Vivek Ramaswamy: Trump’s Sweeping Victory, & What It Means for the Future of Government Bureaucracy

So what it is. now, little over 24 hours. after Donald Trump won the majority. of the popular vote, about half the. Latino vote, overwhelming majority of the. Electoral College, just of all three branches. of government. Amazing. Yeah. Both houses of the Congress and the. executive branch. How did that happen? I think it happened because. it was a rejection of what. the modern left has put on offer, which in some ways was a great favor.

to the rise of this country. You need something to actually. provoke a rebellion. like the one that we had. That's right. I also think that it. is a feature of the leader who. actually led this entire movement. It was very personal to Donald. Trump, too. Yes. And I think that's one of the things. I've appreciated is. that I wrote this like the morning. after the election and after and. after. And. it just felt right to me. He's not actually the thing that. I've learned as I've gotten to know. him over the last year much better. is he's not an ideologue.

or a policy wonk, and he doesn't. pretend to be one. Right. But he is a badass, actually. And I think that definitely a. badass. The nation needs a badass. as its commander in chief right now.

And democracy. kind of works, actually, in the end, Like the people really knew. what they needed and they showed. up in droves to put the. right person in office. And so I just think it is kind of. one of these rare, inspiring moments. in history where. the people knew what they wanted. They would not be shaken from their. will. He would not be shaken from his. will. And I loved being in Mar-A-Lago. that night, where it was just kind. of interesting where everybody. else's, you know, myself to included.

is just like really joyous about. what's happening. And I'm sitting next to Donald Trump. and he sit there and he's just, yep, this is exactly how it was supposed. to be. Wait till it comes in. All right. Now we're going to the. convention center. And this is where I was destined to. be and what I was put here to do. And I think the people of this. country right now want somebody. who has that level of. self-confidence and conviction to. bring that back for the country. And so I just think it was a kind of. a beautiful moment of democracy. working. It goes beyond policies, just like. the persona of the country is.

actually what we recovered. Yeah. I mean, I've spent eight years. watching Republicans kiss. Donald Trump's ass in public, and. I'm always feel a little nauseous. I like I love Trump just personally. because I know him well, but I hate. hearing people say it's all. fake. It is. It's performance now. I just say ever since he got shot. up, I just I. realized I'm not only do I really. like Trump and find him amusing. and I really respect Trump and. I mean that when I'm saying it. I'm not. I'm no reason to kiss his ass.

Yeah. And I mean that. And I, I felt that. night. I think actually for me, that's been. a bit of a journey as well. is that I didn't know him as well as. you know him anyway. But at this. point in time, yeah, he's the right. guy to lead the country. Exactly. He's going to go through. phases of taking. Maybe I'm being too honest, but, you. know, taking Trump seriously. Trump is eccentric. I mean, that's. just a fact. And, you know, he. got elected in 16. Not accidentally. There are reasons he got elected, but he's said to himself many times.

and it's true. I was there. He did not expect to win. And it was kind of this, you. know, on the road with the Grateful. Dead kind of thing, you know, it's. was shambolic, you know what I mean? This did not feel that way at all. It felt purposeful. It felt like he was. living out his destiny and the. nation's destiny. It felt very heavy. That's hope for the night. It was just like he's like there's. like a conviction that this is my. destiny. This is the nation's. destiny. And America has this great. tradition, by the way. We believe in. our own manifest destiny. Yes, it is. Like we had no reason to.

believe it. We have no you know, basically we have no logic behind. it. It's just that we know that. we're born to be the greatest. nation. That sets an example for. everybody else of what's possible. for human capacity. Yes, this is the country that does. it. And we had no reason to believe. that other than the fact that we do. And I think that that's the kind of. leader we need right now to bring. that back. And that's Donald Trump. as a person. So in some ways, Trump. story is America's story. Trump's comeback is now hopefully. America's comeback. And I actually actually just think. it's going to play out that way in. the next couple of years. The National spirit's going to be. back. You'll see it in the composition of.

the electorate. By the way, a lot of. young people, that was probably the. biggest demographic shift, I guess, just came in a tidal wave of force, which I was particularly passionate. about seeing this time. Around, too. I totally. Agree. And and you know, I think. it's just this moment where we're. going through. A great kind of spiritual. and I mean spirit in the religious. sense here, in the civic sense, but. a spiritual revival. of American identity. Clearly that was that was the. pinnacle of what we saw on Tuesday. night. There was a moment, I think right.

around the time he was shot and. Ellen endorsed him within moments. Yes. I think as it was looking back, you know, a pivot point and the. whole thing. But where I think or. I myself felt this way, like, why are we on the defensive? People who vote for Donald Trump, Why are we embarrassed? There was this very successful. effort to make people feel ashamed. for supporting Trump. And it worked for, I mean, eight. years anyway. And then in one moment, it just. evaporated. And you saw like 22. year old sorority girls.

That's right. You know, with Trump hats and. you're like, wait a second. No one's embarrassed about. supporting Trump anymore. They're wearing a Trump ad in. midtown Manhattan. Totally. Who would do that? Nobody would have done that three. years ago. I think I think it's a beautiful. thing for the country. I mean, it. started a little bit with you saw it. in the business elite community. I mean, Ellen was endorsement was. obviously huge. But I think this has been. percolating for a little while. I was really probably the thing I. was most gratified by. after the election is the next. morning the number of either calls. or messages I got from.

real serious business leaders, billionaires and different domains. or whatever. And they didn't have to do this, but. a few of them shared with me. Look, I think you were an important. part of giving me the permission. to support Donald Trump and. give me the permission to at least. stand up against whatever left wing. orthodoxy in a way that they. couldn't have. And I think a lot of other people. played important roles in that as. well. I mean, he played the biggest. role in giving people that. permission. No, but you're from exactly that. world. And like, just to be super. blunt, you're front you have the. credentials that mark. a member of that class.

Yeah. And which which matter to some. people and terms of giving them the. Well it's our whole system is based. on them. Yeah. Right. And so and. JD to some extent is like this David. Sax. Sure. And you want above all, but you're. definitely in that world. And you know, they made. a concerted effort to make certain. that people like you would never. admit to liking Trump. That's right. And even is. liking Trump and standing for. a rejection of the left wing. orthodoxy. The last, you know, 4 or 5 years that reached a fever.

pitch and peak. So I did step down from my job. You know, I first met after I. stepped down from my job as a. biotech CEO. And, you know, I wrote my first. book. For me, that was actually kind. of cathartic. And then I just wanted to other. people to be able to experience that. as well, to be able to, like spread. the possibility of what it feels to. actually speak your mind in the. open. It's like it's like a. liberating experience to get a deep. personal sense of liberating. experience and actually just wanted. more people to be able to experience. that. What's the point of having $1.

billion if you can even express your. opinion in public? Agree. But now I think that that's mostly. it's like actually mostly behind us. Can I just push a little bit on that. point, though? I mean, you and I talked a lot. before you ran for president. And I. remember thinking, you know, most people imagine that if you make. a lot of money, you made a lot of. money young. And that gives you the freedom to. say whatever you want. But of course, the opposite turns. out to be it's totally. The opposite. Right? So the more you have, there's. no F-you money. That's right. Only a few poverty.

The richer you get, the more vested. you are in the current system, the. more you have to lose. And so I did think you were very. unusual in that you made all this. money young and you're like, Yeah, I'm kind of happy to. first of all, stop making money for. a while. You didn't seem addicted to. it. Now they'll get addicted to it. Now you know what I mean? She spent it. Some of it, right? You blew a lot of it. But yeah, there was something great. about that. But why did. why were you different from, like, everyone else? You went to Yale Law. School with, you know, JD.

All of her classmates, you know? Yeah. Here's just the two of us. I can tell you there's some I. wouldn't even I won't even tell you. about the email chains where they. still have the class email list. There's a lot of funny stuff that. goes on. They've lost their minds. over myself. Really? Yeah. Yeah. It's actually. It's actually kind of. hilarious. You guys were in the same class. Yeah, we're in the same class. Me or JD were all classmates, and. my wife was med school at the same. time. So we were all. We were all friendly. Where was she? In med school. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Which is really funny. You all misuse your credentials.

Exactly. The bestowed them. So I have to ask you to pursue. You're on the Yale Law School, which, for those who don't follow. the most prestigious law. school in the States, I think it's. fair to say, but also probably the. most insane in some ways. Yeah, I think all of the things are. fair. Yeah. So what's the what's the email. chain? So each class just has their. own has their own like kind of like. listserv where they, where they'll. stay in touch and after. the Springfield stuff, right? So people were going people were. going totally nuts and eating. Eating the cats. Yeah. Yeah. Or you needed the pets,

right? So. So they were going. totally nuts. And then there was this like long. thread of what. charity people were going to give to. in Springfield town they otherwise. would never visit. Never have heard. of. Never have given a second care. to to say, okay, here's what we're. actually going to do to help this. community. And they started to have. everyone piling in. Well, I'm going to make my donation. and I'm going to make my donation. here. And it was it was so. nauseam, but there was actually a. very keen effort to get The New York. Times to report on it. So The New York Times did report. Add on that, of course, New York. Times has their own agenda in wind.

reporting because it's. Designed to save money. Now to to to to particular causes. in Springfield to virtue signal. the fact that we're not on the. J.D. Vance Donald Trump side. of this. And as Yale Law School, as. fellow Yale Law School alums who. came from that same class, we're. going to actually make a concerted. donation to send a different signal. that we're on the side. But you and J.D. are actually from Ohio. Yeah. Actually, yeah. Yeah. Actually, I actually spent a lot of. my youth in Springfield, actually. No, I actually know a lot about. this. I'm tempted to pull up the. email that I. That I sent.

So I sent an email to the group. I never I haven't commented on this. list. Serve in like five years. or ten years, probably. I haven't posted a single thing, but. I got kind of entertained myself. watching this stuff from time to. time. So I actually. also went to Springfield myself, actually. So this was we went back. So when all this was playing out, I. said, I can only go to Springfield. and check this out. I have a lot of family that's lived. there in the past. I have some. family there who lives there now. I spent a lot of my youth there. There's this place. There's a there's a suburb, a place. that I used to go to like, you know, when I used to play tennis at.

Wittenberg every summer, which is. the university in Springfield. So I've spent a lot of time there. growing up. So I live like 50. minutes from there right now in. Columbus. I grew up in Cincinnati. I live in Columbus. Springfield's literally on the way, right in between. Like, let me just go check it out. So I just was having dinner with my. wife and a couple of friends in. Columbus. I just put out a tweet. I said, I'm going to Springfield. I want to see what's happening, see. for myself. And no plan for like an event or. anything like that. But some guy. then replies and says, We have an. event space that can hold three and. 75 people.

We show up in Springfield. This is what, like a month or month. or two ago when all this played out. and, you know, just 3 in 75 people, it could hold 2000 people show up, but they couldn't hold 2000. So the rest were lined up outside. and people just wanted to be heard. Did I see evidence of cats and dogs. barking? I didn't see evidence of. that. What I did see evidence of was. a woman being chased out of a store. with a machete, her dog, by by. an illegal immigrant who was in this. country, which didn't get reported. on by the news at all, but was a. function of a woman who actually. came and told that story of her. daughter, who was only being chased. with a machete out of a grocery. store called the police.

And the police didn't show up for. hours and they didn't follow up with. an investigation either. So that people deserved to. Hear police did nothing. That's what she said. And I have. every reason to believe her. And so anyway, against. that backdrop, I also wanted to do. something positive for the. community. Having having shown up in. Springfield, there's obviously a. strain on local resources. So I wanted to make a donation. And as you said, I've lived the. American dream. I wanted to make a. $100,000 donation, right? And so to help that for for my. family, that's an easy thing we were. able to do to help a local. community. Where's the strain?

So if I were the local strain points. are access to local primary care. and we tried to make. a donation in conjunction with my. trip, but the organization. did not want to accept the donation. that our family was about to give. So they've talked about Springfield. We need help. We need all the people who can to. help support the community. And yet here is somebody who is. living in Ohio, has lived the. American dream. I want to actually. use a small portion of what this. country has given us to help a. community. That's important to me in. the area of health care where there.

were a lot of strained resources, in. part because of the large numbers. of people who are, you know, who are who've been, you know, moved. to that community. And I didn't even have the ability. to help the community that way. Why? Well, they didn't they didn't. provide a great explanation. They turned down 100 grand. donations. Yeah. Yeah. Well, what who would do that? I mean, an administrator, I suppose. But because of. Politics. I can only. I can only. I can only assume. Right? I can. I would say I heavily doubt.

that if I were, you know, Sherrod Brown or something. like that, that they would have. turned down a similar donation. in a time of need. So anyway, I talked about this when. I visited Springfield, but afterwards. I just I told people that. I was going to help support. Springfield. So I decided to I. wanted to follow through on that. So we found a couple of other. charitable causes to donate. to, you know, in totaling $100,000. to help Springfield. And one of them was a crisis. pregnancy center. I'm pro-life and we wanted to at. least to help people get,

you know, strains on the system. It's a different area of health care. where we thought there were strains. on the system. Actually surveyed a lot of people in. Ohio and in Springfield privately. who I knew where it could have an. impact. And they gave us they. gave us this as a resource. So anyway, to bring us back to the. original story, we have. this law school listserv. where they've made a donation to. I think it was like it was it was a. left leaning group that had a. lot of a lot of stuff on their front. page. I can't tell you which exactly. one it was.

I'll plastered all over wherever it. needs to be. And they made the. donation. They got a bunch of people. to sign on and every time somebody. donated, they would they would reply. all and say, I have also donated. And there was a certain pride and. sanctimony in that they got The New. York Times to report on it. They got MSNBC to pick it up. So there's a lot of media around. that's. Crazy. Comparatively, not quite as much. money being raised even. But that's that's beside the point. And so I'm on this list having to. sort of see my, you. know, inbox. Repeatedly flirted with every other. time. So many made a donation.

So I just sent a note because maybe. there's people who have a different. point of view from supporting. exactly the cause they put up. So I included a link saying, you know, for those who want to. support Springfield, here are some. other alternative causes that you. might wish to support. My family and I were pleased to. support the community. They lost it with respect to a. crisis pregnancy. They didn't actually they didn't. they didn't like it. What did they say? You know, I think they they. they called it a. they they saw it as that. They saw it as a insult.

Actually, they felt personally. insulted that I was. going to exploit. their. good feeling about Springfield to. the attention they wanted to draw by. supporting it, by offering a very. different kind, of course. But a beautiful thing happened. because this goes to the same trend. you and I were talking about. There were actually a lot of my. classmates who I know lean left of. center, who then came out and were. just like, Well, have you ever. considered the fact that we may also. have classmates who have a different. point of view on these questions? And you may not just want to be. donating to one particular side of. this cause, and there was just a.

debate amongst them. So I didn't I. didn't really get further involved. in this. I rarely post on that list. That was just a two liner that I had. to share to offer. The attack to you and JD personally. on the list. You know. I don't I don't read most of the. emails. I think. I think there have been a lot of. unfriendly things said yes. So you got to wonder about that. whole world. Yeah. I mean, so Trump would. depend. JD went to Yale. So you still have two guys have Ivy. League degrees? Yeah, in the top job, by the way. I don't think I don't think any. too far from being or being shame.

in that. Like I'm very I had a great. experience at Harvard and Yale and. we learned a lot. Yeah, well. I think independently I got a better. education because of. a lot of these people leaning left. You get questioned more than the. I bet. That's right. Yeah. But there's also. over the past several years, there's been a lot of evidence that. those schools, you know, probably aren't good for a. lot of the kids. They're not the same places they. were. Even kids who go there. I mean, you're obviously you've got. a strong personality. You know, you. think you're not dependent on other. people's approval. Obviously, you don't seem to care.

that much. But, you know, most people, young. people really do care what the herd. thinks. And for those kids, like a. lot of them, get destroyed and. become completely irrational. and into the, you know, the. witchcraft of transgenderism. or whatever. I mean, they become. like not really functioning people. And and you just wonder, like, how. long does the prestige attached to. those institutions, particularly. in, say, China, which keeps them. afloat? Yeah, maybe not Yale, but like below Yale, while these. schools are dependent on absolutely.

rich Chinese. Yeah. So like, when does that end? When do we stop genuflecting before. these places. Either that are going to. massively change what. they are and what they represent or. they're going to go the way of the. dustbin of history? They are right. They kind of are. So so the thing. is, there's a difference between. even these places now versus 20. years ago. Is it just like not the. same place in the same institution, Harvard, Yale, always lean left, always have had a very, you know, certainly our self. Self-Important view of themselves. That's always been the case.

But they were they were. institutions, certainly when I was. there. I do from experience where. alternative ideas were tolerated. There was good debate. I actually learned a lot from being. pushed by my classmates to a. different point of view than mine. I evolved in some of my views. It's a beautiful thing. That's what's supposed to happen. through a supposedly liberal arts. education that is not. the institution of Harvard or Yale. or countless others like them that. exist today. There's something dramatic has. changed as they have lost. their North Star is no. longer at least. dated as of, let's just say, six. months to a year ago. Maybe a lot's.

going to change. We're no longer committed to the. pursuit of knowledge and we're. committed to the pursuit of. affirmative social goals. Like Harvard's top goal, it seems, is to drive social change in the. world rather than and actually. educate their students. Yale has completely abandoned the. idea of free speech, that the. expression of certain ideas. is itself constitutes an. act of violence in a way that they. no longer would tolerate on their. campus. Now, I think all of that's. going to have to change because. otherwise you're going to actually. produce a bunch of, let's. just say, effete graduates that. aren't going to go on to actually.

accomplish very much, which gives. the next generation very little. incentive to want to go through. those institutions. That's exactly. in the first place. And so, you know what's going to. happen. You know, either either they're. going to become increasingly. irrelevant and go through. this process of elegant decay that. they're in right now. Either they evolve or die. So those are the two choices. I would just like. All of us. Yeah. It's true. So Christmas is coming. and winter is coming. And that's the perfect combination. for Cozy Earth.

Cozy Earth is a company that makes. exactly what it sounds. like, products that are close. to the earth and that are quite. cozy. And you should consider them this. Christmas. They have the best sheets available. They're made out of bamboo, believe. it or not, and it's hard to believe. how great they are until you try. them. We have and they are great. They're a great fit for everybody in. their shopping list. What sets them apart? Well, their fabrics are temperature. regulating. That means they keep you cool and. cozy or warm.

and cozy, depending on the. temperature. And they have a ten. year warranty. So if anything goes. wrong with your sheets, you. get free ones go to cozy. earth.com/tucker. Use our promo code Tucker up to 40%. off If they ask tell you, tell them the Tucker Carlson show. sent you. Everyone here uses those. sheets and loves them. So what are the effects of Trump's. win? I think it's a renewal of national. self-confidence, actually. I think that we're going to be more.

Sure of ourselves as Americans. I think we already are. I think that the idea that people. or, you know, a lot of people who. would have either felt uncomfortable. saying they supported Donald Trump. or didn't even think they did, but. now realize that they actually value. what he represents, have a greater. sense of conviction in themselves, have a greater sense of conviction. in America. I think that's probably. the most important thing. I mean, gold dropped 100. bucks an ounce in like an hour. Yeah, it's interesting how that. works. And it's gold, of course, to bet. against the U.S. dollar and.

The rest of the stock market. And. the stock market went exactly in the. opposite direction. And so, you know, markets reflect. confidence. And I think the revival of our self. confidence is the most important. thing, actually, because everything. else we could talk about, the issues. that, you know, fixing the border, restoring law and order, enforcing. the law, ending rampant crime in the. country, growing the economy, all of those things require a. certain level of self-confidence in. America, requires a certain sense of. spine in who we are. To be able to say, okay, an economy. grows and people are willing to take. risks. You're not willing to take.

risks to create a new business or to. grow, you know, or to invest in. a new venture unless you have actual. confidence in yourself and your. ability to do that. Same thing with respect to the rule. of law. You have to believe in the. validity of American rule of law. to actually stand by it, even when. it's actually hard or unpopular to. do so. Same thing to say that our. own border actually means something. You have to have confidence in a. nation to believe that that nation. is worth protecting. If you actually don't believe in. what's inside, then there's no real. reason you have to protect it. physically either. So I think the revival of our. national self-confidence is.

the most important thing Donald. Trump has delivered and I think is. going to deliver for the country. And if we get that back, the rest. of it's actually pretty easy. It sort of falls into place more or. less automatically, I would say. But along the way there all I mean, there are all kinds of obstacles. And the first obstacle is finding. the right people to staff the. government. Yes. Yes. Which was it? And Trump has said this himself, including to me like the day before. he got elected in public. I didn't have anyone to run the. government. And there are a lot of.

bad people wound up. in positions of real authority. How will it be different this time? I think it will, actually. I think it will because first. of all, we're all human beings, Donald Trump included, has learned a. lot from that first term. I think that if you have somebody. who had never run for office. before, and I'm particularly. sympathetic to this, I ran for. president without knowing what. the heck I was getting into. And it was very much a fire. first aim, later strategy for me. over the last year when I. ran. And so I can deeply.

empathize with Donald Trump's first. run for president. Finally, did he. run for the first time? He actually. won the first time as well. And to be able to get in there, as. you said, I wasn't there. But it sounds like without even that. much of an expectation of winning, I think this system was. able to strike back before. he and his team were able to get. their arms around the system and. even still accomplished a lot. I mean, I think that first term was. you. And I said this when we spoke. the other day, but it was like the. most successful president of the. 21st century, which is. setting a very low bar because the.

other presidents in the 21st century. have been awful. George Bush, Joe Biden, Barack Obama. are the others. And Donald Trump was. unambiguously the best of that. batch. But I think the idea. that there's only some things you. can only learn by doing it. I mean, even running for president, there's only certain things I could. have learned about that process by. doing it now, let alone leading the. country. I think there's only. certain things Donald Trump could. have learned by actually being in. that position. And so this time around, I think. he is. Laser focused on making sure. that the people he puts into those.

positions actually share. broadly his vision for the country, broadly share an allegiance people. make like this some kind of bad. thing, but an allegiance to him. personally. I'm sorry. If you're running a company, you can't run that company as a CEO. If the people who work for you. actively dislike you or wish to. undermine you personally, well, sure. Even if they believe in the. company's product, it doesn't work. if they actually, like actively hate. the CEO. So I don't know why the liberal. press actually likes to make a big. deal out of the fact that Donald. Trump wants people who will also. share a personal allegiance to him.

and our mission aligned. I think both of those things are. required for a functioning. civilization. Tarion because under. Trump, the FBI was always showing up. at people's houses and stealing. their cell phones and carting them. off to, wait, no, you know, these people are. totalitarian. Yeah, it's actually. I mean, I know a lot of people. personally. I'm friends with people. who've been the target of FBI raids, including today, Elfie. Oakes, who's. a wonderful man. He was we went visited his.

restaurant and he did shop. Yeah. In South for Naples. Yeah, man, it's about I don't know. I don't I think about the allergies, the. Grocery store in the United States. I have no idea. Very kind human being who was. immensely he just took. such great care of our family in the. short time we spent with. Him and wonderful person. I was shocked that outspoken. conservative and outspoken Trump. voter. Which is your right to do in this. country? Of course, he was a Covid dissident. and he was raided. by the FBI today. Now, I just texted him, I,

I, I don't know what. the charges are. The pretext is parading his house. But I'm willing to stake. my credibility on. him since I know him so well. You know, don't think Alfie Oakes is. doing anything that warranted an FBI. raid. And I doubt he would have been. raided, not been an outspoken Trump. or so anyway. These people are scary. They're going to be thrown out of. power. What is Trump do with the mandate. that he has? I hope as much as possible, as. quickly as possible. I think the same. I think the lesson from last time.

around is if you don't move. fast, the beast ultimately. will, you know, will will swallow. any individual whole. Of. Course. And so I think he's ready to. go in with real determination this. time around to move quickly, move. fast. I think we need the winds. behind our back early on. You know, one of the things that I. think we learned from last time. around is a lot of this is just. early momentum, right? If let's say we have three all three. branches, let's say we've got a. judicial branch, we have a great. judicial branch right now at the top. of the Supreme Court, the best we've.

had certainly in our lifetime. But you combine that with the strong. electoral mandate for the. presidency, a strong, decisive. majority in the Senate, hopefully. get a good Senate majority leader. picked. And then I think Rick Scott. would be great for that. But that's. it's. Can't be John Cornyn. Cornyn is an aggressive liberal. And if Donald Trump wins the. popular vote and John Cornyn. of Texas, who is way more liberal. than a lot of Democrats I know, winds up Senate majority leader. I mean, that's just it's crazy. I assume a few more the correct. pieces fall into place and then.

even a majority, at least an. impeachment proof house. I think that we got to go big. We got to go fast. Two major issues right out the gate. One is already the one that Donald. Trump's been talking about the. entire time. You know, he's pumped. up about it and he is not. going to mess around with this, is. to fix the illegal immigration. crisis and actually seal our. national borders. And he is laser. focused on that. He has made no secrets about that. That's his top campaign message. He's going to keep that promise. And I think he's going to keep it. fast starting on day one. That's number one.

And there's a lot to say on that. But it's hard to say what hasn't. already been said about what needs. to be done. Right. It's just about getting in there and. doing it. So that's mass deportation. Number one is millions of illegals. out of this country and sealing the. border along with it. But I'm actually far more intrigued. and interested for the long run in. what I think of as the second mass. deportation that we require, which is the mass deportation of. millions of unelected federal. bureaucrats out of the DC. bureaucracy. And I do think that is what's going. to save this country.

You can't. Do that. I think you actually can. You can't fire. We can all be fired. I've been fired many times. I'm sure. What, you just lost a. presidential race like we've all the. only group that cannot fail that. has actual tenure is not a Harvard. professors. Not even. Yeah, it's not even. Yeah it's federal bureaucrats doing. new acts just got you. know tenure isn't is no. protection are compared to the. protection of federal employees. So the one difference is first. of all, we have a president who I. think has the spine to actually step. up and do it.

But the second thing is we actually. have a not to get to, you know, in the weeds here, but we actually. have a legal landscape with the. current Supreme Court that allows us. to do what couldn't have been. done in the last half century. They have a moral right to work. from home. Yeah. Ten hours a week at. our expense, at a far. higher wage than the average. American. Absolutely. So the funny the funny. thing. Is, it's never more. Right. You can't you can't complain about. you. Actually brought up a really interesting. Mention of this. If you literally. just mandated that they have to. actually show up to work Monday.

through Friday. I know. A radical idea. They don't they don't go to work. Actually, a good number of them would. quit that way. Right. Right. That step alone. So you don't even have to talk talk. about your a mass firing mass. exodus. Just tell them they have to. come back five days a week from 8. p.m. to 6 p.m.. Like many Americans, most Americans. who work hard to earn a living in. this country just show up physically. to work, yet actually have about. a 25% thinning out of the federal. bureaucracy right there. So that's an easy first step. Next step is. So the Supreme Court, what they've. laid out right now is they've.

basically said in so many words. that most federal regulations. are unconstitutional, close to in so. many words. That's what they've said. if Congress didn't pass it. It's a basic principle. Here is the people we elect to run. The government should run the government. That's not the case today. The people who write most of the. rules were never elected to them. And the Congress makes the laws. That's what the Constitution says, the Constitution says. But that's not exactly how it works. today. And the Supreme Court, thankfully, has had a major problem. with that. So in this case, West. Virginia versus EPA. Two years ago, there was this Loper. Bright case that came down this year. that overturned this horrific.

doctrine called Chevron deference, which said that they the courts. have to defer to the agency's. judgments on what the law actually. says. The Supreme Court's torn all of that. to shreds. And basically what. they've said is if it's a major. question, if it's something that. affects people's lives economically. or relates to a major political. issue, it cannot be written. into existence by somebody who was. not elected to office or who can't. be voted out of office. It has to be done by the people who. are elected to write the loss, who could be voted out if they write. bad laws.

That's a beautiful thing. And I think that those were seismic. democracy. They used to bring democracy. That's actually the essence of. democracy. That's the essence of. self-governance. So we've had those cases come down. under this Biden-Harris. tenure. But actually, if you have somebody. who takes over in the presidency. now, we're going to on January 20th. who takes a posture of executive. humility. And this is the key part, right? Because people will say, Donald Trump's going to go if he's. going to go shut down these. agencies, that's executive.

fiat. No, no, no. You got it mixed up. The executive fiat is what's been. happening for the last century, really in this country. But over the last four years. included unelected bureaucrats. by fiat legislating what otherwise. should have gone through, we the. people in our elected. representatives. So the Supreme Court's already said. it told the executive engineer, no, you can't do that. Actually, a lot. of that was illegal and. unconstitutional. All we need right now is an. executive branch that says, hey, the Supreme Court, you've told us a. lot of what we're doing is illegal. It violates the Constitution.

So we're not going to do that. anymore. And that requires us to. take any regulation, any. federal regulation that fails these. standards that the Supreme Court has. given us in West Virginia versus EPA. and Loper Brite. And there's another case called. Casey versus SEC that. relates to slightly different. issues. But the Supreme Court standards, all. of these regulations that fail that. test, we're just going to rescind, they're null and void and we don't. have to rescind them because we. already know they're actually null. and void and illegitimate anyway. But we'll put the public on notice. to say these tens of thousands.

of regulations that have been. written by federal bureaucrats, they're null and void because they. were never written by the people who. we elected. Now, if you have 50% fewer. regulations, that creates. kind of an industrial logic. to say that, okay, well then we. don't need 50% of the people around. anymore either. And the way these rules have worked. in the past is they have this you. know, this well, read the civil. service rules, the civil protection. rules that say you can't fire. these federal workers. That's been. the historical, you know, accepted.

dogma. Actually, if you read a carefully, it doesn't work quite that way. That applies to individual firings, right. To say if I fire you, you have a special protection to say. that either politically. discriminated against, you're. discriminated for some other reason, or if you fire a bunch of people. with discretionary firings, if. there's a disparate racial impact or. a gender impact or whatever, you. could be sued on a million grounds. But if it is part of a mass firing, what you call a reduction in force, if it's just like a mass firing, those actually fall outside the.

civil service rules as they exist. So if you go in that order to say. that, okay, the Supreme Court's. already told us that all. of these regulations, not all of. them, but an overwhelming majority. of them are invalid, you go. straight down that list and say we. have 50%, 70%, 80% fewer regulations. Then you look at the 4 million. people, civil servants or whatever, and say that, okay, if we have. 80% fewer regulations than. we need 80% fewer people to enforce. them, that simply makes sense. Then you have the industrial logic.

for right there under current law. Mass downsizing, just the scale. of the federal government. And part of the problem is these. things are deeply related. When you have a bunch of people who. show up to work who should have. never had that job in the first. place, they start. finding things to do, actually. And that's what gave us that. regulatory morass in. the first place, like the Federal. Reserve. I mean, if you just fire, you have about 22,000 employees in. Federal Reserve. If you fired 90%. of them, there are still be 2000. left, which is arguably on the.

high side. If you have the Federal. Reserve, whose sole focus is. restoring the stability of the US. dollar, which I do think should be. the sole mandate, sole purpose of. the US Fed. Same thing with respect. You go straight down the list, whatever. What did 22,000 employees do. with the Fed? They do a lot of calculations. They do a lot of conjecture. And it if it feeds their. hubris a little bit. So markets and I was you. know, I worked at a hedge fund as. first job I had for seven years out. of college and you know understand. the way in which people will huddle.

around divining what the exact. meaning is of a comma at the. end of Federal Reserve minutes. Does that mean that they think the. economy's overheating so much. that they have to raise interest. rates? That feeds the kind of hubris of the. bureaucrat to make them think that. they're some kind of genius and some. kind of actual savant. that merits this attention. But the reason the market actors pay. attention to what these Federal. Reserve people say is not because. they have some sort of expert. knowledge that's actually. meaningful. They're actually looking to see. effectively how they're going to.

screwed up in the process. Right. And so academics took. over the Federal Reserve in the late. 1990s, But the Fed. Only has one big lever, right? Well, if if you do if they have a. few levers actually they're able to. pull. Yeah. I mean one big lever broad limits. is how much money you feed in or. suck out of the system. Yeah. Yeah. That's true. But they've they've. used that in ways that have been, I. think, badly destructive for the. country. Yeah, I mean, because. because here's here's like an. example of how. So when the academics took over the. Fed in the late 1980s. One of the things that happened and. this was a kind of managerial class.

in this agency that's a three letter. agency in some form their Fed. Right. What they said was, look, if wages are going up, this. is a long story if you want to get. into this, but we can give you a. short version. If wages are going up, that that is a leading indicator. of inflation. So wage growth was a bad thing. So the way you fight wage growth is. by tightening monetary policy. Right. Wages going up. Here's the problem with that. Anybody who's run a business knows. this. Okay. Wages are the generally the last.

thing to go up in the business cycle. if things are going really well in. the business cycle. The last thing most employers want. to say, you know, I'm not saying. it's the right decision or the wrong. decision, but most employers, the. last thing they want to have go up. is the wages. So wages tend to be actually not a. leading indicator of the business. cycle. Wage growth tends to be. a trailing indicator of the business. cycle. But you have the academic. mindset at the Federal Reserve That. said, that's one thing we can. measure that we can observe and feel. smart about. So wage growth, we're. going to treat that as a leading. indicator of inflation even when. it's a trailing indicator.

Well, what does that mean? They. tighten monetary policy. precisely into a natural downturn. of the business cycle, which gives. you the boom bust. And then what comes after a bust is, of course, the bailout. So you get these boom bust bailout. cycles. That's exactly what. happened. You could say in 2000. You could see 2008, could see some. version of it, you know, even in. 2023, although that was a little bit. more subtle. And so anyway, that's that's a whole. rabbit hole about the Fed. But it's an example of when you have. 23,000 people show up to work who. should have never had the job in the. first place. They start finding things to do. And when you find things to do that.

ends up being destructive rather. than helpful, which means the root. causes, you got to get rid of the. presence of the people who populate. that bureaucracy. But in order to do that, you need. this industrial logic. And that industrial logic, in my. opinion, is what the Supreme Court. has already given us, which is this. mandate to say the executive branch, the executive branch, the. administrative state has written all. these rules by fiat. Most of them are illegal, like. they're actually unlawful, they're. illegitimate. And so if you have an executive. branch that says, okay, we're going. to recognize that most of these.

regulations are legitimate, there's. your blueprint for then shaving down. the size of the federal bureaucracy, which is then the permanent solution. to stop that bureaucracy from. perpetuating this kind of illegal, rampant action. And I think that's the stuff of how. you actually save a country. Boring as that might sound. It's not boring. And I think I've. never heard in all the. you know, my whole life in. Washington, anybody suggest. that this is a process that could. really be stalled or reverse. the process being the growth of the.

federal government, which is just. inexorable because the purpose. of the institution is to protect, to. protect itself and expand. That's like a law. Of physics set by this government. Every institution exists to protect. itself for its own benefit. That's its purpose, and. it's demonstrable in its behavior. So but it's. so obvious. It's so overwhelming. It's the. largest institution in human. history. I've never heard anybody say, you. know, we have a shot of like lopping. off 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%. Percent. Yeah. That. I mean, that would change.

everything from our foreign policy. to our economy, to our culture. You really think that's that could. happen? Yeah, I think it could happen. I think. I think it will. There'll be trade offs. I not going to paint some sort of. exclusively. Line of trade offs if you're going. to have a crash in the economy. of Arlington, Virginia, which is well-deserved. And maybe a boom of the economy. elsewhere and. Long overdue. Yeah. You know what? Why shouldn't Arlington. and McLean and Loudoun County.

share the pain of Gary, Indiana? I don't understand. Springfield, Ohio. I don't I am. Actually going to take the bright. side of this as far. as the sake of the apocalyptic. I mean, I'm in I'm in the golden age. mood, right? Yeah. Yeah. No, sorry. The golden age. But. But you could feel the resentment. Two sides of the same coin, though. They go right together. Yeah. Send these people to Gary, Indiana, or to Springfield? Yes. We don't need external. External individuals to the nation. to actually fill those open. positions. We have 3 million. of them sitting in the greater. Washington, D.C.

area who now could say, well, are. those people really going to do. those jobs? Maybe they should. actually, they could be far more. productive than the destruction. that they're doing to the country. right now. It is a fact that we have more open. jobs than we have people in the. country. That's often one of the. backdoor arguments made for mass. illegal immigration in this country. But actually, the gain, I. think, for rule of law reasons, you. need deportation of people who are. in this country illegally. But if you get 3 million people out. of the federal bureaucracy in. Washington, D.C., they are Americans. and those are available. candidates to actually provide a.

little shot in the arm to the labor. market. Should the agencies be moved to. Baltimore? And to the extent. They exist, I think they should. absolutely be moved. Absolutely. I don't think all of I. think many of those agencies should. not exist. Many of them that do continue to. exist absolutely should be moved. to other parts of the country. So I don't think the surgeon general. office shouldn't. Washington, D.C.. I don't think. I don't think you. should have much of HHS more. broadly. I don't think that the. Department of Agriculture should sit. in Washington, D.C.. I think there are countless. agencies. The Department of. Education, I think you're in. wrongfully insulated.

in Washington, D.C. Now, certain of those agencies like. the Department of Education should. not actually exist. So I wouldn't want to start this. process of just saying, okay, let's. move them out of Washington, D.C., as some sort of polite, genteel way. of avoiding and sidestepping the. thing that we actually need to do, which is bring a jackhammer and. a chainsaw to the whole thing. But even those that do continue to. exist, you would actually have. a lot more accountability to the. people and probably even. some some kind of stimulus, if you will, in parts of the country.

that wouldn't mind a little bit of. that growth getting out of D.C. and come into their own backyard. These two things go together, though. Because if you actually do. take one of those agencies and say. you have to show up to work five. days a week and actually you have to. go to Topeka, Kansas, or Cincinnati, Ohio, instead, you'd actually have. a good number of the people quit. anyway, which avoids the severance. costs. So I kind of like that method. as you could kind of get two and one. right there is sending it down and. moving it out, but you move the. agencies out. You should fire about 75% of the.

federal employee headcount. If not, you know, immediately on day. one, you could go you could ease. into that pretty quickly. Agencies that are redundant can. be reorganized that shouldn't exist. Department of Education is a good. example. Shut it down. Send the money back. Workforce training can move to the. Department of Labor and loan. collections can move to Treasury. There's just a mass opportunity. for a mega reorganization. and thereby downsizing of. this bureaucracy. And it's a one way ratchet because. it's not like if another president. comes back, they can write that back. into existence by fiat.

They'd actually have to go through. Congress to do it. And so I think this is a. To call it once in a generation. understates it. It might be closer to once in a. century or once in a nation's. lifetime opportunity to. drastically reorganize. and reshape and drive structural. change in the federal government. And I'm pretty pumped up about that, actually. Would you be involved in this. effort? I'd like to be, yeah, absolutely. I've given it a lot of thought. It was the centerpiece of my.

presidential campaign. I spent a year and a half of my. life. It was probably the most. I mean, I took a lot of positions on. a lot of things, but this is. probably the single most useful. and certainly personally important. to me, part of the policy. aspect of my campaign last. year. And yes, I have been involved, let's just. say, in recent months. So this is laying out what the. blueprint should look like. This is the draining, the swamp part. of the operation that we were. promised but never got in. I know you've talked to the. president elect about this and. many other topics.

Do you think he's on board for. something this far reaching? He understands this is the root. cause of the cancer. He I mean, he's he's a drain the. swamp for a reason. You could talk about all the reasons. why that was hard to do the first. time around. One of the reasons is we didn't have. that legal landscape from the. current Supreme Court. And he made some good Supreme Court. appointments that allowed us to have. this landscape. So now I think he is. dialed in, understands that. incrementally tinkering around the. edges of these agencies, it doesn't. work. There's a temptation to say if you. just fire the person on top, that.

somehow that's going to fix the. problem. Well, you know, get James. Comey to point or whatever to Phil, it's absurd. The same seat. But I think if you're willing to. actually strike. the leviathan at its core, I think that that's actually what. it's going to take to save a. country. And I do think he gets that. in a deep way. It turns out that what you do online. is not private, not even close. Data brokers are tracking. and creating a profile of everything. you do that would include your. spending habits, your values, your beliefs.

Here in the United States, for some. reason, they're allowed to sell all. of that information. And that means that big corporations. buy and sell. everything about you. and then give it information to. others who use it against you. and to control you. How do you push back? How do you hold on to your. privacy, which means your freedom? Well, we use Expressvpn. with expressvpn. 100% of your online activity. is rerouted through secure and. encrypted servers. And that means it's impossible for.

your Internet service provider to. know what you're doing or. for outside parties or governments. to sell your data. Express VPN Hides your IP. address. Data brokers use that IP address. to build a profile on you and then. sell it to whoever they want. But without it and without. all of your online activity, data brokers can't do that. They can add it to your profile. You are free. to do what you want online. without prying eyes spying.

on you. Express VPN is. pretty complex technically, but it's. very easy to use and it works on. everything you own your phones, tablets, smart TVs, computers. You can use it on eight devices. at once so you can share. the privacy that you've. received with your entire family. Right now, you get an extra three. months free when you use a special. link to expressvpn.com/tucker. An extra three free months of. express VPN Express vpn.com/tucker.

Federal employees are the core. audience of CNN and MSNBC, so I don't think. Yeah exactly. Yeah, of course they are. Who's watching that crap? Yeah. What happens? I mean, that's a group. I mean, I'm not obviously, but. apparently people are the watching. The view. What happens are watching. Jimmy Kimmel or whatever his. name is what. happens to all those people? I mean, if they reach the point of. like being so totally discredited. that they can't continue. So here's here's sort of my view.

when I talk about the bureaucracy. as anything. We need to bring a. chainsaw to actually draw a. distinction between. the bureaucracy is its own. self-perpetuating organism. and the individual, 3 million people. who populate it. So there are certainly some people. who are in positions of authority. who are just individually bad. people. Absolutely. That need to be purged from the. federal government and get out and. back into normal life. And maybe they can be rehabilitated, but they're going to be. that's not to be the job of the new.

government. That's going to be. something that their own spiritual. advisers have to help them through. That's that's that's a separate. category. But I think that's a. relatively small minority. of the three plus million federal. civil servants who I do think are. probably. dead weight, worse than dead weight, because they're actually. inadvertently even doing things that. are harmful to the country. I think it's the machine itself. that I think is a big part of the. problem. A lot of these people are. people who individually believe that. they're carrying out some sort of.

some sort of good. And it comes from. this sort of organizational conceit, which is basically. Critical of self-governance, right? I mean, it's as old as it's as old. as human beings are. Is the idea that you can. govern yourself was mostly a radical. idea that most people thought was. laughable and crazy. I mean, that's why we fought the we. fought the American Revolution over. the exact topic that you and I are. talking about here, because the. basic view is that if you leave. it to We the People, you'll burn. yourself out of existence through. global warming or climate change, or. you'll you'll harm.

yourself before you even know it. through racial equity failures. or climate change failures. That's the equivalent of what the. old European worldview was. Was that the idea that we the. people, could be trusted to govern. ourselves and express our own. opinions, that was crazy. That's why we fought an American. Revolution. Well, it turns out that that ugly. monster is just rearing its head. again, saying that. No, no, no. You actually can't be trusted to. self-govern. So we'll tell you that you are to. give you the satisfaction of. believing that you live in a. republic. That was actually they could think. of rewrite the American Revolution.

through revisionist lens. and say, okay, you can't. tell people they live in a monarchy, but if you can at least keep the. parts of a monarchy that are. required for society to continue to. exist. But for people into thinking. they live in a democracy or a. self-governing republic, that's almost good enough. And that comes with some inconveniences. because sometimes it will actually. even behave a little bit like a. democracy at times. But in the core questions, at least, if it was unelected people who. actually made those decisions, that. machine is actually. what protects humanity from itself.

And so the people who occupy those. positions are individually people. who believe that they are doing. the right thing, not. even for themselves or that they're. trying to harm their fellow. citizens. They're doing the right. thing for their fellow citizens. I'm thinking about the average civil. servant working at the FDA or the. SEC or whatever. They believe that if it weren't for. them, the silent, you know, the Bruce Wayne figure, that. they are right there, they're the. hero that Gotham deserves. That's how they think about. themselves and individually,

I guess you could say that that. motivation, as much as there's a. conceit embedded in that, like. they're not individually. irredeemable people, I just. think that they have become part of. a machine that is irredeemable. And so. Maybe they'll continue to watch. Jimmy Kimmel. That's like a separate. issue. Right. We have cultural. issues in the country. But if we view the bureaucracy as. its own target separate. and apart from the individuals who. comprise it, I think that's going to. allow us to be more successful. and, B, allow us to, I.

think. Sell it to the rest of the country. and not in a fake sale, but like a. true sale. To say that we don't hold. this against the individuals. who are working here, who have. put in 20 years of work to the. federal government. But we owe it to the rest of the. people of this country that the job. of the federal government is not to. employ these people. So where does the rubber hit the. road on that? Here's one where you. can call me soft for this, but I. actually think this would be advisable. I actually think this would. drastically increase the probability. of success of this happening. But I also think that it doesn't.

really dilute what we're. doing. It doesn't have that our. purpose. I would actually favor. rather generous severance. arrangements with those individuals. Right. Like we could debate whether. that's a year, year and a half, year. and a half would be extremely. generous. You could say that. Well, then you're. eating into some of your cost. savings. Not really. In the long run, you're. still saving a lot of money for. sure. But the whole exercise wasn't. really about saving their headcount. costs anyway. The biggest costs of employing the. people in this machine is the action.

of the machine itself. So if you've debilitated that for a. year and a half, it's worth the. severance. Well, I mean, what's that? It's like a year and a half's worth. of not having done this in the first. place. Pay that as a down payment. Actually make that happen. That by normal employment standards. is actually really generous. Like if you're working at a company. and you're not doing a great job and. someone fires you, or even if you're. doing a great job and you're part of. a division that's no longer part of. the company, you're generally not. going to get a year and a half's. worth unless you're the CEO. You're not going to get a year and a. half's worth of pay. It just doesn't work that way. You might get two weeks, you might. get two months at most.

So to treat these federal employees. far more generously than they would. have been in a private sector. circumstance, there's probably people watching. this who would who would think, I'm. being soft for saying that? No, I think what actually I think. that's the right thing to do. because it will allow us to do this. in a way that separates this is a. personal vendetta against those. I get. Bills will result out their. families and their kids and whatever. does it, that we're solving more of. a structural problem. And so that's how I kind of separate. attacker is, especially economically.

on the severance piece of this. Like I want to go in I want to go I. want to go hard. I want to go aggressive, but I want. to make this less about. going after the individuals. You know, they're still free to. watch The View if they want. You know what they can have a year. or a year and a half towards their. old salary. Pose it because I mean. It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. Like it just. doesn't matter right now. Actually. I love that. Yeah. And they'll they'll sue and they'll. take it to the Supreme Court. That's also why this has to be done. now, not only because it's the. window of the electoral mandate we. have.

I think the current Supreme Court. is on our side in a way. that it never has been. since the advent of the. administrative state, which is. around 1920. Like in the last century, we have. had we have not had a Supreme Court. that has been as aligned with the. vision that I'm describing to you as. we have now. And fast forward another 20 years, we probably won't really I mean, realistically, in the next 20 years, there's going to be somebody who you. and I don't agree with is probably. going to be elected president and. there's going be Supreme Court. justices who either die or get swept. out in that timeframe.

So this is a again, back to a once. in a century, maybe once in the. national history opportunity. to really drive. Deep structural change. in the federal government. improvement. So here's how I would stop it. if I were. on the other side and opposed to. this. Yeah, I would have a war. I mean, we have more. Well, sure, we have these. I mean, the federal government is at. its current size because of war. The main physical effect. of the Second World War in the. United States was was the. construction of the world's largest.

office building, the Pentagon. We have DHS because of a war. that is. Just came in existence, of course, in the. Air raid on 11. Yeah. So, yeah, war increases the size of. government. It changes attitudes. It changes your society always. in terrible ways, in my opinion, but certainly it changes it. But it creates an environment. where people don't question because. people are afraid. Yeah. And so they feel like they. need government. So it's the ultimate. big government is, is. The you know, there been a lot of.

money spent in the last. year. on war with Iran. Like people want war with Iran. That's that's the war people want, donors want. And I know for a fact. So if we get a war with. Iran that we're not kind of we're. not cutting the government at all. Interesting. I would give that some. thought. I mean, you're one of the. things that's also true is that. massive leviathan we're talking. about probably I gave that we go. into this esoteric example about the. Fed, but one of the best places. and best examples of that is the. State Department, as you well know.

Right. That is when you think about. the swamp and then elected. bureaucracy. And the people who set. policy were never elected to set. that policy. I mean, the State Department's. probably even a far better example. than the US Federal Reserve. There are too many good examples to. choose from, but that's State. Department is is disgusting. Yeah, that's probably high on the. list. Yeah. No, it's got some sort of mandate to. make the world gay or something. I don't understand what where. it came out. I mean, the point of. the State Department is to conduct. diplomacy on behalf of the United. States is not to change cultures. around the world to fit, you know, the mores of Bethesda, Maryland,

didn't actually so well. I think it's behaved like most. organizational bureaucracies. It takes on a life of its own. And so that's that's again, another. example of an agency is. just another agency really, that. needs to be, you know, we got to. take the same attitude to say that. if you get a bunch of people showing. up to work, you should never had. that job. They start finding things to do that. are generally damaging. And that could include even not only. in our own soil. my. Gosh. But abroad as well. It's I mean, my dad, where the. Warfare statement is upstream of the. welfare state in some waste because.

it even relates to the to the. immigration crisis. Actually more so in Europe, though I think it probably will. eventually be directly linked to. the immigration crisis here, too, where part of Europe's. mass invasion, if you will, of illegals entering. Europe is. actually the consequence of US. disruptions that we created at the. Once the war in Syria. Absolutely, yes. Syria and Libya. That's exactly right. No, we did that. And so that that necessitates. a welfare state. We're different. from Western European countries.

But if you view the West more. broadly and the rise of the welfare. state in the West, the warfare state. actually creates the need for that. welfare state, which then actually. creates the magnet that. keeps the illegal migration. patterns coming. And the labor you know, the real. labor shortage in this country is in. the Pentagon, the meet the. recruitment goals. Yeah. And so they're going to start. Yeah, yeah. Weaving in illegal. aliens and giving them automatic. weapons. Do you think that's do you think. that's. Of course that's where this is. going. Of course. And so then you then you have, you. know, late Rome where. the Germanic tribes are populating.

its history. Yeah. Yeah, It's it's. Terrifying, but. Okay, so what about the election? Yeah. It's so dark, I can't even. think about it. But that's where. we're going on. Okay, so within hours. of the election of Trump. being declared the winner in this. last election, numbers appeared on. the Internet, which are accurate, which I know you've seen, that. showed the vote totals in the last. four elections for the Democrats. Yeah. And in three out of the four, the number of including this one, the number hovered between, say, 59. and 65 million.

votes. And then you have this weird anomaly. in 2020 where it was 81. So how do you go. With such a compelling candidate? That doesn't make any sense. And I so. This candidate, his vice. president, she received she. Kamala Harris received, they. tell us Wikipedia tells us, received 81 million votes. in 2020. And then somehow she received 15. million fewer.

What happened to those 15 million? That just does not make it. I just dare anyone to explain that. to me. What is that? I mean, look, I'm. I'm not a scholar on this stuff, but. I will tell you what I would want to. know. Yeah. What about it? So I think a good. number of those are on the. super positive side of this. A lot of those people are the people. who are given the permission. structure, whether it's those. people. And I will put that to one. side. But there are a lot of people. who actually did vote for. Joe Biden who could not stomach. voting for anyone other than Donald. Trump this time around.

I think it's great. Yeah. But Trump's numbers stayed the same. Yeah, Trump's numbers have stayed. the same through four through three. elections, pretty much the same. And let's just let's just cut to the. chase on this. We won the election. Here's what we do single day voting. on Election Day as a national. holiday with paper ballots. and government issued ID to match. the voter file. And I would also add, while we're at. it, make English the sole language. that appears in a ballot. Yes. And you know what? It's a beautiful thing. Puerto Rico does it this way. There's other countries that do it. this way. I think that that's something that. we could actually do. The country. that sent a rocket out.

and caught it on the way back. Yes. We would be able to actually. run elections on a single. day with paper ballots. Yeah. And send dominion packing. And the fact the fact that there is. resistance to this, let's just say. the policy proposal on offer. Okay. I've said it countless times. Donald Trump's talked about this. single day voting on Election Day. Make it a national holiday that. actually brings people together. Paper ballots, government issued. I.D. to match the voter file. I don't know if that is if that is. objectionable. That itself raises doubts about. exactly what that is.

So I don't think. Kamala Harris, what you can check this, but I'm. pretty sure Kamala Harris did not. win any states. with voter I.D. law. Is that right? Yeah. And she didn't lose any. Interesting. She didn't lose any. states that don't require voter. I.D.. So that's really interesting. Ha ha. Ha. No, I'm not saying there's a. connection there for vague, but. you're following the science. So I just don't understand. And I again, I've been in, you know, 18 hours or whatever of depositions. from voting machine companies.

to discussing companies. I was not named in either suit, but. they hold me in and tried to wreck. my life just for, I don't know, I. guess, disagreeing with them or. something. Smartmatic and Dominion Disgusting. companies. Why do we have electronic voting. machines? No one will say this. because they're afraid of getting. sued by these companies. What's the gist of what's what? I haven't followed the the. industrial history of this. When did that come and when did they. start using them and what was the. justification? The justification was that they're. more efficient and faster, more.

accurate and faster. And they turned out like. It takes a lot longer. To get our hands know. So India, I think, is the largest country in the world. I think they we reset the population. numbers recently and if it's not the. hardest it's one of the largest, probably the second largest. And the largest. Now here, I. Think it is the largest and. largest democracy for sure in the. history of the world. I think they. finished counting in one day every. time. Is that correct? I think it did is a pretty fast. logic to do it pretty fast, as I. said. Even even I mean, like you. look at a territory that is in.

Puerto Rico and runs their. elections with such. Executional excellence. compared to the rest of the United. States and America. Keep the power grid going. They can keep up a fair election. It's unbelievable. And so. We? What do we say? This, Tamara? This had to be by such a decisive. margin that a landslide. minus some shenanigans is still. going to be a decisive victory. And that's what we got. So my view is we. can and there's there's going to be.

such a temptation to do this is. we actually won like we're actually. in a winning position right now. So like I more or less, I could care. less for the Kamala Harris. or Joe Biden pastor or like, I just. don't it just doesn't matter. That's the spirit. What I care about is how we actually. going to fix it in a lasting. way, like in a way that just lasts. for a really long time. I think there would be enough of an. opportunity. I mean, think about the. majority we're now commanding in the. Senate. I think we can do this nationally. where you make election a national. holiday, put it on a single day, and.

at least four federal elections. because state elections run by. states. But at least for a federal. election, all 50 states. have a bit of bare minimum standard. of single day voting. Paper ballots, government issued. I.D. to match the voter file, period. And I think more or less we've. solved. The problem of public confidence in. elections for the long run. I think if. You saw what you saw right there. If you're against that, then I'd. like to offer I'd like to I'd love. to hear the best possible argument. offered against that. I haven't really heard one. Black people. Don't have ideas in this.

Country. I think that that's a. racist supposition, actually. So, you know, and then they will. allege racism for somebody who. actually thinks anything different. than the actual most racist thought. on the matter. But I haven't heard a. good most black people favor voter. I.D. laws. Actually, most people. favor voter I.D. laws. So it shouldn't be surprising that. most black people also favor voter. I.D. laws. And, you know, I think if somebody. is on their way to. you know, if there's some driving, somebody uses analogy that that. that's pretty good driving under way. to vote and they actually get pulled. over. They say I'm on my way to.

vote. That's your way out of. actually a speeding ticket because. if you're on your way to vote, you. don't need a voter I.D. But if. you're driving anywhere else, you. do. It's kind of a funny little. paradox. So most it's common sense. It's called common sense because. most people, it's everywhere tend to. have it. And I think most people. agree on this issue. We now have enough of a mandate. So I think let's just. Let's just say we are proud at the. end to offer quality, long form. programing films, documentaries, short series. And we've got a new one rolling out. It's a six part documentary series.

called All the President's Men The. Conspiracy Against Trump. It's made by our friend, the. documentary filmmaker Sean Stone. All six episodes available now at. Tucker carlson.com. It's an in-depth look at what. happened in the first Trump. administration 2016 to. 2020. And while the rest of us is busy. watching TV behind. the scenes permanent Washington, particularly the Intel agencies and. the law enforcement agencies and. the indirect but pretty. clear command of Barack Obama.

and Hillary Clinton set out to. systematically destroy not just. Donald Trump, but the people around. him, the people who supported him. And this series explains exactly. what happened. It's we're seeing as. Donald Trump starts his second. presidency, this series, his. interviews with the people who are. targeted and presents it in a way. that will help you understand. exactly what happened. How American democracy. is democracy was undermined. by the people who claim to be. defending it. It's in this series and. it's absolutely worth it. All The President's Men The. Conspiracy Against Trump.

Out now on Tucker Carlson, Rt.com. So how did you. When I saw you in Florida, an election night with Trump. And you clearly like him. He clearly likes you. You know, running against somebody. for office is not a natural. environment for a friendship to. sprout. All I was you know, Jeb Bush was not there. Yeah. Yeah. How did you end up liking. Trump? How did he end up liking you?

Why do you have such an easy. friendship after running against. him? I think we're both unusual. individuals in ways that. caused us to gel. Actually, I didn't see the point. in running. I ran against Trump for sure. And, you know, I made my case for. why I thought I was right candidate. You know, I think that there was I. was the youngest person ever to run. for U.S. president as a Republican. And I do think that there is an. opportunity to lead and bring. in a new generation in some ways, as. we have nonetheless in the last. year. But I didn't do the Trump bashing.

thing like it just seemed. seemed kind of lame. It seemed really facile. He was. Yeah, but is. These things right? Everybody starts out that way, but. then it gets intense. It gets intense. Yeah. And, you know, we had our we had our. sharp moments over the course of the. campaign. But it wasn't it wasn't. Personal. Well, how did you do that? How did you not get mad? They all get mad at the end. No, it was it was interesting. I guess the whole thing wasn't an. exercise that I took super. personally.

Anyway, I think when you take this. stuff too personally, it becomes. exhausting. But for me, it was, Look, I feel. like I have a calling for the country. I'm running for something. I'm running for my vision. And you know what? Along the way, because it was deeply. consistent, the vision I respected. Donald Trump. Like in a certain. sense, if you think about like a. family business or something, right? You have you can have a guy who. started it, bequeathed to his. kids at some point along the. way. There are some bumps in the. road in terms of, you know, how that. happens and when and when's the. right time for the torch to be.

passed on. And those would be. legitimate. Disagreements, arguments within the. context of families. I know many people who have been in. that similar position. And so in that sense of. caring the American torch, we can. have like a reasonable debate about. when the right time is for that to. be able to pass on to the next. generation of leaders or whatever. But I came from a place of. actual deep respect for Donald Trump. the whole time that I ran, because. one of the reasons why is it was a. fact of the matter that I was. self-aware about myself. I would not have thought about.

running for US president had Donald. Trump not actually done it. As a first time outsider and won. in 2016, of course. I don't think that that. I don't think that idea would have. occurred to me. I'm a you know, I'm an entrepreneur. I believe in achieving things that. have been achieved before. But that particular thing, I just. wouldn't have even considered that. possibility. Had Donald Trump not. run one and been a successful. president. And so, you know, I said it on the. debate stage. I thought Donald Trump. was the greatest person of the 21st. century. And I think it actually.

caused more anger. from the other candidates on that. stage at me for the rest of the race. than Donald Trump or I ever had with. respect to really. They didn't like that. They didn't like that very much. Who didn't like it? Well, I think most of the other. people on the debates stage, actually. How many were there? This started with like ten. You know, I the last debate ahead of. us before there was four of us up. there. That was interesting. There was. There's. So many things I would do differently. But that's that's a story for me. today. You know.

I think the hardest the hardest part. was in the short windows. into a campaign. that you that you have interfacing. with like 300 million people. I think even the people who are in. physical rooms with me understood. me at a different and deeper level. than the 99.9% of the. electorate than ever was. But who saw? So the few windows. that they had to see who you are. now. The debates, one of things I.

learned about them is that. this different for a general. election debate. If you're going. against like Trump versus Harris or. Trump. Biden People watch that and. for good reason. I'm glad they did. But like in in Republican primary. debate in the early cycle, where. there's like ten people standing on. a stage, most people. don't actually watch that. debate or see what happened for. themselves. But what they do see is. the distillation of it. And so the clips. As we say. The clips, but even even the. even just like the verbal. descriptions of actually what. happened, that's what they get is.

the synthesis. So the audience. functionally of a primary debate. isn't really the electorate. It's two groups of people. It's the gatekeepers in the media, and it is the people who fund. campaigns, like that's the audience. that actually matters. I mean, I'm not saying she worked. that way, and I'm saying I want it. to work that way. But functionally, if you're looking at moving the ball. forward in a in a race, that is the group that determines. whether or not that. event actually advanced your. campaign forward towards victory.

And a certain point, the campaign I. mean, you and I actually spoke a few. times over it, including over. conversations like this we had while. I was running. You know, the conclusion I arrived. at was, here's my strategy. I'm going to tell you what I. actually believe right now. And. 99% of the time. That was the same thing that I. believe four years ago. 1% of the time it was not. But I'm going to tell you what I. believe right now, and I'm going to. tell it to you straight without. filters. And it felt like that should be a. winning electoral strategy.

I'm not sure it's the winning. electoral strategy, but this race. was just so different from any. other one, because in retrospect, there's literally it's foolish. for anybody, myself included, to. think that anybody else was going to. come out of this process other than. Donald Trump as the nominee. And it's because the moment right. now that we're in, the people of. this country know what they need. when they need it. And they needed a guy who had been. there, who had who was strong. enough, who wasn't necessarily an. ideologue, but who was a bad ass, who actually had had the experience.

and was ready from those learnings. to be charged up and go back in. and actually take it to the next. level. So they knew that. And I don't think the outcome was. going to be any different of of who. the nominee was, regardless of what. I did. But there was still. a lot of a lot of learnings through. the process. Now, things like I. could have done better. About a million things I could've. done better. But I. think that. You know, I think that. Being unsparing as I was, I think that I wouldn't change.

But to be able to combine that. a little bit more with if there's a. way for me to allow a lot of people. to sort of know me the way that like. my employees at my businesses know. me or my closest friends know me, I would I would love to think about. how to do that. Donald Trump is. actually really good at that. Yes. Yeah. And I think that he is. he's like the best at it. And watching him, even in the years. since I left, the campaign has been. eye opening. It's been it's been. kind of inspiring, actually. And it's made me think a lot about. he's able to take, you know, 20,000. people in a room at a time, but also.

100 million people not in the room. at that time to really get. to know him like who he. is and feel like they actually. deeply know him as a person as. opposed to just as policies. I think it was really good at. allowing a lot of people around the. country to know what my policies. were, what my specific self. were, my vision for America. I found it a little bit hard to. figure out how to let people on the. other side of. Right, no. Camera know who you actually get. It. It's it's difficult. I was that was like kind of one of. the one of the reflect. Trump is more self-deprecating.

than he gets credit for quite. self-deprecating he's actually. Actually really funny. It's a great. mix of really funny. The other night in the last week of. the campaign, he was pivoting. against the Trump voters are. garbage. Biden's comment he shows. up in a garbage truck wearing I. think you were there wearing a, you know, Day-Glo vest and. he comes out on stage wearing it. And he says, my staff told me they. wanted me to wear this. I want to. wear it. And they said to me, it. makes you look thinner. Yeah, I like that. And I said, Anything makes me look. thinner. I'm far harder to wear. It's true. It's hard to say. something like that about yourself.

Yeah. So what about I've just. wondered, like one of the sort of. ongoing side skirmishes that. I tried to pay too much attention. to, but is a little mesmerizing. Is that is the. The NeverTrump movement? Yeah. What's going on with that. most? Yeah. Well, I don't think anything. actually. And I'm enraged because. they're all people I know. Yeah. Because I think. it does for you. Yeah, I do. And they're so. They're just so repulsive. to me. But what do you think is going on? I think there's a kind of. Well, there are a. Psychological derangement sat,

right. He's almost like a sick a. condition that needs to be treated. with like a. Person, like. A priest or something. Totally. If you're, you know, whatever Dick Cheney's repulsive. little daughter or Jonah. Goldberg or, you know, it's like. you're not. they're just not impressive people. They were exercising. authority far beyond what. they had earned, in my view, in the. first place. Both are the product of. nepotism, and they're just mad. that their world ended. Whatever. But here's the I don't. want to be mean about it though.

That was me. Really mean but true. Honest. It was true. But in the closing days of the. campaign, the Harris people kept. telling us there were a lot of. people like that. There were a lot of Republican women. who weren't going to vote for Trump. because he's too repulsive. They wouldn't tell their husbands, they. Wouldn't tell their husbands, and. they're going to vote for Kamala. Harris. And it turns out like the. never Trump world has gotten so much. attention. But there's like no. One with no clothes. There's no one there. Totally. Yeah, it was it actually ended up.

just being a mirage. That whole thing at the end started. that actually really got into my. skin a little bit. Like the whole. thing about go into the ballot box. and vote differently than your. husband. Like that was a pitch that. was made. Subverting the family, subverting. the marriage, encouraging a spouse. to lie to. You. You can vote differently, but. like the idea that you want to do it. secretly, it creates this some kind. of I mean, it's the ultimate. division play because identity. politics divides us based on is the. division of the natural extension. of actual division on race, division, on gender, division, on. gender within the household, because.

they're fundamentally against the. household as a unit anyway. That's for. Sure. And so that was that was that. was really the thing that pissed me. Off that well, I don't even. understand it. I mean, I know someone really well. was saying that it. Wow. You know, we're voting differently. in our household. And I said to my. wife, if we had, we're going to vote. for different people. First of all, I would say absolutely not. We're not for different people so. that we're not going to vote yes if. we're going to vote for different people. And second, we're going to take the. weekend and talk. for as long as it takes to get on. the same page. Yeah, and maybe I'll change my view.

Maybe we'll change years. But we're. going to align because we're. married. Yeah, we're the don't. Even understood this is. The you're on the same team. at the deeper sense Yeah. Yeah. So basically they're encouraging. people to. Not only split the team but to lie. about it. And actually, that's a. lie. To your husband. Yeah. Boy, that is the Democratic. Party. Just distill it. It's the lie to your husband parts. the weak man, unhappy woman. Party's right. It makes me. There's something really sinister. about that. There's something sinister about it.

But it reveals that. I mean, that's what it's something. sinister about it. But it's also. I mean, it's transparently what the. agenda is, of course. Yeah. And so that was in some. ways the tactics of the politics of. it revealed a big part of what. the whole project was like. They were they're always telling you. during Covid or during the BLM. riots, the real insurrection, which is what that was, you know, go home and lecture. your racist uncle or grandfather. at the Thanksgiving. That's right. That's right. That was. again. Your family that was again, destroy your family over.

what you're what your ideological. obligation is. Do you think the culture changes? I think it I think it has. to. I mean, I think if we get our. job right here, let's say bridges. go in in dismantling new, you know, administrative state. Actually fixing illegal immigration. in this country and actually having. secure national borders, reviving. our self-confidence. I can't see how. the culture doesn't. change. And in some ways, it creates. a cultural change that might even. just be in the wrong framing of it. That is a small part of the story.

I think in some ways the culture has. already changed and the best. evidence of that is what we saw. in the last couple of days, what we. saw on Tuesday night where, by. the way, at the time you and I. scheduled this to sit down, I was. kind of skeptical because I thought. we're going to be like sitting here. looking at like TV screens and like. counting ballots in Pennsylvania or. something like that, which would. have been a horrific way to spend. time. But the fact. that we're not doing that and that. very night, we actually knew the. result in a way that nobody. anticipated suggests that we. actually have already had the.

cultural change in this country, and. it was just revealed to be. so. Whatever happened to Joe Biden is. his. I mean, that that I. am not making fun of him. I feel. I feel sorry. I do. I do, too. But I've never seen anyone. disappear faster. Yeah. Than Joe Biden. You never heard a word. I wonder. what. His attitude is towards. the Obama family right now. Towards Barack Obama, because. Joe Biden certainly would have been. more compelling candidate than. Hillary Clinton in 2016.

And so this guy has had this life. dream. He's worked his entire life, became a senator, was elected like. at the age of 30 or 20 9 or 29. And then when he's elected, there's. turn 30. Who has aspired his entire. life over the span of decades, beginning long before I was born. Over 50 years for this. For this. I mean, like significantly. longer than I was born. This man has been a U.S. senator, aspired to be US. president. To say that finally, when his turn. came around in 2015, after faithfully serving as a vice.

president or whatever, to say that. No, no, for. Eight years, eight. Years, going through that ignominy. And then to have. to have Hillary Clinton say, no, no, no, it's not your time. And then finally, he just says, okay, after Hillary loses, I'm just. going to do this myself anyway. By hell or high water. That's a whole separate discussion. Gets his way into the White House. And then to say the same guy comes. back and, you know, who knows. if the if the reporting on. this is true, but effectively. threatens to have him.

constitutionally removed from office. and to let it go unless. you bend the knee, the same guy, only to then watch again. the woman instead, who in this time. was nominated. Ultimately, this time it's Galerius. Fail at the very mission that you. otherwise right now, I cannot even. begin to fathom what that. what that feels like. He is surely. the happiest person. about the election result on Tuesday. night in America. Right. Because he's at least. personally, maybe maybe him or Jill. Biden, his wife are the.

had to have been the two most. You know schadenfreude relieved. Americans total country. But it's in. How is he doing? I don't know. Does that help if. you're going through like a state of. cognitive decline? Does something like that as painful. as that is, does that sense of. aggrievement and. desire for vengeance actually kind. of sharpen you? Maybe it does, because it did seem. like he actually got a little bit. sharper, actually after he.

was yanked out. Is a part of him. It's like part of him came back. Right. And his wife were read on Election. Day. Did she? Yeah. I mean, you wear MAGA hat. Yeah. So, you know, it's. not like they were they were deriding. it too much. But, you know, it's it's. just a fascinating thing. It's neither critical nor not. It's just it's just interesting. sociologically and just. psychologically. What about the. Rest of the party? Like if you I mean. Well, you failed. You ran for president and didn't get.

elected. And I know for a case I. talked to you about it. There was a time after where you. thought, okay, you know, what did I. do right? What did I do wrong? Were you take on a stock of your. own behavior? Because that's that's what it is to. grow. That's called adulthood. Yeah. Is there a moment like that. for the Democratic Party, do you. think? I think I hope there is. Actually. I'm kind of rooting for. that because that'd be better for. the country. I mean, the number one. person who's responsible. for whether or not you achieve your. goal is you actually there's a lot. of other factors you can claim, of. course. But again, the number one. determinant of whether you achieve.

what you set out to achieve is you. And that's a basic level of an. individual. And if your team. is a political party in American. politics, and that's true for for. your team, right? They were. responsible for their own failure. and demise. I saw some interesting things over. the last day. And it hasn't it hasn't been as. like monolithically crazy as. I expected. I expected everybody just. in lockstep in the same way to go. the same direction of, you know, threat to democracy. Authoritarianism has reached. America. And we're seeing certainly. a lot of that. That's like 90% of.

it. But I think there were, I. think, some thoughtful moments. of reflection of, you know, a few folks like I think. I don't know this guy, but someone. sent me his tweet. Iglesias, Saramago, Yeah. Yes, yes, yes. He had he had. something thoughtful like in my. campaign, I had I ten truths, ten things that are true that I lay. out. That was kind of the centerpiece. of my campaign. Yeah. You might remember they said to me. he had nine today, but like. he left, he forgot. Number ten was the joke that. somebody sent me.

But actually I read them and it was. They were all smart and reasonable. You saw this? Yeah. I don't want Matt why Iglesias. at all. But I must say. I saw. I saw I'm a non fan and I'm willing. to admit that all nine of. them were great. Yeah, it. was good. The U.S. government exists for the benefit. of its citizens. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. It was up like that. It was stuff that was not. too dissimilar from what. you or I might say about our vision. for what. I totally agree would. Be. You know, I disagree with some.

of the stuff on there, the framing. of it. He's what he said something. about climate change like, I just. think the whole agenda is. artificial. Here's our climate. change is real but is not a goal. in itself. It is a means to the end of doing. what's better for humanity. And so that framing. Was, I agree, was. At least like as a framing matter, the right way to look at it. And so if that's. evidence to say that even within a. period of 48 hours, you can at least. have thoughtful voices on the other. side who are willing to. look themselves in the mirror, admit.

failure, inquire. about the nature of the screw up, and maybe even begin to offer some. path forward. I think that actually leaves me. I just don't have all the. times you would have gotten together. I'm probably like the most hopeful. mood I've actually ever been in. right now, and I'm hopeful. for the future of the Republican. Party. I'm hopeful for the future of. our country. But like a weird part of me. is almost hopeful. for the future of the Democratic. Party based on. Around these great. Either that or they don't have to go.

the way the Harvard and Yale that we. talked about earlier. Either that or. they die. Right? So it's easy to evolve or die. By someone who's been fired a lot. I can say there's nothing better for. you than failure. Yeah. You know, there's. It's in fact, it's essential. Yeah. Because you'll never. re-assess. You know, winning. Succeeding, I. think, exacerbates your worst. qualities totally. Because it covers them up and cause. Hopefully it affirms your hubris. and, like, I'm successful because. I'm so great. Yeah, but that's. not entirely true. So this time of year, we. are focused on our families because.

we're apt to be with our families. celebrating together. And it's the time of year where you. might ask yourself, what happens. when you're gone? What's left behind will. protect your family's future and. peace of mind. With a product called policy Genius. Policy genius has one goal to make. it easy to find and buy. life insurance so. your loved ones have something. when you're not here, something they can use to cover. debts and expenses. If something unexpected happens. Because unexpected things do.

happen with policy. Genius. You don't need to struggle. to do this. You can find life insurance policies. that start at $292 per. year for $1 million of coverage. Some options are 100% online, and that lets you avoid unnecessary. medical exams, which is always. good policy. Genius combines digital tools with. the expertise of real licensed. agents. You compare quotes from America's. top insurers side by side. for free, and there are no hidden.

fees. Their license support team helps you. get what you need fast. You can get on with your life. Join thousands of happy policy. genius customers. Live five star reviews on Google and. Trustpilot. So secure your families tomorrow so. you have peace of mind today. It's easy go to policy. genius.com/tucker to. get your fleet free life insurance. quotes and see how much you could. save again its policy genius.com. slash. Tucker one last question. Ellen you know him yes. I think you know him for a while.

You're from similar worlds. Tell us what you think his. significance in this election. was and what its significance. will be going forward. Huge. I actually haven't known him for. that long. I only got to know him. last year. He came to dinner. I was at while I was running for. president. We really hit it off. I, I like. people who are extremely. intelligent. And he is in the. category of extreme intelligence. He's somebody who. is able to not only able to, but.

requires himself to be doing. multiple different things at the. same time. And he's better. individually at each of those things. because he's also doing those other. things at the same time. But I think that his significance. was twofold. One, is he really? Expanded that permission structure. we're talking about earlier for. people who are elite in America, people who define their. status based on the number of. dollars in their bank account, which. I think is probably the wrong way to. look at your own status as a human. being. But, you know, we all have.

our biases. If the richest man in the world and. the most successful self-made man. in human history can publicly. state his support for Donald Trump, then there's nothing stopping me. from doing so, if I believe that's. right. That's true. And he's pretty. darn smart, actually. So if this guy both can. do it from a social perspective, but. also is as intelligent as. he is to send rockets to outer. space and back more intelligent. And the US government has, you know, ever if he can. kind of do the analysis and say the. Donald Trumps could be the right.

choice for the future of the country, then you know what? Maybe I should do some. simpler thinking of my own and have. the courage to arrive at the same. place. So in terms of blowing out that. permission structure like that was. certainly what I consider to be one. of my responsibilities over the last. year. But the person who really blew. that out, bar none. was Elon when he came out publicly. endorsed Trump. And I love the way. he did it because it was clearly. he was just moved by the fact. that, okay, maybe thinking about. it, who knows? Who knows where. exactly he was in his journey right.

there. He and I talked at various. points, but I don't know that he was. going to come out and publicly. endorsed Trump in the way he did. But there was this supernatural. event. I do think it was it was. a divine moment in American history. where we averted a natural. disaster, a national disaster by. about two centimeters. And he just said, okay, it's done. I'm doing this. He's an American hero and I'm. endorsing him. I thought that was number one. Number two was on just the execution. of it, too. And this election, I mean, Pennsylvania was it turns. out Donald Trump would have won.

regardless. But Pennsylvania was the key. that allowed us to really secure. this victory and to just go in and. say, okay, got a lot of political. consultants and a lot of people in. traditional Republican Party. apparatuses who have, you know, tried to figure this stuff. out and say, I'm just actually going. to figure out myself directly and. understand here's low propensity. voters. I'm going to personally go. and talk to them myself. I'm going to spend nine figures or. whatever it was. In the end, I think. it was at least nine figures to. actually make sure that we. get the job done and then get the.

job done. I think was was. essential actually to this victory. And so I hope he's. an essential part going forward of. saving the country and using this. mandate to shred. to pieces that federal bureaucracy. you and I talked about earlier. And I hope he's, you know, doesn't. lose his interest in American. politics for a long time to come. You know, you and I think have been. on the side of it because you hear. this objection now coming up, which. actually infuriates me about, well,

what about all of a sudden now after. 14 years of being silent on this. from the left? We don't like this influence of. money in politics. Well, okay. Trump got outspent 3 to 1. Exactly. Rita was exactly, exactly. Shot in the swing states. Right. So so long as we. have the game and I think that this. is something for our side to, you know, man up into as well is. If you're going to play the game, like you got to compete, actually. And we can't just win this.

against the so-called. successful or elites or whatever. No, actually, we are better off. if we have our own. cadre of superhuman. heroes who are able to, with. their own unique skills, be they. cultural leaders or business leaders. or whatever, to have our own. version of our, you know, special forces. Especially since nobody. I mean, I don't like most political. donors. I know them all and most. of them have creepy agendas or they. just want to be get their picture. taken with a politician, which is. like a very low motive, in my view.

Yeah, Yuan. is not unique, but he's very. unusual. And that is really what. anything. Yeah. Is really one thing. I mean. He certainly doesn't need anything. That we're trying to. Lose, but he certainly doesn't know. if. He does want anything for himself. Like he's not in it, obviously not. for the money. Yeah. And there's something uniting. about it. He was not a conservative. I mean, the whole Trump phenomenon. is if you take three steps back, unifying. Yeah, I think there's a unifying. moment. Orthodox Jews in Brooklyn voting for. Donald Trump. Yeah, You had Muslims in Southeast.

Michigan voting for Donald Trump. It was. Also. You had sugar cane. workers. The people cut the cane in. Florida and the people who owned the. ranches. Right. All voting for Donald Trump. You had north Georgia, you. know, white rednecks and you had. black men in Atlanta all voting for. Trump. Totally. And then above them all is Elon. Musk, who's like just sort of this. figure who's above politics. He's for Trump or something. Yeah, it was it was part of it was. it was in some ways an. In some ways you could say like what.

was the causal link that he played. if he were analytical? I think it was huge. There's also some broader sense in. which this was just destined. to happen. Totally. This is all just playing out. I'm with. You. Like, we're going to have like. a false analytical hubris. here by just, like, dissecting. No, no. But you're right. It was all destined that it was. Going to happen. Just gone out know. And this was all part of it playing. out. And, you. Know, I feel that you I mean, you. were there when they won. And even just over the last. year. I mean, I. and you know, I'm not mean.

it would mean to commit the sin of. flattening you to your face. But I think one of the things I. liked about our conversations. and, you know, I, you know, fashion in a fashion. myself as as having some of this as. well is just having like a. little bit of an intuition of where. things are going a little bit. like just like just get a pulse. of the country and to sort of. see it. I think you and I have what. conversations over the last year. where I think. we were both on the same page about. early on last year.

in like spring of 2023, being both convinced that Joe Biden. was not going to be the nominee. Yeah, that's right. And there you said it many times. Well, and there's there's some darker. there's some darker ones in in. Sure. I think sadly. predicted but we're wrong about by. two centimeters. Yes exactly. Thankfully. And you know even. the idea that this is going to be a. landslide, you could just sort of. feel it. Right, is just. it was just in the ether. And so in some sense, like. at that hour, at our very best,

we might kind of smell it. coming. But it was coming either. way. No, I think so. I think the more we remember. that, that actually is I think. what's uniting actually, once you. see that, that's really uniting the. idea that it's. not being done by us, actually, it's being done through us. Like that's a liberating feeling. And in that sense, you and I or any other everyday. American is united with a, you know, Elon Musk to Donald Trump. Like we're all part of, I. think, a higher plan. It's been done through us.

This was coming. It was going to happen one fact. or not. And you know, in some ways we're all. just playing our little. piece of a role in. in playing out what was going to. play out all along. I can't improve on that. That's that's the greatest summation. I have heard of this election so. far. Thank you very much. Good cinema and see you.