.

I'm not saying who cares because

that was a disgusting display of,

I think, parochial interest that you just saw. Yes,

but we see that often, so I don't get too worked up about it.

The bigger issue is that

Rabbi Yehuda would probably classify you and I as anti-Semitic because we've been critical of some of the policy choices of the Israeli government.

And that broad application of anti-Semitism, to say anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism,

to

say that even some things in the Bible may be deemed anti-Semitic if they're critical of Jews at any point.

It has created such a curiosity among young people to test those mores and challenge those dogmas. Like,

I think there are a lot of like the Mark Levin Israel First Crowd who look at us and say like we're the problem Tucker and Matt are the problem Actually, we're not the problem.

The problem is you lost us.

Oh, I know you they show these old videos of you being very complimentary of Israel and critical of Israel's critics I you could easily find a lot of my library speaking on the floor of the Congress supporting a strong and robust U.S.-Israel relationship.

So two people who in our 30s were incredibly supportive of this relationship completely that have come untethered and it is because the relationship has has become too burdensome.

And friends should be able to tell that to each other. And when you do, that doesn't make you a bad friend.
I still consider myself pro-Israel.

I think that what the Netanyahu government is doing to Israel is bad for Israel. Totally.

Much in the way the United States created more terrorists than we killed during the wars in the Middle East that have consumed most of my life.

I think that is what that is the chapter of the book they're in right now.

This expansionism and the adventurism. And it ends badly.
It ended badly for us.

Remember, Syria is in the news now because tragically we've lost Americans in uniform in Syria and a translator there as well. And reasonable people are asking, why are we still in Syria?

What are we doing being in the U.S.? So we can lose troops, that's why.

That is so sick.

I believe that's true. You believe that those people are there so that they can die and trigger a war.
That is correct. And a deeper commitment and an emotional commitment.
You've lost people here.

And

I do think that.

When we lost someone in Mogadishu, did that create a deeper emotional connection to Somalia? Or did that cause Americans to say, what are we doing patrolling around Mogadishu?

Well, it allowed the State Department and the rest of the federal government and its constellation of NGOs to import tens of thousands of Somalis into the United States because all of a sudden...

Well, that had been happening under Clinton, you know, for some time. Trevor Burrus, Jr.: Yeah, well, that right.
But that, I believe, Black Hawk Down was at the during the Clinton administration.

Yeah, yeah. Right.
So,

yeah,

we now have had military action in this country. So there's a deep and important connection between our country and whatever country we're killing people in.

And so we need to import whoever it is, the Somalis, the Montanards from Vietnam, whatever. And by the way, some of those groups have done well here.
Others have not done well at all.

But the pretext is exactly the same. We occupy Haiti repeatedly.
All of a sudden, we have a ton of Haitians. Like, this is how it works.
We're fooling with Venezuela policy.

Got a ton of Venezuela politics. Is that the next chapter here?

You're welcoming a good chunk of Syria into the United States? I mean, a lot of them are already living in Europe.

Yeah, and but let me just say, I've known a lot of Syrians in my life, a lot of Syrian Christians and Alawites and moderate Muslims. It's never been a hotbed of religious extremism.

It had a secular government until last year. Damascus was a great secular center of enlightenment and architecture.
A lot of the New Testament was written from what's now Syria. So

it's had an ancient Christian presence. Of course, Paul was on his way to Damascus when he met Jesus.
So like, this is the Levant. This is not some faraway, this is on the Mediterranean.
Okay.

This is,

and so I know some amazing Syrians, also a lot of like war-traumatized, unemployed, and unemployable, dangerous Syrians, and they're happening to be living in Berlin right now. So like, whatever,

it's a mixed pack. The only point is as soon as you intervene in another country, all of a sudden, you know, invade the world, import the world becomes real.

Aaron Powell, yeah, I introduced the legislation in Congress to take all of our troops out of Syria. It was defeated overwhelmingly.

When was that?

That was in 2024, last year. And Ana Paulina Luna,

others, and I took to the floor to explain that this would result in American deaths, that those deaths would not be worth whatever gain is attempting to be realized in Syria.

In Syria, we had troops funded by the Pentagon fighting forces funded by the CIA. And Syria is even an example on the limits of Russia's interventionism.

I

took note of the fact that them propping up a government and trying to keep it loyal was not something that was ultimately sustainable for Russia. And so now

we ought to get our troops out. There's no thing that we are fighting for there that is an achievable win.
And what were these guys doing? You hear it on the news now. Key leader engagement.

You know what that means? That means we've got troops wandering around Syria, figuring out which Bedouin leaders to go bribe as a part of some coalition we can represent.

And that is everything Donald Trump is against. Donald Trump doesn't want to import a bunch of Syrians.
He doesn't want to control Syria. And I think that

there is a lot of the military-industrial complex that just needs us to be in a state of kind of constant, latent war everywhere.

Oh, there's no question. And I want to ask you an extra.

And by the way, just while I'm on the rant, the reason that happens is because in Congress, there's this great sense of deference like if you're not on the agriculture committee you defer to those people if you're not on the intelligence committee you defer to those people or the armed services committee and under a system where people's specializations were being represented in that way that might work but it's just a function of which special interests are are controlling which committees and which members of congress the way you get on the war committee is to be for the wars the way you get on the intelligence committee is to be for the intelligence apparatus the way to get on the agriculture committee is to be for big food.

The way to get on the natural resources committee is to be against natural resources. And then

when you do all of that, you end up with this highly deferential system to people who were elected by no one, who buy off your leaders.

And those leaders justify it by saying, well, at least I'm moving up in the system. And thus whatever I do to surrender my agency is justified.

And worth it, because I can have a seat at the table and maybe I can.

I mean, I think the moral justification for the person who makes moral compromises is, well, at least now I'm here and I could potentially make things better.

Yeah, but you're not even really there because you've sold all the shares of yourself. You know who else was there? Kevin McCarthy.

Like he was there until he wasn't, but the problem is the man had no agency because over such a period of time, he had sold shares of himself to the highest bidder.

Are there any sovereign leaders in the world that you're aware of?

Like, does any leader have the ability to say, this is the right thing or the wrong thing, and I'm just going to act according to how I feel with the authority vested in me? Yes. Really? Yeah.

El Salvador, Naibukele. Yeah.
I think he has total agency to just do things, as he says.

How's the country doing? It's doing well. People are safe.
Investment is coming.

You and I have spent time there.

A lot of time there. I think that

it is a great case study in what happens when

you exercise the type of executive power that benefits the people.

In a way, if it's a dictatorship, it's a very benevolent dictatorship, and people get to vote for or against him, and they vote for him. Aaron Ross Powell, yeah, they also get to leave.

I mean, a third of Salvadorans have left over the past 40 years, come to the United States, and now a bunch of them are returning. They are, yeah.

I mean, and by the way, like, I know out there among your supporters and mine, there's a lot of angst over, like, well, you know, has Donald Trump done every single thing I ever wanted him to do in this first year in office?

And, like, if you would have told me back when we were staring at polls showing us that Kamala Harris was going to be the next president of the United States, that here we would be at the conclusion of 2025 with negative net migration in this country.

And some of that indeed is the great work of DHS, but a lot of it is the self-deportation, where Trump has set the ethic in this country where if you are not here legally, you are not welcome.

And a bunch of those people are going home. And I think that is a great credit to the work they've done.
It is.

And in the case of El Salvador, it's a great credit to the job the president of El Salvador has done in like improving his country. Yeah.
Like, Like why not live there?

Well, here's a pretty obvious question that too few ask. What's the smartest way to protect your home and your family? Is it A, waiting until a burglar smashes a window and tries to get in?

Or is it B, preventing that attempt in the first place? Well, obviously it's B. The second option is way better.
And unlike most security systems, SimplySafe understands this and acts on that premise.

So SimplySafe provides proactive security. It stops criminals before they get inside your house.
I mean, really?

You would have thought everyone would have thought of that, but no. SimplySafe has, though.

SimplySafe's cameras spot threats early and alert live agents, actual human beings who talk directly to intruders. Hey, you're on camera.
Get out.

And they either bolt, they split the scene, most of course do, or police show up fast.

No long-term contracts or hidden fees, and you can cancel it whenever you want, anytime. Named best new home security by U.S.

News World Report for five years in a row, plus a 60-day money-back guarantee. SimplySafe is the go-to for whoever needs security systems.

It takes just minutes to set up and the app lets you monitor everything from anywhere. There's no tech wizardry needed.
This month, right now, get 50% off any new system.

This is one of the best prices you'll ever see for SimplySafe. Visit SimplySafe, S-I-M-P-L-I safe.com slash Tucker.
Again, that's simply safe.com slash Tucker and lock in your discount.

There's no safe like SimplySafe. A incredible nutritional supplement called Immuno150 is now available to the public.

It contains 13 vitamins, 17 herbs, 18 amino acids, 17 antioxidants, 9 exotic fruits, COQ10, turmeric, and 70 plant-derived colloidal minerals.

It may be the best health supplement in the world because of its 70 minerals. There's nothing like this amazing product.

It supports the body with everything it needs to become healthy and stay healthy.

Immuno 150 contains seven times more minerals and many more vitamins and enzymes than found in foods and most nutritional supplements.

Immuno150 can be ordered from Amazon or Walmart or call 844-519-3400. That's 844-519-3400 or visit the website immuno150.com.
That's IMMUNO150.com.

Christmas gift giving probably means you're spending a lot of money. PureTalk can help you save some of it.
Some of it. Cut your cell phone bill in half.

That's a big start by switching to Pure Talk's Saver Plan. It's $25 a month for unlimited talk, text, and three gigs of high-speed data on PureTalk's nationwide 5G network.

It seems like that couldn't be real, but it is. This is a veteran-led company.
They care about giving back to those who serve.

So if you're active or former military or first responder, PureTalk will give you an extra 20% off every single month. The easiest way to free up cash flow is to reduce what you spend every month.

And cutting overpriced wireless and switching to our wireless company, Pure Talk is a great way to start. Visit puretalk.com slash Tucker.
Make the switch today. Takes as little as 10 minutes.

Talk text data. 20 bucks a month.
PureTalk.com slash Tucker. You save an extra 50% off your first month.
PureTalk, America's wireless company.

So I just want to get back to one more question about the State Department's new Office on Anti-Semitism and just say, again, I'm opposed to anti-Semitism every bit as much as I'm opposed to anti-white hate, which is much more prevalent.

And all of it, anti-black, anti-Mexican, everything,

anti-people.

But in there, he says we need to control what people say on the internet. Yes.
And we're going to talk to Jews in the... He just said that.
That's so funny.

It's like, do they really think that's gonna work does anyone but that's why should the US government be trying to censor its own citizens like I thought that was first of all illegal I thought we ran against that that was the Biden administration but isn't that like how is that different from slavery if you can't say what you believe

yeah well I don't know it's a form of bondage it's like I'm not treating you as a human being as a free man if I won't allow you to say what you what you think well and in I thought that's what America was it was the place where you could say what you think yeah uh the opportunity to do that apparently would be constrained worldwide as Rabbi Yehuda is serving you, Yokoshi.

But why should the U.S. State Department, I thought we were against censorship.

Wait a second. You thought the U.S.
State Department was against censorship? That's not true. This guy's standing up at some event with a bunch of lunatics saying,

I'm censoring Americans and I'm at work for the U.S. government.
How about you get fired today? Yeah, I think he was pointing globally, and the U.S.

State Department has a long history of trying to control what people see and hear and how they react to that. So we need to change the textbooks in Indonesia.

Should we really be changing other people's textbooks? Whatever. No, I think there is a reasonable argument to be made that we should not be funding the textbooks.

No, we should not be funding. We should be funding anybody's textbooks.
Like there are people living on the street, but whatever.

Leaving that aside, you're not allowed to censor our social media, period, because we're Americans. We can say and think whatever we want.
That's the point of being American. How can a U.S.

official say that?

I think we have crossed that Rubicon long ago.

When you had people in the Biden administration censoring true information about vaccine side effects and no accountability for that, no action against those officials, it has blown the door open to use powers in government to try to advance the viewpoints that you find comforting and to silence the ideas that you find uncomfortable.

I've never heard anybody say we should censor anti-white hate on the internet.

Not one person has ever, I don't, by the way, I don't think we should censor it or any expression of what people believe should ever censor. So do do you think censorship

digitally is ultimately sustainable with the fragmented digital environment? So, that's the point. I'm constantly

getting you. I'm not as worked up over it as you are, because I just think that

we have so many different opportunities to communicate now, more so than in the 2010s. And the censorship regime is only going to backfire on these folks.
And it's sad.

Honestly, I wish people like Jonathan Greenblatt at the ADL and this particular rabbi would see that what they are doing is ultimately to their detriment because more and more people are going to wonder why there is this one group that seems to have primacy in speech and discourse.

You're 100% right. And you're able to control your emotions sufficient to see that, which is why I'm glad you're here.
Controlling emotions really is what I'm known for.

No, it is actually, because you're seeing,

at least compared to me with no self-control at all. You're seeing the big picture, which is that this is a conversation that can only be counterproductive.

They don't understand the nature of human discourse and of the internet and like you can't censor it. No, and how are you going to censor the presidential debate stage in 2028?

Because let me walk through what you're going to see. You are going to see

candidates on the Republican debate stage and on the Democrat debate stage that are going to say, I'm going to cut off all aid to Israel. I believe the U.S.-Israel relationship is toxic.

I think it is an abusive relationship, and the United States is the abused partner, and we need to leave.

And those people are automatically going to surge to a prominent position in the polling in their parties. And so then,

how are you ultimately going to censor a viewpoint that is a rising viewpoint on the left and the right? Right.

Among the bases of those parties.

This isn't a viewpoint percolating among the elites that maybe the U.S.-Israel relationship is something we have to question in its current iteration and in its current form.

But this is coming to a head. And

I saw the deal where, have you looked at the FARA filings where the Israeli government is paying to geo-fence U.S. churches so that they can propagandize evangelical Christians?

I'm watching this, like, saying.

It is not going to work. People are still going to ask questions.
And I still can't find any of Israel's strongest defenders who will defend that conduct.

They've also, I guess, hired Brad Parscale to spoof the AI bots. I saw that and I thought, at least it's like them getting grifted this time.
He's pathetic. But yes, no, I mean, literally pathetic,

but it's still so dishonorable what he's doing. But you're absolutely right.
I should have a lighter heart about this kind of stuff.

I guess what concerns me is

these are people who are totally committed to violence, who, I mean, for rabbi Rabbi whatever his name is to say we need to hold the people of Gaza accountable when they already, the Israelis and the U.S.

have murdered tens of thousands of women and children, murdered them, it's like, that's not accountable. Like, what?

Is there anyone who believes that Israel's campaign in Gaza has killed more terrorists than it's created? Is there a single serious person who believes that? Well, it's a crime.

It's a crime. And the more you know about it, the more shocking it is that it's happened, a first world country doing something, murdering all those kids, murdering them, which they have.

And all these people like Rabbi Whatever and Mark Levin defending it,

they're just pro-violence. They believe in violence.
Mark Levin, when Charlie was murdered three months ago, said, you know, he was murdered because people called him a Nazi.

And that's an invitation to shoot somebody. Next thing you know, he's running around calling everyone who disagrees with the next aid package a Nazi.
He's espousing violence.

Mark Levin's totally for violence. A lot of these stronger voices are for violence.

So if censorship doesn't work, it makes me uncomfortable when people who believe in violence and murdering the innocents, as they do,

if they can't achieve their goals by peaceful means, like what's the next step?

Violence. I think that they come from a viewpoint of like every 400 years, people round up the Jews and kill them on the planet Earth.
And they think that their struggle is existential.

And if they do not become violent in certain places in certain iterations, that they become the victim of it. Okay,

look, I get that. And actually, one thing that I grieve over, because I hear about it all the time from friends of mine, is that people are panicked or panicked.

And then you have a shooting, this massacre in Australia is like the worst thing I've ever. I couldn't even watch the video.
It was so horrible.

And it's like, that adds to people's sense that there's something like that is going to happen here. And I totally sympathize with that, all of that.

But violence is not the answer. That's the point.
It's why you can't defend the murder of kids in Gaza. You can't call for your enemies to be killed like Mark Levin, in effect, does.

Don't do that, right?

Yeah, and

it

probably is, you know, the next chapter of all of this is that more of that type of violence is visited here in the United States. And we're against that.

By the way, that's why the speech and the dialogue and the discourse is so important, which is what Charlie Kirk understood. I know.
And

said so.

All the time. And I mean, when you and I know what few others do, and that is the operational competence of Charlie Kirk

in doing everything he could to support the Trump administration to make the best possible decisions on the information that existed.

And Charlie told me something once about President Trump and Twitter. And he said, you know, man, how many times back in 2016, 2017

did we have someone come up to us and say, we love Trump, but can we get him off Twitter? Can we just get him to stop tweeting every impulse? And by the way, I always loved the posts, still do.

But

we, so many people were focused on the information flow from Trump out into the Twitter sphere.

When what we, I think, discounted was when Trump was scrolling Twitter regularly, he was getting bi-directional feedback that does not exist right now.

That avenue is not open the way it was in those years.

And I think it was really special and awesome about Trump that he was able to understand the zeitgeist and what the temperature and mood of the country was.

And I would love to see Trump back on Twitter, posting regularly and seeing the feedback from users.

I think it's a really smart point and true. We did an interview with a woman called Casey Means.
She's a Stanford educated surgeon and really one of the most remarkable people I have ever met.

In the interview, she explained how the food that we eat, produced by huge food companies, big food, in conjunction with pharma, is destroying our health, making this a weak and sick country.

The levels of chronic disease are beyond belief. What Casey means, who we've not stopped thinking about ever since, is the co-founder of a healthcare technology company called Levels.

And we are proud to announce today that we are partnering with Levels. And by proud, I mean sincerely proud.
Levels is a really interesting company and a great product.

It gives you insight into what's going on inside your body, your metabolic health.

It helps you understand how the food that you're eating, the things that you're doing every single day are affecting your body in real time. And you don't think about it.

You have no idea what you're putting in your mouth and you have no idea what it's doing to your body. But over time, you feel weak and tired and spacey.

And over an even longer period of time, you can get really sick. So it's worth knowing what the food you eat is doing to you.

The Levels app works with something called a continuous glucose monitor, a CGM. You can get one as part of the plan or you can bring your own.
It doesn't matter.

But the bottom line is big tech, big pharma, and big food combine together to form an incredibly malevolent force pumping you full of garbage, unhealthy food with artificial sugars, and hurting you and hurting the entire country.

So with levels, you'll be able to see immediately what all this is doing to you. You get access to real-time personalized data, and that's a critical step to changing your behavior.

Those of us who like Oreos can tell you firsthand.

This isn't talking to your doctor at an annual physical, looking backwards about things you did in the past.

This is up to the second information on how your body is responding to different foods and activities, the things that give you stress, your sleep, et cetera, et cetera. It's easy to use.

It gives you powerful, personalized health data, and then you can make much better choices about how you feel. And over time, it'll have a huge effect.

Right now, you can get an additional two free months when you go to levels.link slash tucker. That's levels.link slash tucker.

This is the beginning of what we hope will be a long and happy partnership with Levels and Dr. Casey Means.
Verbo's last-minute deals make chasing fresh mountain powder incredibly easy.

With thousands of homes close to the slopes, you can get Epic POW, Freshies, First Tracks, and more. Find last-minute deals with the last-minute filter on the app.

Book a private vacation rental now at Verbo.com. Do you remember this line from the night before Christmas?

Quote, the children were nestled all snug in their beds while while visions of sugar plums danced in their heads. It's the perfect winter slumber, but it's only possible if you can actually sleep.

That's where Beam's Dream Powder comes in handy. Our friends at Beam, which is an American company, have made the perfect formula for the most effective sleep powder ever used.

Unlike the junk you would buy from your pharmacy, Beam's Dream Powder is completely clean. It's got no fillers or synthetic garbage, and it actually works.

Lots of people here on our staff use it, and they can affirm that fact. When you use Dream, you fall asleep fast.
You sleep through the night.

And when you get up, you feel sharp, focused, and ready to dominate the day.

It's already improved over 28 million nights of sleep. They've calculated it.
And Christmas is the perfect time to try it. This winter, Beam is giving our listeners the Patriot discount.

Visit shopbeam.com slash Tucker. Use the code Tucker and get up to 40% off Beam's Dream Powder.
But here's the catch. It's only available at this price until it sells out.

Go to shopbeam.com/slash Tucker. Use the code Tucker.
We recommend it.

What role does Twitter X play in the discourse of the nation? It's the global news wire.

It's where news is made. And, you know, I think that

people discount the significance of the platform when they say it doesn't have the same user base that you see on meta or TikTok.

But the reality is the news that is made on X, Twitter, really pollinates to those other platforms extensively and I think drives all the action.

So Twitter is real life, is what you're saying.

I think that it is.

Could you understand what's happening in the country without reading it?

I don't think so because you would be limited in

the inputs to your system, right?

What are your... So well, you host a show.

But even long before you hosted the show, you're in the middle of the national conversation. You were the subject of the national conversation for a while.

Where do you get your information? How do you know what reality is?

I try to read a lot. I try to watch cable news as little as possible, even though I'm a host of a cable show on American News.

I think we've lost an appreciation for the 10,000-word piece in society today. For sure.

I miss the long investigative reporting pieces we used to get at places like

the National Pulse and

places like Revolver News.

And more and more, the attention span of the country is limited. And so you've got to be able to convey messages sharply, crisply, so that they're absorbed and people can act on the information.

Do you read Twitter a lot? I do. Yeah.
I'm on Twitter a good bit. Citizen Free Press is one of my daily check-ins for the news as well.
And also, more and more

since I've left government life, seeing how the movement of money impacts policy decisions,

I was so into like what was on the next committee agenda,

what the next witness would be in the chair. And oftentimes it's the way money moves in global marketplaces influencing events.

And I also think this is informative on our discussion on the Middle East because for most of your and my life, the principal capital markets that mattered in the world were New York and London.

Of course. And I think a lot of people were really comfortable with that.

And then as capital has really flown out of these Gulf monarchies, out of the Middle East, you're seeing places like Doha, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Muscat Oman, Riyadh emerge as

these very significant capital marketplaces.

And I think Netanyahu is trying to wash that region in blood and chaos and war migrants so that there is a return to New York and London being the principal capital markets.

Yeah, I mean, I saw an Israeli cabinet minister the other day describe, was talking about the Saudis, and, you know, go back to whatever, your camels and sleeping with your cousin or whatever, eating lamb in a tent.

And I, you know, it was dismissive, of course. I'm not even taking sides in it, but it was more than dismissive.
It was like idiotic. It's like, have you been there recently?

You know, there are not a lot of camels in downtown Riyadh, which has like 8 million people in it. It's like the most modern city the side of China.

I think

people don't fully understand how quickly that region has changed. Yeah, and you know, the uh

that change is frightening to people who are losing power. I get it.

And I think a lot of those people are the constituency that Netanyahu is serving as he is trying to advance an agenda that will create more war and create more violence.

And like nobody's going to want to do business deals in

Doha or Abu Dhabi or Dubai if there are 30 million Iranians that are on the move because they're war migrants.

No, that's really, really smart. So I want to get to something.
So you sponsored this bill in the Congress in 2024, last year, that would have pulled the United States finally out of Syria.

And of course it didn't pass. Did it even get to a vote? Yeah, I was able to force a vote on it

under our rules. Yeah, I mean, it lost by a margin of two to one.
I didn't even have a majority of it. At least.
Oh, of course.

But the fact that you did that, which, by the way, way, for people who aren't from Washington, that's like a radical act. That's like Tea Party level.

You know, it's like throwing the tea in Boston Harbor. That's like a, no one would do that.
Poor Telsey Gabbard once said, like, why do we have to be in Syria?

And they spied on her and kept her off commercial airplanes for saying that. So it was a ballsy thing to say.
But you've always had this kind of like, you know, independent cast to your thinking.

It's been very obvious. For a long time.
Several years ago, your life got completely blown up. It sounded like you were going to jail.
People started calling you a child molester.

You're a child molester.

I was attacked for talking to you, which is kind of funny. Normally, people are attacked for talking to me, but I was attacked for talking to you.

But at the heart of that story was foreign influence, and I've never heard you describe what exactly happened there.

So in one sentence, news broke in the New York Times that the House

Ethics Committee. No, this was this was, I got news that the Department of Justice.
Ooh, sorry, it was DOJ.

A criminal investigation was investigating me, and obviously I knew that the allegations were false, that someone was. He'd be in jail right now if they were obviously.

You and Andrew Tate would both be in jail, so stop with the bullshit. And by the way, like,

no one has ever even made an accusation against me in any forum in which I can depose witnesses, do cross-examination, review records.

So, like, that's how you know the allegations against me are false.

No one is ever willing to make them in any forum where I'm allowed to fight back, where I have any of the tools that you haven't been charged and brought to process.

Charged, sued, anything. And so I never had sued on the basis of this.
No, of course not.

And if anyone were to sue me, a human being would have to stand up and make an accusation against me and have their name behind it. That's never happened.

Who is the person who has publicly accused me of misconduct regarding women?

It doesn't exist, right? It is just an op. And it was an op to silence me.
And Israel was involved and I hate to say that I was shocked to learn it, but there was a consulate official.

Okay, this is amazing. So this is the charge that you were like trafficking underage girls.

Absurd. And I don't even know what the charge was, but that was the headline.
Matt Gates trafficks underage women. It's like, oh my gosh, can't talk to Matt Gates anymore.
Well, for us,

the shocking moment was when my father, who's a prominent person in our community, got outreach from someone he had never met that said that there were pictures and images of me with underage prostitutes and my dad needed to meet with these people right away and so uh my my dad somewhat surprised and concerned goes and talks to these people and says what in the world are you talking about and they said well uh mr giggs we need 25 million dollars from you to go and rescue a uh a spy that is being held in iran and if you do that we can make these things about your son go away

which was crazy and wild we did what any any reasonable people would do. We went to the FBI and said that we were being extorted by these folks with their false claims.

And we later learned that this consulate official

working for the Israeli government was sending text messages to Scott Adams, of all people, the Dilbert cartoonist, saying they were expecting my father to furnish this $25 million payment

and that that would be evidence of my consciousness of guilt. For the American FBI agent grabbed on an Iranian island maybe 18 or 19 years ago.
Yeah, and I don't know anything about this person.

I don't know if the person's dead or alive,

but it was troubling and concerning to me that someone who was getting paid by the Israeli government was involved in a criminal shakedown of a U.S. congressman.
And someone went to jail for this.

The person who conveyed this message to my father pled guilty to the attempted fraud.

And surprisingly, there was never really an effort to figure out what the government of Israel's involvement was in this matter.

But you know that the government of Israel was involved because this was an Israeli government official who was involved in this. Yes, yes, a person who is named Jake Novak.

I think he currently works for Real America's Voice. And he sent texts.
What? Yeah. Yeah.

That's the name of the official. And he sent messages to Scott Adams saying that he was involved in this scheme that was later deemed a criminal scheme to shake down my family.

So what is false allegations? He got a television show.

Come on now.

I didn't know any of this. I'm not playing dumb.
I really didn't know that.

Have you ever talked to him about it?

I have attempted to

figure out because obviously I still have a lot of unanswered questions about why he was working for a foreign government and trying to shake down my family.

What's the answer, do you think? Well, some have shared with me their concern that this was a consequence of some of the votes and positions I took in the Congress.

I I represented one of the most military heavy districts in the entire country. Right number one.
Yeah, right up there. And

I saw these wars in the Middle East that my neighbors and friends had fought in as unworthy of our best, unworthy of the disruptions and parenting and the divorces and the injuries. Suicides, yeah.

And so I

took the position that we should be less entangled in these things. And I think that really

shocked a number of people who thought I would be more of a neocon coming from the district I came from. And I think that, you know,

with like the Israel influence operation, it's always fire and ice. It's always outreach followed by consequence.
And then outreach and then consequence. Even to this day,

there was someone who just appeared and offered to pay me a bunch of money to go to Israel and give a bunch of speeches.

And, you know, you decline those offers when you don't feel they're appropriate. And then, lo and behold, it's like green blad on the other side of the operation calling you an anti-Semite.

This just happened to you? Yeah.

You don't need to be an economist to see what's happening. The dollar is in trouble.
It's getting weaker. It's sad, but we're not in charge of it.

So we have to respond appropriately in ways to protect our families. When paper money dies, it's going to be replaced by programmable digital currency or gold.
Gold survives.

The same Americans who think they're protecting themselves with gold are the ones getting ripped off by big gold dealers.

After we left corporate media, we got offered tens of millions of dollars to promote gold companies. How'd they get the money to spend that much on marketing? Because they're scamming their customers.

We didn't want anything to do with that. So we sought an honest broker and together we formed a precious metals company that you can actually trust.
It's called Battalion Metals.

At battalionmetals.com, we publish actual spot prices. We're totally transparent about the VIG, what we take, and we treat everyone with honesty.

So if you've been watching what's happening, you know, it's not just about money, it's about sovereignty and holding something that endures and cannot be manipulated or taken from you.

So, if you've been waiting for the right time to act, this is it. Visit battalionmetals.com.

You've got such a, maybe you've just been around, you're younger than I am, but been around a lot. You have such a blase attitude.
Like, yeah, that happens.

People try to pay you off, then they threaten you, pay you off, then they threaten you. Yeah, I mean, unfortunately, this is the parlance of government.
It's a series of carrots and sticks.

And, you know, I was the the only Republican in the entire Congress during my time there who refused all PAC and lobbyist donations because it was like a game I just didn't want to win.

What you have to realize is what most of your Congress is doing most of the time is trying to move up in this system. And sometimes moving up means a better committee.

Sometimes it's like getting invited to better dinner parties. You've lived in Washington for many years.

You know that there's this like hidden dinner party circuit that is reflective of your influence and your acceptance.

And people who are probably good people when they get elected go there and morally compromise for that. And I just like reached a point one

time when I just thought, I don't even care. Like, it's like, oh, well, if you do enough favors for the chief deputy whip, they'll invite you to their fundraiser.
And then you could move up.

And the whip could invite you to his foreign trip. And if you say the right things on the foreign trip and kiss the ring, well, then maybe like the majority leader will want you on a task force.

And at the end of the day, I thought, I'm not here to do any of this stuff and I don't really care about any of it. Those are prizes not worth winning, too.

Yeah, it's sort of like the homecoming court. Like nobody really cares except the people doing it.
The problem is in Congress, the people who are not the brightest and not the, you know, I think most

service oriented often prevail in that system.

It's also low bar, so just pathetic.

And it's even more pathetic when really smart, accomplished people do it.

That's always what amazed me. If you're like, I'm just a country lawyer from North Florida, I'd been in the legislature, got elected to Congress.

I'd never done anything in my life that rendered me a war hero or some tycoon of industry. But those people do get elected at times, and then you just go watch them debase themselves.
Oh, I know.

And they become actors.

And the scripts are written by the lobby corps and produced and directed by the leadership.

You never took AIPAC money? I did not.

I refused those funds. How did that go for you?

I just, you know. Well, I guess you ultimately got blackmailed.

I didn't become Attorney General. No.

But I... Oh, I forgot about it.
But that wasn't precisely about APAC for me. That was just about all of it.

I even had groups like DNRA or Right to Life that I was largely aligned with say, well, will you take our PAC money? And I just, the whole thing seemed untoward.

Like, how do you take money from people who have a specific interest at times hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars and then go stand at the fish house in Pensacola, Florida, and tell people you're not influenced by it?

I just, I couldn't perform the act anymore. Now, there's, you know, there's, there are other,

throughout my time in Congress, there are other

kind of accommodations you have to make. Like, I had to be there, willing, able.
Anytime your bookers or anybody else's bookers would call and say, come be on television.

Because my theory was if I wasn't going to have the resources to buy ads, just go be on TV a lot. And

that comes with its own compromise to your life and

your overall operation. Right.
Well, life is a series of traps.

And sometimes you don't know you're falling into them.

It seems like a good trade, but it never is.

But just to go back to what happened to you, so

this guy or a series of people approached your dad and said, we have

documentary evidence that your son likes. Photos.
Photos, slept with underage girls. Will you give us $25 million to go find the FBI agent Bob Levinson? Levinson, right?

Also working for CIA, who was grabbed on this island in Iran, still in custody, dead or alive.

Your dad says no, contacts you, you call the FBI, the person who reached out, gets convicted of that, goes to jail for it. But

this other guy is never punished for it, the one who's working for the Israeli government.

And then the story winds up in the New York Times. How does it wind up in the New York Times? Well, I think that Bill Barr told them.
Bill Barr was a very well-known source for the New York Times.

Bill Barr was the attorney general. And he hated me.

Why did he hate you? We were in a big dispute about his unwillingness to enforce some of the election integrity laws.

There was a case in Florida where a Democrat supervisor of elections brought to the U.S.

Attorney a clear instance of fraud where a Soros-aligned Soros-aligned organization was fraudulently creating voter registrations so that they could request absentee ballots that were ghost votes.

And the U.S. Attorney asked for resources to pursue that investigation, and Bill Barr refused and said, I refuse to investigate any of this stuff because it will decrease confidence in the elections.

This was before the 2020 election. And so I was constantly pestering President Trump and members of his administration that Bill Barr had to be dealt with on this.

You can't just say that you're not going to investigate something because the investigation itself

will impact people's confidence. And so he and I were in that big struggle, and I believe he was angry with me and

wanted to leak things that would hurt me. This is the guy who covered up the murder of an American citizen in federal detention in New York City.

I mean, the person who was murdered is called Jeffrey Epstein, so I understand that I'm not defending Jeffrey Epstein, but no American should be murdered extrajudicially in federal lockups.

Bill Barr covered up that murder. Well, also, I mean, we're the United States of America.

You can't even go in and out of a casino without people knowing that you're there and without it being on every camera.

And you're telling me that we don't have the video of Epstein killing himself and that we're all just supposed to expect this guy who we know, we know, all those people who are in the admin now, my friends, they know Epstein was Intel.

They know he was tied to our Intel. They know he was tied to Mossad.
They knew he was tied to Saudi. He was a free agent.
He was willing to go. And British intelligence.

Yeah, and he was willing to go and get this compromise at a time when

the British and the Israelis and the United States government needed to get people aligned with the Iraq war.

And there was a worry that people would drift off and start opposing an increasingly unpopular war in Iraq.

And so they got together a bunch of people in academia, politics, media, business, and tried to get them in a compromising situation so that then everyone would stay on board no matter what.

That does not sound unlikely. But when he died,

by his own admission, he said, our job is to convince the American public he killed himself and prevent dangerous conspiracy theories from threatening. The guy was murdered.

And so Barr is, by definition, corrupt. Like, you can't, attorney generals can't do that.
That is totally over the top.

So,

and he was fighting with you, but you think he's the one who leaked

this stuff, which

happened in a while. I mean, I'm not going to sit here and pearl clutch over some leak when

the FBI took my phone away. I assumed this was all when they first came.
On what grounds do they take your phone away? They came with a subpoena and said, we want your phone.

And at the time, I was somewhat relieved because I thought, perfect, if what you think is in my phone is some sort of untoward issue with underage people, have a look.

And obviously, if I'd committed any crimes,

they kept my phone for years.

They did? Yeah, they did.

And you've never been charged with anything? No.

What's it like? Because we have a justice system. You know, it's still in place, I think.
We've got courts and stuff and police and all that. But what's it like to be accused of

a real crime? You know, child sex trafficking.

And then sort of wait for all these years to get indicted for it, have someone prove it, and that never happens. Well, I mean, I know who I am.
The people around me know who I am.

I would, during these investigations, repeatedly run back to my district. And despite Kevin McCarthy spending millions of dollars to try to defeat me, I was always overwhelmingly re-elected.

And so I took comfort in knowing. You're getting reelected in the middle of the day.
Yeah,

despite a lot of folks not wanting me to return to Washington. But

there is comfort in knowing that

the people will be there for you, your family, the folks you care about. And so I'm not a tragic case by any sense.
I wish I would have had the chance to be Attorney General.

I said a lot of bad things about senators over the years that made that impossible for me to achieve. So walk walk us through that.
So Trump announces you're going to be AG.

And I have not campaigned for the position. To be clear,

I love President Trump and was there to support his transition as a friend, a confidant, someone who had been there during the tough times in his first term.

I mean, the real reason I was hanging around the transition is because I remembered what it was like when you had a good amount of the cabinet hoping that Donald Trump was a criminal and wanting to install Mike Pence.

And

just the nightmare that that was. So I was was there to be a trusted friend, and Charlie Kirk and Stephen Miller and I had

talked to a number of people who wanted to be attorney general, and we were presenting

some of those ideas to the president. I was advocating for a different person to be the attorney general on a plane ride with the president.

And he just sort of, as he has a tendency to do, said that that wasn't who he wanted, and he wanted me to do the job.

And you had no idea this was coming. No, none.
And it was. So you're you're telling Trump, actually, I think you should pick so-and-so.
Right, right.

And I did tell him if he wanted me to do it, I would do my best job. I would work hard to be confirmed.

And that I thought I could lead the department out of some of its darkest days and towards something better. I think Pam Bondi has done a very good job.
I know she has her critics.

By the way, I would have too. Like, if I'd have been the Attorney General, there probably would be a whole

ecosystem saying I wasn't doing enough. But I actually think Pam Bondi's done a good job, and I'm here to be her supporter and advocate.
Clearly, you are here to be her supporter and advocate.

I disagree, but whatever, I think

let's get into that, Tucker. Wait, but hold on.

I'm not here to attack Pam Bonnie, who I know well, and I have always liked Pam Boni.

But

you were willing as a sitting member of the Congress and the House to

go after your own party when you thought that they were wrong.

And I think Trump also... believed that someone who had been unfairly accused of something and who had endured the grind of that

would be really interested in fixing it.

I mean, I think that's why President Trump asked me to do the job is because he saw that I could empathize with those who had been treated unfairly and that I would approach the position with a true sense of justice.

I love that. No, I share that view.
And I do think the only quality that matters in a leader is strength. Not

so he can oppress people. Weak people oppress others.
Strong people have no need to oppress others or rule over others. They can serve others because they're not compensating for the void within them.

And I think you would have been, you know, the best person I can think of because you've been through it. You didn't collapse.
You married a great girl right in the middle of it. You got re-elected.

Like your life shows that you were not destroyed by what happened to you. So you are strong by definition.
That's what we need. And all of America's problems are downstream from weak men, obviously.

That's why the women are crazy because the men are weak. So let's find a strong one to lead a critical agency.
That's my like primitive view of it, but I think I'm right.

What happened? Why did you not get that gig?

There were a lot of great people I interacted with in the Senate, but at the end of the day, there was a core block of about half a dozen of them who'd said they would never vote for me. And,

you know, I could have endeavored to grind that down, maybe win, you know, one or two of them possibly over an extended period of time. But

you saw the way courts started enjoining the actions of this administration right off the bat. Pam Bondi did defeat nationwide injunctions as a ruling legal theory.

And had we not had her and her team lined up to do that, I actually think that we'd be in a very different position today with the deportation agenda. Yeah, how can.

But I, I mean, there, look, you know, you know how a lot of my conversations went, I'd be like, yes, Senator so-and-so, this is Matt Gates. I'm calling about my confirmation for attorney.

Wait, what was tweeted about you? Now, that was a staffer years ago, and they were fired immediately.

Oh, they were that that petty. Oh, yeah.
Yeah. And several,

you know, would bring like things I had tweeted about them to the media. Is that really so? The point of your attorney general is not to say mean things about an individual senator? Like, what?

Talk about making it about you. Well, yeah, that

one senator, you know, from Oklahoma really grill me about my vote against the anti-Semitism bill. So, you know, how can I vote for someone who voted against the anti-Semitism bill?

And I'm thinking, like, is this some driving issue in Oklahoma that I'm

unaware of?

Just mentioning it.

Yeah, Langford is

such a weak man. It's sad.

And is a tool for evil, in my opinion. So sorry, that's what I think.

But despite having good qualities.

So who are the senators who are against you? Do you care to name any of them?

I don't know that that's productive, but I think that

it would not be difficult to look at

the college of senators who have been otherwise problematic for some of Trump's appointees, and that's where I had problems.

So

you decide to bow out?

Yeah, I didn't think that me obtaining me doing some multi-week, multi-month fight to try to grind down the last of Mitch McConnell was somehow going to help the administration in the end.

Can I ask, do you think, just since you know the system so well, because you serve within it most of your life, do you think there's anything you could have traded in exchange for their support?

I don't know. I don't know.
I oftentimes couldn't get a meeting with people like Senator Murkowski and Senator Collins. They were not interested in even having a discussion with me.

So it would have been hard to execute a trade. I mean, I think part of the problem is you're not the kind of guy who makes those trades, and that's why they opposed you in the first place.

Well, and I think also there's something unsettling about my unpredictability. You know, people who read

people who read the script are easy to predict and manage.

So you wind up with a government and business. You wind up with a whole society run by weak people.

Not at the top. Trump's pretty strong.
And I think Forrest is strong. And I think Susie Wiles is strong.
There's no doubt about what you just said.

But no, I mean beneath the very, you know, you're talking about the pinnacle of the pyramid. I mean, like, all the way down.

They're just, everyone's so weak, and that's where evil thrives is in weakness.

Weakness and risk aversion. And

risk aversion is fundamentally anti-American. We are a nation of risk takers at our best moments.
That's who we are. But in government, it's often, you know,

how do I avoid any attention or ire?

I do think that, you know, probably the riskiest thing we've seen is what Obama got everybody together to do on December 9th of 2016 when he ordered the Russia hoax.

I think that is really the original sin of a lot of this that has happened.

And, you know, I certainly would have brought a RICO charge against the people who were involved in that decision-making process and participating in the various predicate criminal acts.

I wouldn't be surprised if that's precisely what Pam Bondi does.

When the Biden FBI raided Trump's house, they engaged in a predicate criminal act to try to get information back that was exculpatory as to Trump.

From my standpoint, that would properly venue a RICO charge against the major players in the deep state in the southern district of Florida rather than in Washington, D.C., where

they have an administrative and judicial advantage.

So the Russia hoax was predicated on something that I'm pretty sure was a lie, which is that the Russian government stole a tranche of emails from the DNC earlier that year.

Do you think that it got reinvigorated after that? Of course, all of that got dispensed with. Then Trump won, which people weren't expecting.

And Obama on December 9th calls in Clapper, Brennan, Comey, and says, you guys have got to go out and reignite this Russia thing.

And in that effort, you see all of this offense against George Papadopoulos.

You see the activation of foreign intelligence networks to try to create some predicate for spying on the Trump campaign.

And, you know,

where does that leave us? I think in

almost a post-coup country. Well, we're literally at war with Russia today as a result of this hysteria, which was all the kind of predicate for that war.
And

it's

like there was a real discussion in the 90s going on about extending NATO membership to Russia, which is what we should have done. What do you mean?

Putin, in his first meeting with George W. Bush, was like right at the beginning of 2020,

2001,

said I want to join NATO

imagine where we would be right now if the United States and Russia had created peace and a security infrastructure around Europe I think appropriately position NATO as an alliance against the excesses of Sino expansion it would be a safer world it would be a more prosperous world

all the way to Asia because Russia extends into Asia And right, so you would have a Western bloc,

you know, not identical countries. Russia's got a different system, different culture, different language, different history.

But so many aligned interests with NATO when it comes to countering extremism, having strong borders,

all of the things that are

one of the most mineral-dense countries in the world, right? It's basically a Western country, produced Dostoevsky.

Don't tell me otherwise. Anyway, yeah, I couldn't agree more.
But I just want to get to something I've never gotten past.

which is the question of whether the Russian government stole those emails from the DNC during the Democratic primary. And then this DNC staffer called Seth Rich is murdered in Washington, D.C.

in a robbery in which his wallet is not taken.

And

a number of conservative, conservative

people

who call themselves conservatives went on TV and said, I think Seth Rich was murdered because he knew too much.

And then those people were either sued or threatened with lawsuits from Seth Rich's family. So everybody shut up about it.

And then Julian Assange is asked repeatedly, who runs WikiLeaks at the time before they sell him to prison for talking like this,

did the Russians send you that information? And he goes, no.

Did Seth Rich? And he says, we're not going to talk about that. So the heavy implication is that Seth Rich, and I don't know the answer, despite knowing Julian Assange, but

the heavy implication was that Seth Rich sent this information because he was offended by how the DNC was taking Bernie Sanders out,

was was basically all behind Hillary Clinton. It was a rigged election, and they were crushing Bernie Sanders, and he was offended, so he leaked these emails, and they killed him for it.

And no one was allowed to talk about that. Now, I don't know if that's what happened, but I knew someone at very high level of the DNC who thought that's what happened.

And no one's ever talked about it again.

We in Congress had people that were

doing various roles within the D.C.

police department come and say, we want to be whistleblowers, and we want to talk about the way in which this investigation was truncated and we didn't get to really do the

shoe leather work but but there's a way that the FBI can involve themselves in these investigations that doesn't strip the agency completely away from their partners to also participate and so these whistleblowers were concerned about that and then you know ultimately they they weren't really given much of a platform and disappeared well we never saw Seth Rich's laptop and and that story just ended and I'm not alleging but like but isn't the tell in that how it kept shifting like first it was the emails and then it was uh Vladimir Putin had taken over Facebook with $120,000 and then it was actually like George Papadopoulos in a London bar

then it was Don Jr. at Trump Tower

it was an effort to

obscure the lack of quality in any of these theories by just having a sufficient quantity of them.

Well, that's always,

that's, it's called flooding the zone. And that's what happened.
I'm watching that happen right now.

That's what always, that is the most classic move of anyone involved in a SIOP with the Intel community.

Yeah, you just, you just flood, you see this with UAPs. It's pretty obvious what they are, actually, in my view, but no, it's this, it's men from Mars, it's an advanced technology program.

It's like, whatever.

Yeah, they flood it with too many theories. And you think that's what happened there? Of course, because none of the theories could individually hold water.

And I had a recent conversation with CIA Director John Ratcliffe, where, and I like John, but I chastised him for not answering some of these

fundamental questions. Joseph Miffsud was this professor who was drawn into an intelligence operation against the United States.

He was drawn into that operation either by the United States or one of our allies. How do we not know the answer to that question?

This was the key thing that we said we were going to uncover when we got power.

And I I know they got a lot of work to do to keep the country safe, but I would encourage the director of the CIA to really tell us the CIA's. What's the answer, do you think? Well, I believe that

some of this crowd in the Obama administration knew that their direct management of an asset against the Trump administration would create paperwork, payments,

complicating things that could be found out. And so they went to other

European countries and said, you know, you do us a favor, we do you a favor, but the favor we want from you is actually to go against our country, our presidential candidate, Donald Trump.

And that is treasonous. That is straight treason to ask another country to attack your country.

And I think that occurred. And I think that if we knew who had authorized that, we would have a person to be at the center of this Broader Rico conspiracy.

Yeah. And traditionally, it's been Britain and France who play that role.

Huge Intel presence in Italy as well. Exactly.

It's one of the biggest.

And now with the growth of NATO under this war, it's Romania, it's Eastern Europe, it's wherever you have a NATO base, you have there are a lot of other things that come with it, of course.

So you've seen this a lot where American political actors or IC members in the United States use foreign governments to do their work for them.

Yeah. And I

am concerned that that doesn't just happen abroad, that that happens even within the eight square miles of Washington, D.C.

Did you feel when you worked there that there was a lot of intrigue?

There's always intrigue, but I think that

a lot of the decisions that get made in Washington are detached from the elected leaders. And there probably should be more intrigue, actually.

Our lawmakers should be more curious and inquisitive and skeptical.

What do you mean a lot of the decisions that are made are detached from elected leaders? Well, look, take these bills that get written, right?

Like, do you think that anyone who voted for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was trying to outlaw hemp?

It was just stuck in the bill, and then they voted for it. And however you feel about hemp, I think it's kind of crazy that

an issue wouldn't even get its own dignity. Like, the lashing together of disparate issues for just an up-or-down vote that kind of becomes a shirts and skins

exercise is a way to detach from the realities of the decision-making. And those decisions are made by staff, by interest groups, by foreign countries at times.

Aaron Powell, what's going to happen in the next two election cycles?

I think we are headed for a bloodbath in the midterms for a few reasons, primarily history.

The president's party loses seats during the midterms. I don't think I'm breaking any news there.

And I think that

the other side is just really worked up, and they have an organizing principle.

The organizing principle of the left in America today is we hate Trump and they don't really need any more than that and there's something elegant politically about using that to activate voters.

Yeah, totally. Whereas we're trying to tell people to reward us for securing the border.
And

voting is rarely an exercise in rewarding prior conduct. It is always about new promises.
What are the new promises you're making?

And right now, a lot of people have economic anxiety around the cost of living.

I think the Democrats, again, have an elegant presentation to make, which is, we're going to take the things that cost you a lot of money and have the government provide those to you.

And then those things won't cost you a lot of money. And we try to make an argument about economic theory that doesn't always land with the same poignance.

So midterms in a year, very tough. Yeah,

I think Hakeem Jeffries becomes the speaker.

I think that they will then become the problem is the candy becomes the poison for them because when they do this big elect us so that we can use all these tools to fight Trump, then once they get that power,

they're going to be pressed to continually use the silliest ones. And think about what they've already used.
They've already used like the attempted application of criminal law, that backfired.

They already used the impeachment process, that backfired.

And so what I think Democrats believe or what they've recently been conditioned to believe is that shutdowns are good for them under Trump, that that's good politics.

So my prediction is Democrats win the midterms. They execute a series of ransom-like shutdowns on Trump.
The country gets weary of that and probably elects J.D. Vance president in 2028.

What's the field look like in 2028?

On our side?

I mean, I'm just assuming that there will be, you know, Ted Cru I mean, Ted Cruz is running, I guess. Against you, apparently.

I've never seen that. It's odd to have someone running for president against

that the organizing principle of their campaign is to attack someone else who is not running for president. It's a novel

for Ted. But

what is that to you? Ted and Ron DeSantis both want to be president really bad, but they suffer from a likability problem and they're not really having a good time. I think so.

And when you run for president,

when you run for president, there's an element of it where the people have to feel like they're a a part of something fun. And that's something Trump understood.

That's something Charlie Kirk understood. And

for Ron and Ted, it is, you know, the campaign is sort of something they have to do in order to get the power that they seek. So what is that intent?

I mean, I could see, you know, Ron DeSantis has been really successful in a lot of ways. I would vote for him again for governor.
If he could run again for governor of Florida, I would too.

I would too.

Despite the fact he signed a hate speech law in Israel, which is like so offensive to me as an American, not because I'm against Israel, but we don't have hate speech laws in the United States.

And when we do, we don't sign them in foreign countries. So I, you know, whatever.
But you'd still vote for him again. I would.
For governor of Florida? Yeah. Oh, without thinking about it.
For sure.

I think he's been a great governor. You know, you could whatever, quibble about it, but generally, no, he's been great.
I totally agree. But Ted Cruz is not going to be president.

Obviously, nobody thinks that. I'm sure Mrs.
Cruz doesn't think that. She probably just wants to get out of the house.
Who knows what's going on?

But why doesn't Ted, who's famously, obviously the smartest person in America, why can't he see that?

Well, I think that, as we were discussing earlier, running for president is an itch that doesn't go away with one scratch.

I think that he believed he should have defeated Trump in the 2016 election, and he's toiling in the Senate until he gets a next bite at the apple.

I think on the other side, I would have believed before Kamala Harris that the Democrats had nominated their last straight white guy.

Yeah, I would just think so. Yeah, they're just not.
I mean, it is, you know, it is a movement that stands against straightness and white people. Is Gavin straight?

He seems to be pretty enthusiastic heterosexual

based on some of his personal conduct. Again, you never know.
It could be an omnivore. There's some of those.

Yeah, we're not the bedroom police. Oh, no, I don't even want to think about it.
Seriously. But Newsom has at least demonstrated power.
And I think that is what.

Democrats have lacked in this time in the wilderness in the Trump era, is that no one steps up and says, I'm ready to use power effectively.

And when Gavin Newsom stole those congressional seats with Prop 50 in California, it was an effective exercise of power. And I think voters may reward him for that.

You know, someone else in the Democratic Party who wants to be president told me that

it was actually Kamala Harris who has like reignited the prospects of Gavin Newsom. If they'd have just run Biden and lost, they would have never gone back to another straight white guy.

But rolling out Harris and the embarrassment that that was has people thinking, well, you know, maybe we don't want to try this again. No, that's, that's, I believe that.

Just knowing what they're like, they're just transactional. They just want power.
That's it. They don't have any beliefs.
They just want to be in charge. And I get it.
I find it terrifying,

but that's who they are. And I also think that when Gavin started going on conservative podcasts, That's when I was like, ooh, you are formidable.
I mean, he didn't, you know,

defend his own policies very effectively. It didn't matter.
He like went on other people's podcasts and took questions. Ballsy.
Well,

that in essence is an indictment of Harris because Harris could not have an extended intelligent conversation about anything.

And so just getting over the most basic of hurdles to be able to string sentences together was this great display of talent in the Democratic Party. And he'll say anything.
He just doesn't.

But look at what they've been through, right? Joe Biden never did extended discussions. Harris never did extended discussions.

So he was giving the base at least some viewpoint into his thinking on things. So you think Gavin will be the nominee?

Right now, I would say so. I think that AOC is going to make a compelling run, and I think she will be formidable as well.

And she do? If Bernie really does the handoff.

You and I, Bernie has this kind of goofy professor persona, but in reality, Bernie's like a deeply selfish person. He's selfish.
And a coward. He's a total coward.

And he believes he is the leader of the Democratic Party. Does he really? Well, but he's won every argument in it.
Maybe he is the leader of the Democratic Party.

If you look on policy, Bernie has won the argument on this shift towards socialism. But

the party structurally did things twice to stop him from becoming the nominee. They stole the election from him twice.
Yeah. And he sat back and is like, oh, I've been kind of a sexist.
I'm sorry.

I mean, he's such a fucking coward. I can't deal with it.
If he was real, at least I would respect it. AOC, same thing.

Yeah, AOC is a very different person today than when she got to Congress.

Totally corrupted. Co-opted.

Completely. Oh, the Gaza War is fine.
It's like, what?

When we were ousting McCarthy, she came up to me and was like, you know, I really respect this because I'll be honest, we don't have the guts to do this on our side. What's she like?

Before January 6th, she was incredibly chummy with Republicans in Congress, would regularly come over to our side, sit down, hang out, talk about her day.

Did you ever date her? I did not. No.
Did you try? No. And not my cup of tea, but she,

after January 6th, like treated us all like, you know, we had horns or something.

So she gave this kind of famous statement after January 6th and said, you know, as a trauma survivor, I was traumatized. I was almost killed that day.

Do you think, was that real? No, but it is reflective of the performance art of Congress. And it was just bad performance art.

But how could you get points from anyone for being like, yeah, I'm a terrified little girl?

Because on I find that contemptible. No, you can't be in charge of anything if you're a terrified little girl.
Sorry. But we are a society that is increasingly built on grievance identity.

You are

the grievance that you can access, right? And so if you are

a woman, that can be a source of grievance. If you're a minority, and then you have people who are just odd and say, well, maybe if I'm trans, then that can be this source of grievance.

And then you have a bunch of men, white men looking around saying, well, I guess I'll be a drug addict because then like that can be my source of grievance. And, you know,

she was leaning into that. She wanted to show that she had been aggrieved by this act and should be owed some unique empathy.
But she revealed that she's afraid, that she's a coward.

Like, how is that a...

The only thing people respect on a gut level is strength and courage. That's it.
So I just don't, I don't get like what's the insincerity. I mean, yeah, strength, courage, and sincere violence.

And it arose from strength and courage. I'm brave enough to tell you what I really think.
Yeah, and I got to a point where

I was confident enough with my district where I could say the things I believed that I knew they didn't because even if they disagreed with me on a subject,

they knew I came to that view sincerely, that I wasn't holding marijuana legalization, is something you and I disagree on.

I disagreed with a majority of my constituents on that point. I authored Florida's marijuana law.
I support President Trump rescheduling marijuana. And

when people at my First Baptist Church in Fort Walton Beach, Florida came up to me to say they really disagreed with me on that, they did not vote against me as a consequence because they knew that these were views that I sincerely hold.

Well,

I could be one of those congregants

if I were a Baptist in the Baptist church, because because I agree with that. You know, I don't expect people to agree with all of my eccentric views or my heartfelt views.
It's okay.

We're different people, but I can't deal with falseness at all. Trevor Burrus, Jr.:

And that, I think, was the magic of Trump.

And I think that's a magic that he knows he needs to reignite on the campaign trail going into these midterms, the connection directly with the American voter that

no matter who you are, if you're the president and behind the resolute desk and in the rose garden, it's a different experience than being out on the trail in Lancaster, Pennsylvania.

Trevor Burrus, Jr.: So what's AOC's lane? Is it the... The Bernie lane.

Okay, but the Bernie lane was an economic lane, which I always had respect for. I didn't agree with all of it, but we've got too many billionaires and not a big enough middle class.
That's true.

That's factually true. And anyone who says it, I will agree with.
And he used to say that. And the open borders lane.
I mean, totally. Well, they're two are related.

I mean, we have always been able to get a lot of business

at open borders. They weren't always.
I mean, Bernie, at one point, as part of his pro-American worker agenda, was actually for restricted immigration.

No, but no, no, I'm saying they're related in that. But it's the AOC corollary.
It's to take the Bernie social issue, like economic socialism and lash it to unchecked borders.

Aaron Ross Powell, if you care about

the lopsided economy where all the wealth is concentrated in too few hands and the country is becoming unstable as a result, it's becoming pre-chov as Venezuela.

We're going to get a revolution if this continues. I wrote a book about this.

If you care about that, you have to ask, how did that happen?

And the main way it happened was by unchecked immigration, which devalued labor that's people have less economic power because there are more people willing to work for less it's really simple it's why organized labor always supported immigration restrictions they're the ones who got them in 1924 they closed the borders for that reason and bernie was from that tradition and i always respected it and then he became this kind of

you know neoliberal hybrid where he's like oh we got to fight russia and it's racist to be against borders and like what

you know what i mean we have to send money to israel what like so i don't think that's a real lane i don't think it's sustainable lane do you it it is a sufficient cohort of voters to virtue signal kind of a reignition of bernie's economic policies alongside like that she will stand up and say no more money for israel no more money for ice and universal basic income for americans and open borders

that will be the core of the case open borders with universal basic income and print more by the way like, I mean, did you see what we just did in the economy in this past week?

We are printing money to buy our own debt right now. The self-licking ice cream cone.
The electric windmill.

I know.

Right.

How much of it is real when we're printing money to buy our own debt? Yeah. And the explosion of personal wealth among people I know is just unbelievable.

Not me, but I at all. but I, all of a sudden you know people who are just like,

you know, worth hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. Whereas I never, and I grew up in rich people world, I never really knew anyone with hundreds and hundreds of millions.

One in every 10 Americans is a millionaire now.

Actually? Yeah.

You're including assets. Yeah.
Yeah. Well, homeowners are millionaires now.

So well, and that, you know, if you talk about the revolution coming, I mean, housing is as likely to be a part of that as anything else because the way housing is indexed to what people make and what they can afford is insane in this country.

Yeah, and I'm totally opposed to revolutions. However, if there was ever a reason to have one, it's that.

That's a real grievance. I think that's totally.
Isn't it kind of what all revolutions are about? Like, where am I going to live? What's going to be? Yeah. And how do my kids have kids?

You know, how does this continue? How do my genes thrive when I'm gone? I mean, yeah.

Have you noticed this trend online where all these lonely women in their 30s are making car selfie videos about their personal anguish that they can't find men?

I posted posted one recently, got millions of views. And

I feel sad for these women.

My wife has so many friends who are beautiful, accomplished, wonderful people, but they cannot find men. They cannot find men to marry them.
And they start to feel the clock ticking. And

it's really a lonely world out there.

Well, I think it's important to identify how we got here. And certain bad ideas played a huge role, feminism, which is like just a total lie on every level.

But also, the way the economy is structured, where businesses decided to be a good idea to bring women into the workforce, a better idea than, say, like supporting families or allowing people to have children, like was more important to have female workers than it was to have American families.

This is a constant discussion we have on my One American News program. It's like, can you have both? Because I do see women who excel in

a woman can have both, sure, who build businesses who have great ideas and are the center of their family.

family well i certainly know a lot of women in the workplace who are amazing and if women left the workforce you know my business would fall apart yeah i mean and they're the best and anyone who's an employer i'm a small bore employer will tell you female employees man they're there's some jobs type a women well that's crushing that is a hundred percent rate of course and uh and they're also like just the greatest people to work with if you're a man because there's no competition they're so nice they're always nice i've i've i'm 56.

I've never had a dispute with a woman at work ever, not one. I've seen them mistreat each other in a way that North Koreans could learn from.
It's like truly cruel the way they behave to each other.

But if you're a male employer having female employees, it is 100% upside. They will never stop thinking about their job.
They will never stop being nice to you. They're great at their job.

Certain jobs, they're the only ones who can do it because they do. But do you think men are out there looking for jobless women?

Because I certainly wasn't when I was like, you know, single and trying to find a wife. I was not out there like

seeking someone who had nothing else going on but to serve me in a marriage. I think it's people's passions and women will choose their family if given their choice.
And some won't.

I mean, there's anomalies in every cohort. But what do you say to the ones who are like, I want to make that choice?

There are millions of women out there that are like, please present me the guy who isn't spending all of his day playing Fortnite and hanging out at the tattoo party.

Well, look, the first thing to know is men and women need each other. They can't exist separately or they're destroyed.
They destroy themselves 100%.

They fit together like puzzle pieces and they can't live alone.

Again, there are exceptions to all of these rules, but overpopulations, these are hard and fast rules that have existed since Adam and Eve. So it's just a fact.

And if you ignore that fact, you'll be destroyed. And we are because we've ignored it.

Most women, if given the choice between going to work at JP Morgan or staying home and raising their small children, will, of course, choose staying home and raising their small children.

If they're given the choice, they're not given the choice because feminism, total fucking lie. There are no choices.
Get to work.

Well, oftentimes it's people's economic conditions that take the choice away. If you're not sure what they're saying, that's what I'm saying.

You're putting on $130,000 in student loans because you were told that you had this great

future. They don't have a choice.
That's why they do it. And it's a Hobson's choice.
But it's not marital bondage as much as it's economic bondage to debt. Marriage isn't bondage for women.

Marriage family is the context in which women women have the most power women have no power outside of their relationships women are relational so if you want to empower women power in business they can have wealth they can have money that's not power that's not power

who has more power over you your employee or your mom your employee or your wife your employee or your your employer or your daughter real power is the power to influence other people and women outside the family have very little within the family they have huge power there's no man almost all of it almost all of it there's no man who ignores his wife there's no son who ignores his mother there's no father who ignores his daughter and so i mean there may be but they're they're freaks the average man is influenced by women in the family more than any other place So if you want to empower women, put them at the center of a family.

If you want to disempower them, put them at the center of Citibank. It's super simple.
And liars and dumb people, like fucking feminists, like, oh, real power comes from money and job title.

And it's like, that's a lie. And anyone who believes that is

an idiot. But they think it's their power to get a man.
Like, there was this theory that the way you prepare yourself to get the husband you want is to showcase like your LinkedIn resume.

And you're... Who told them that?

You don't think there are a lot of women who are going to watch this program that may have tuned out by now

to say and say, yeah, like, I actually thought if I had the big job and had the house that a man would want to be. Are you being serious?

I mean, look, I shouldn't be surprised if people believe dumb things because look around,

but that's the dumbest of all things.

Imagine believing that and now being caught. How much social shyness do we need?

First of all, we don't need any because we just know our lived experiences, but there's a lot of study on this, if you're interested. I happen to be.

Women do not want to marry men who make less than they do, period. In any society in which that becomes the case,

you find marriage dropping off a cliff. That's what happened to black America.
Black people used to be married like everybody else. Then black women started making more than black black men.

The marriage rate declined. Rural America, rural whites, I live in a place like this.
The women on average make more than the men because they work at the hospitals and the schools.

The men have only seasonal work. Guess what? No marriage.
So if you want to discourage marriage,

set up a system where the women make more, which is a system that we have. That's why people don't get married because women make more.
And the women are making the decisions.

They may want to sleep with him. They may want to have his babies.
They don't want to marry him. It's just a fact.
Ask them.

Ask a woman, do you want to marry a man who's shorter than you or makes less than than you? And the answer is no.

But nobody asks women because nobody cares because the idea is to destroy the country, its people, and its most basic structure of the family.

So it's just like, we're going to do this in your name and tell you what you want, but they don't want that.

And if you ask, ask 15 women, do you want to marry a man who's shorter than you or makes less than you? No, I've asked. And yeah, you're right.
It's, I'm, I'm so lonely. I need to find someone.

I have so much love to give. I've built a great life.
I want to share it with someone. And then it's like, okay, well, a woman says that? No, no, women say this.

And then I say, well, like, are you cool? It's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Are you cool with a guy who makes less than 100 grand? Well, you know, that shows that he doesn't have ambition.

Oh, what about someone who's a little shorter? Well, I want to feel, you know, I want to feel feminine. And if someone's shorter, that I don't think I'll be able to.

Things are more fucked up than I realize. If people actually believe that, what? Look, a man's job is to protect and provide.

Period. Those are his jobs.
Protect and provide. Period.

Yeah, but when that class of men is shrinking because testosterone is falling, because of the war on masculinity that we've endured for the last 40 years.

When that resource isn't available, then women start to say, well, I've got to put a roof over my own head. I've got to protect and provide for myself.

And there are a lot of them who would say, where is my protector and provider? I get it. I'm not attacking women.
I'm just at all. I feel so, I've got three daughters.
I feel so sorry for women.

I do. And I, as a man, I always blame the man first.
Always, 100%. It's your job.
You're the man. Your wife's unhappy.
Whose fault is that? Yours? It is. Kids are out of the way.

It is the job of a husband to keep your your wife. 100%.
That's your job. Yes.

I literally couldn't agree more. And if she's a drunk or something, it's not going to work.
It's out of your control.

But in a normal marriage with two sober people who are kind of trying, it is up to you. By the way, her happiness is not contingent on yours.
Your happiness is contingent on hers.

That's the great equalizer designed by God. to keep balance in a relationship.
I don't know a single man who's truly happy whose wife hates him. Of course.
I don't know one.

And the reason our system, our biology is set up that that way is because men are physically dominant. So you could just beat up your wife and rape her and make her do whatever you wanted.

It sounds terrible. Exactly.
It sounds terrible. Exactly.
That's exactly the point. It sounds terrible.
Men don't want that.

They want a woman to be sexually attracted to them, to be happy, to have real orgasms, to be, they want it to be genuine, and that's the equalizer. You're totally focused on your wife's happiness.

That keeps it equal. That gives her power.
That's where her power comes from.

How do we fix it?

By letting people observe the laws of nature, which they ignore at their peril. You can't ignore the laws of nature around you or you get killed.

Well, nature is sending us the message when we see the declining birth rate, when we see the societal impact.

Nature is sending us the message that this isn't working. Yeah, and you're not allowed, you're like considered some sort of weird religious freak when you're like,

I don't know, unnatural sex acts gives rise to disease.

People are like, shut up, shut up.

Well, they do. I mean, I don't know.
Have you? I've been alive for 56 years. I've watched this.
That's just a fact. I'm not saying I want it to be that way.
I'm not in charge of nature, actually.

And I'm not in charge of human nature above all. None of us is.

Do you really know women who think if they get a big salary in a house, some guy will want to marry them? Oh, yeah. Would you want to?

There are many who will watch this discussion and say, I am that. I am perfectly suited for marriage.
I have everything. I've done everything society has asked of me.
I got an advanced degree.

I got a six-figure job. My LinkedIn is fire.
I do five spinning classes a week. I look good.
And

every man that I find either is on the dating apps and they have so much optionality that there's not really an incentive to anchor your life with someone or they're losers.

And they can be losers who've inherited money and

just have no desire to build something beyond that.

I mean, I'm sorry to sound like a liberal. I do blame society.
I blame what people are taught and,

you know, the lies that they get through propaganda

for convincing them that something so obviously absurd could be true. I mean, of course, men find that emasculating, unappealing.

No man wants to marry a woman with her own house and a higher income than him. No way.
And she doesn't want to marry him. You know, if

you had marriage as this thing that gave people financial security, right? And people, you know, 40s and 50s, people were getting married. And then you're bound to someone economically

and built a life together. You got married in your 20s and did your thing.

And then when we did no-fault divorce, then marriage really became a contract, like more, more than anything else.

And just like any other contract, when you're out of the contract, there are certain obligations that you still have to fill financially and otherwise.

And then, you know, the obvious next step is, well, if marriage is a contract, like kind of so is dating in a weird way.

Like what you will provide and what I'll provide.

And if, you know, at the end of it, you know, there are women who say, like, yeah, if I'm going to spend my time to go on a date, I want you to pay for it.

I think that's where we are. And I don't mind.
Like, when I hear women say that they go out and the guy wants to split the check, to me, there's nothing...

There's nothing chivalrous or interesting about that. I think that...
Well, it's awful.

Look, again, men and women need each other. They compliment each other.
Any attempts. We tame each other.
Men.

Men are necessary to tame women, and women must tame men a hundred percent and without each other they become just industrial components who can be manipulated by global capital or whatever whatever your force you're afraid of the only real protection is your family and that includes the one not just you were born into but the one that you start yourself that's your bulwark that's your fortress and if people are making it impossible for you to build that fortress like i respect the whole man it's not just like what you say you believe it's how do you live if i had a camera in your house, would do your kids respect you?

Does your wife respect you? If not, why would I respect you? I feel that. Like, do you think that the notion of the barren life is what motivates people like Lindsey Graham to go to?

100%.

100%. Like a normal person goes home.
You go home.

I mean, I don't know if you and I are normal, but just like a conventional person goes home and it's like, I've got all kinds of views, but like continuity matters to me because I've got descendants.

If you have no descendants, it like ends with you and you don't believe. Clearly, these people, no, these people believe in God.
So it's like, I don't know.

I got 15, 20 years, five, three years, whatever I have, we don't know.

And I, it doesn't matter what happens after that. Ooh, that's scary.
That's day trading with the world, right? With your life. No, but with everyone else's life.

You think, why would Lindsey Graham care? He's 70 years old. He's not, he has no kids.
Like, why does it matter if there's a nuclear war? I mean, he's looking just at, he's not the back nine.

It's like the back three at this point. Like, his options are like heart disease cancer and Alzheimer's that's it there's no tomorrow

sad don't you think

I do think I mean you know having having children vests you in the future in a way that not having children just doesn't I mean hasn't it changed your attitudes of course of course and and you know the way you care about what comes after you shifts dramatically well it was like maybe 10 years ago some smart friend of mine sent me this list of European leaders I'm interested in Europe.

So

I felt like I knew a lot. I didn't know that none of them had kids.

And I remember thinking, that's not, first of all, you can't say anything about that because you want to seem like you're attacking people without kids, which I'm not. I'm feeling sorry for them.

I'm attacking the idea of childless leadership. You can't have leaders with no kids because

they're not thinking long-term because why would they? And look what happened to Europe. And the Harris campaign.
And the Harris campaign. Yeah.

Whatever, what's going to happen to her? She's running again. You haven't seen the news? She's assembling her team.

For what? President. Yeah.
Come on now.

As we've said, it's an ambition that resurfaces often in one way. So what, I mean, you know a lot more about this than I, but like, let's say you decide you're going to run for president.

How,

how does your party exert influence on you to like stop. That's such a bad idea.
You would think someone in the Democratic Party would be like, be able to say no.

I don't know.

Again, who's like, you assume the Obamas are in charge of that party, so potentially they could move her to another path. But they'll have a crowded field.

It may be the case that having ancillary people around soaking up votes is good for the ultimate objective. I can't imagine the Obamas in the Gavin Newsom world would mix well.

That's not really the same vein of the Democratic Party. Do you know anyone who's friends with her or knows her well? Harris? No, I don't think I do.

That's kind of strange, considering you know know everybody.

I know a lot of people, but I can't say that there was a single member of Congress I ever interacted with that could talk about any

private moment or

in-depth conversation they'd ever had with Kamala Harris.

So there was really no constituency for her. Like it wasn't.
I mean, that was...

Yeah, I think that Democrats believed that there is this vast part of the population whose dream candidate is some combination of Michelle Obama and Oprah, and like the closest they could get was like bargain basement Kamala Harris to go and attempt to achieve that archetype, and it just didn't work out.

Aaron Powell, so it was all about race and gender.

I think that

that was a huge part of it. And we saw the limits of playing into those

impulses

with Harris. Aaron Ross Powell, last question.
Where do you think the country goes in the next, say, three years?

Like, what are the big trends? No, what are the big trends?

Obviously, you know, we're going to see automation in the next three years in a level that you and I have never seen in our lives. You really believe we'll see that in the next three years? I do.

I believe that automation in transportation, in agriculture, in manufacturing will be the new dominant force in our lives. And I don't think that's going to be entirely good.

I think that it's inevitable.

Because the capabilities, when you think automation will be a dominant force in our lives in three years. Yes.
I think that like I will tell my grandkids what it was like to order food from a person.

That will go the way of the pay phone.

There are like seven million American men who make their living driving today in one form or another. Those jobs are gone in the next half decade.

Where do those people go?

I think that's when you start to see these calls for a universal basic income

because we will say that there's such wealth being created on a lot of these tech platforms that doesn't get shared broadly. And I worry that

that draw politically is

something that will zap the motivation of the country in a bad way.

Just look at this healthcare debate that's happening right now as a microcosm of this trend.

Republicans are trying to cobble together something that they think is a free market approach to healthcare, as if anything in healthcare is a free market.

And Democrats are just saying, we're going to give you free stuff for longer.

And I think that Republicans in swing districts have seen that and said, we can't beat that. So we have to have our own version of we'll give you free stuff longer.
And you may see these

Obamacare credits extended via a discharge petition that does just that. And that brings the right in America in line with where the right has moved in Europe, which is toward

economic liberalism, which I'm not for.

Aaron Powell, I think you'll see what also has happened in Europe where the richest people, the Bill Ackmans, the bottom feeders like Bill Ackman, non-productive elements of the economy who've just like made billions of dollars shorting stocks, those people are totally fine.

They offshore their money. They find ways around tax compliance.
But it's the level down.

It's the 65-year-old Florida retirees who own some insurance company in Indiana. They spent their whole life building it.
They sold it for $5 million.

Exactly. Exactly right.
Exactly. They have just enough money.
Exactly right.

To live on a golf course outside Sarasota, love Ron DeSantis, love Trump, and those people are going to see everything stolen from them.

And the method of theft will be the devaluation of their existing assets. It will be the deep, that's it, especially real estate.
I totally agree with that. And

I think in taxation.

Just like the,

and I love Steve Bannon, so I don't want

our last discussion to come across as a criticism of Steve, but he's going to run for president

on just a straight Elizabeth Warren wealth tax economic agenda.

Actually? Yeah, he's going to run for president and say, take the money from those people who have way too much of it, the Bill Ackmans of the world, and I want to give it to you.

I wonder if that has that ever, it always seems like those people flee the country. I mean, Miami is filled,

people who fled other countries. Exactly.
That's exactly right. And they live in splendor, not attacking them, but like they didn't give up their money.
They just left. And then the middle class,

upper middle class, especially just get hammered. And that is the core of your society, right?

It won't last that way. And, you know, Trump's elections have been, I think, a reaction to that broader trend we've experienced for decades.
And

what I hope doesn't happen is that it just becomes a policy race to the bottom to try to

throw insufficient solutions at that. Things like, well, we'll just give them free houses.
We'll just give them free health care. The robots will just build the houses in national parks.
Right, right.

Wouldn't that be awful?

Matt Gates, thank you for spending all this time. It's always good to see you, Matt.
And I'm just glad that you survived everything and you're thriving. Likewise.
Are you running for president?

No, not of this country. Okay.

Thank you. Thank you.

Well, some Americans have become cut off from the things that once kept us grounded, our land, the skills that tied our families to nature. Soldier's getting his next spot.

And to remind us, we made a new six-part series, American Game, Tales from the Wild. We follow the sportsmen who are keeping these ancient traditions alive.

We follow a former Navy SEAL into the mountains of Texas. Donald Trump Jr.
across the ridges of Lanai. That's what we call from going from zero to hero.

And wander with me through the quiet woods of Maine. I have just three dog commands.
And then as I direct the dogs, find the bird. Find the bird.

And then dead bird, obviously, which I don't use as much as I'd like to.

We cast for steelhead on the Deschutes River in Oregon. I'm the first one I've caught in a while.
Track mule deer in the Utah high country.

Spearfish in the waters off Montauk, chasing striped bass and bluefin tuna. See you on the other side.
It's called American Game Tales from the Wild outdoor series. Watch it at tuckercarlson.com.