The Tucker Carlson Show - Israel’s Sinister Agenda to Use the U.S. Military to Defy Trump’s Plan for Peace With Clayton Morris

Episode Date: February 26, 2026

This is Israel’s last chance to blow up Iran with America’s military, so naturally the neocons have reached peak hysteria. Clayton Morris on what happens if they get their wish. Paid partnerships with: Masa Chips: Get 25% off with code TUCKER at https://masachips.com/tucker Dutch: Get $50 a year for vet care with Tucker50 at https://dutch.com/tucker Good Ranchers: Use code TUCKER to get an additional 25% off your first order at https://go.goodranchers.com/tucker Last Country Supply: Real prep starts with the basics. Here’s what we keep stocked: https://lastcountrysupply.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Well, in between the Super Bowl halftime show and Epstein and the Winter Olympics, most Americans probably weren't aware that we are on the verge of a massive regional war in the Middle East, if not a third world war. We are. The largest movement of American military hardware is since 2003, the Iraq invasion, is now in or steaming toward the Persian Gulf off Iran, preparatory to, what could be the aforementioned war. Now, most people, once again, probably didn't know this. Those who did know it weren't for it. The recent polls on this question, are you for a war with Iran? It's about one in five Americans support it. The rest are probably asking war with Iran. Why have a war with Iran? They said no idea. The president did address it last night in a state

of the union and at a press conference. And he said in public what he basically says in private, one of those rare public figures who's pretty much the same behind closed doors as he is on stage. He says pretty much the same stuff. He's a little funnier in private, but basically he's not a different guy. He's the same guy. And he's been saying the same thing about Iran for a long time. Really two things. One, Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. They cannot have a nuclear weapon. He says it again and again, he really means it. That's not a talking point. It's completely sincere. And two, I would prefer a negotiated settlement. I would prefer peace rather than than war. And that's obviously true. So to bottom line where we are right now at the end of February

2026 on this looming Iran war seems likely have all those aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, planes ready, missiles ready, but it's not certain because the president hasn't decided to do it. And you may not get that impression either from watching the news. There is the sense that it's inevitable. And that's kind of a sciop, actually, designed to make you think there's nothing you can do about it. No, Trump has not decided to do this. Again, seems likely all the momentum is in that direction. But the president's the sole decider on this question. He's the commander in chief.

And he's showing no obvious signs of enthusiasm. And why would he? There are a lot of reasons not to do this. The first being, the one just mentioned, which is most Americans don't want it. And though it's not a direct democracy, it's a form of democracy. you probably shouldn't commit history-changing acts without the support of your people. And Trump feels that way. This is someone who pays very close attention to say TV ratings.

Why is that? Not just because he worked in TV, but because he thinks there are a pretty good measure of what people are interested. And he cares about what people think. And he's willing to listen to almost anybody. So that's a good reason not to do it. The public's not behind you. Maybe you've got great reasons to do it that they don't know about yet. But we haven't heard those.

and the president hasn't really explained them other than to say Iran is bad, yes. That's been the official U.S. position since 1979. Iran can't have nukes. That's always been the president's position. And we would like some kind of settlement. The reason he's not eager to start this war is because he, in general, is eager to start wars, hasn't been anyway, but because this would be a particularly tough war. This is the largest buildup since the Iraq war, but Iran is not.

Iraq, it's much, much, much bigger and much more technologically advanced. The population of Iran's about 92 million. In 2003, almost exactly 23 years ago, when we rolled into Baghdad, the population of Iraq was 25 million. So Iran is more than three times bigger. The landmass of Iran is multiple, six times bigger. It's huge. It's a huge, pretty advanced country compared to Iraq. So that's a problem right there. This is a serious thing to start a war with a real country. Are we in a position to do that? Well, there's some debate about that.

The U.S. military performs in a remarkable way under certain circumstances. But is the U.S. military right now ready for a prolonged conflict with a big country? Hmm. No, it turns out. And these are facts taken from open source material that have been published. They're on the Internet. You can look it up. None of this is classified.

This is all out there. But current estimates suggest that the United States is so low on some munitions, partly because we've used them in the defense of Israel already in the last 12 months. But whatever the cause, the United States is so low on certain kinds of munitions that were we to have even a brief but intense engagement with Iran, our military would not be ready for like 10 years to fight a real war against, you know, a peer or near peer adversary. So out the window would go any hope of defending Taiwan, whether or not it's a good idea is kind of, you know, up to you to decide. But that would not

even be on the table because we wouldn't be able to. We would be much weakened by this, because we don't have the stockpiles and we don't have the necessary industrial capacity to replace them quickly. So we are not in a position to have a lengthy engagement. And everyone at the Pentagon, who's gaming us out, understands that. And again, this has been reported publicly, though not necessarily in the New York Times or the Washington Post, at least not on the front page. But it's widely known. So it'd be a tough war. We're not in a great place to fight it right now. And the potential downsides are absolutely real. Lots of things could happen. There are tens of thousands of Americans in the region, of course, in uniform and out. They could be her to

killed. There's Israel, our ally, which is probably a little more vulnerable than we pretend it is to conventional attacks from ballistic missiles. Do the math on how many missiles Iran is believed to have versus how many anti-ballistic missiles Israel has, or we have to defend Israel. They could be in trouble. And then there's a question of what happens to Iran? Like, does it fall apart? Does it disintegrate as a country? To be clear, as if tonight, there is no Israeli plan for what comes a day after we depose the Ayatollah. Knock out the leadership of the country. What happens then? You're going to put in the former king's son or something? No one believes that's real. Will the country hang together with Pahlavi on the throne? Come on. No one is thinking this through

because the people pushing this clearly don't care what happens after. The point is to take out Iran as a coherent country, not to protect Israel, but in order to sweep Iran aside as a regional rival. Once Iran is gone, there's no question as to who controls the Middle East. It, of course, would be the only nuclear-armed power in the Middle East, Israel, period. That's the reason. The problem is, if the country were to disintegrate, the downstream effects would be profound for everybody else. You would likely have refugee crises. Where would they go? Well, Europe. They haven't enough refugees. They might go right across the water to Qatar or UAE. Oh, that could be a huge, huge problem. So why would they push for this? Well, you have to.

to think that the people pushing for this are not stupid. They've thought through the consequences. Let's say the United States attacks Iran. Maybe Iran just says, you know, you're absolutely right. We're evil. We're rolling over. Everybody in charge is going to retire, commit ritual suicide. We're going to turn it over to some Western Democrat who brings in pro-choice politics and gay marriage. And like, we're cool. We're going to join NATO at that point. That's great. but what if Iran decides better to die in your feet than on your knees and just unleashes its conventional arsenal against American assets in the region, against Israel, and critically against energy infrastructure in the Gulf? What would happen then? Well, you would see a global depression if they did that if they were successful in doing that.

if the extraction facilities and refineries and petrochemical plants in the Gulf were disabled, how expensive would oil be per barrel? How much would gasoline cost? What would steel go for? What would happen to liquefied natural gas, which goes to both Europe and China? What would happen to Europe if you disrupted the flow of LNG from the Gulf to Europe? What would happen if you close the Straits-Oremuz? The choke point at the end, of the Persian Gulf. Woo. I mean, wouldn't destroy the world forever, probably,

but it would tank the economy in the meantime, for sure. And who would suffer most? Well, let's see. The Gulf states, Europe, and the United States. It's kind of weird that anybody, especially an ally, would push for a conflict that's almost guaranteed to hurt its so-called allies. Why would you do that?

You can tell me you love me, but if you're encouraging me to commit suicide, you're probably lying. It's possible that we should judge people's intentions by the effects of what they do, not by their own description of their motive. Is it possible that there is some hostility toward the United States, the Gulf states, and Europe from the people. pushing this war. Oh, there's a lot of hostility. And part of it makes sense. The Gulf states, the six Arab oil-producing states called the GCC in the region, are, along with Iran, one of the main impediments to Israel's regional hegemony. They are very rich. They produce something that the rest of the world needs. They're also very good at diplomacy, particularly Qatar. They settle a lot of disputes internationally. They've positive themselves as the

Switzerland of the Middle East. They've done a good job at it, actually. And so they are a rival to Israel. You hear on Fox News, they're Hamas supporters. No, no, no, no, that's not their sin. Their sin is existing as a powerful independent country in potential rivalry with the regional hegemon Israel. So shafting them would be a very good thing from the Israeli perspective. But what about the United States? Israel's benefactor, its closest to ally. Hmm, why would they want that? Well, maybe if you're gaming this out a little bit, you've decided we need a new superpower. Public opinion in this country has swung against us so hard.

This bipartisan consensus that we're its closest ally is disintegrating before our very eyes. And let's be honest with ourselves, this is not going to continue forever. We need another country to be aligned with. Now, how many big countries are there to choose from? It's got to be physically large, big population nuclear armed. Not too many. In fact, the big ones would be China in India. But China, unfortunately, is a Han ethno state.

So you can't really turn its population against itself in order to increase your own power. It's not going to work. It's resistant to this to manipulation. And that leaves India. And it was probably no coincidence that the prime minister of India, India, Prime Minister Modi spoke to Knesset today about the ancient ties between Israel and India. Bottom line, yes, Israel is moving on from the United States at some point, probably sooner rather than later, to India. And so weakening the United States in a war with Iran is not all bad.

In fact, it might be good because then there's no rivalry at all in your region. It's you, the only country with nuclear weapons, and everybody else. So you can kind of do whatever you want. You don't have to worry about hostile neighbors. You can expand the size of your territory, for example. You can move your borders in all directions. Who's going to stop you? No one.

So if you game this out for a minute, the things that from an American perspective seem horrifying, like real downsides. Holy smokes. We could tank the U.S. economy. We could wreck the energy sector, at least temporarily. Some of our key Arab allies could be disabled by this. Those all seem very bad from an American perspective. Are they so bad from an Israeli perspective? No, they're not, actually. They may be the point long term. So where does this leave our president, President Trump? Well, it leaves him where he began, which is very resistant

to start big new wars. He, of course, ran for president, both times. all three times on the promise that he wouldn't do that. And he very famously in the 2016 campaign attacked Jeb Bush because of his brother's invasion of Iraq. That was idiotic, he said. And of course, he was right. And 23 years later, we know exactly how right he was. That war, which lasted 20 years, waged on behalf of our ally Israel, didn't help the United States. It helped to impoverish the United States and sink this country deeper into debt to weaken the dollar and destroy a generation of young men, mostly from the flyover states, the most decent and patriotic among us, destroyed. So from an American perspective, Iraq was a true disaster, and Trump was the first big political

candidate to say that out loud. He knows this. He always has. So why would he even be considering a war with Iran? Well, one way to think about it is the United States may not have a choice about whether or not this war starts. Because, of course, the government of Benjamin Netanyahu could always act unilaterally, preemptively against Iran, and just do it. Just strike Iran. What would happen then? Well, most likely the Iranians would strike Israel and then potentially strike American assets in the Gulf and then potentially strike energy facilities in the Gulf. And the United States would be, by definition, drawn in. So it's possible that the U.S. government, while not anxious to go to war with Iran, is trying to find a way to contain the behavior of its closest ally Israel.

Rather than sit back and wait for BB to do something that we have to clean up that we're implicated in and then sucked into, it's possible that the U.S. government is attempting to steer this in a less destructive direction. It's possible. None of this, of course, is filtered down to people paying attention because the few people. who are paying attention to this, because all the noise has been about Iran's nuclear weapons. They're on the verge of building a nuclear weapon any day now. Now, if you're semi-awake, you may remember that it was only about eight months ago back in June of last year during the short but hot 12-day war against Iran that the United States

took out nuclear processing facilities deep underground and then announced we have ended the Iranian nuclear threat. And then without you noticing, well, you were on summer vacation or going to your kids' graduation or bringing them back to school or watching the Super Bowl halftime show with your jaw slack, well, you were not tuned in. All of a sudden, that threat out of nowhere reemerged. And there's Benjamin Netanyahu on television or at the White House for a seventh time in a single year making the case that we're right on the verge of a nuclear Holocaust. Any day now, the Iranian government will have a nuclear weapon. And by the way, as noted, the president does not want Iran to have a nuclear weapon.

That is one thing that takes very, very seriously. And he said that to the Iranians. And unfortunately, turns out, whatever side's Iran, the current Iranian government, is very hard to deal with. They're disorganized. The head guy is 87 years old. There's almost no communication directly between the governments. The Supreme Leader in Iran has never had a single phone call with the President of the United States.

It's unclear exactly who's in charge. There are all kinds of factions. I mean, it's a nightmare. So the only people who've really been out there speaking in public about Iran's nuclear program basically are Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister of Israel and his many accolates and paid shills in the United States. You may have seen this tape before, but in case you have it, it's worth watching again, because it reminds us that Benjamin Netanyahu has been saying exactly the same thing about Iran. They're not to have a nuclear weapon any minute since at least 1996.

30 years. Here it is. Now they're well into the second stage. And by next spring, at most, by next summer, at current enrichment rates, they will have finished the medium enrichment and move on to the final stage. From there, it's only a few months, possibly a few weeks, before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb. You talk about a network of terror. Are there any other nations that you would recommend that the United States

launch preemptive attacks upon at this point? No, the issue is not, the issue is not, First of all, are there other nations that are developing nuclear weapons? Yes. Should we launch any other preemptive attacks? First, let me say what they are, and then let me make a suggestion on how to proceed. Thank you. The answer is categorically yes.

The two nations that are vying competing with each other, who will be the first to achieve nuclear weapons is Iraq and Iran. And Iran, by the way, is also outpacing Iraq in the development of ballistic missile systems that they hope will reach the eastern seaboard of the United States within 15 years. The dangerous of these regimes is Iran that has led a cruel despotism to a fanatic militancy. If this regime or its despotic neighbor Iraq were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences not only for my country and not only for the Middle East, but for all of mankind.

I believe that only the United States can lead this vital international effort. international effort to stop the nuclearization of terrorist states. But the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close. You can see why the government of Israel is such contempt for the United States, while they're totally happy to tank our economy, stretch our military to its limit, degrade us in public. Why? Because our leaders put up with this.

Some foreigner shows up in our capital every year for 30 years. for 30 years telling the same lies. And everyone in there just nods along all 535. Oh, really, Iran's about to get a nuclear weapon. I ran into a senator the other day. It was like, Iran's about to get a nuclear weapon. I mean, they believe it. How could you have respect for people who believe something that dumb?

Well, you couldn't, and they don't. And by the way, it's not just the claim that Iran is seconds away from a nuclear weapon that they're recycling here. It's maybe the oldest lie in American Forum. policy you heard in those clips too, which is, we need to do this because it's a despotic regime that is oppressing its own people. Now, this line is older than you may know. And the reason it's so distressing, it's so cynical, is because it plays upon Americans' best quality, which is decency. Americans hate despotism. They believe freedom is grand.

them and all people by God. And so a regime that oppresses its own people is inherently illegitimate. Americans are born believing that, and God willing, they always will believe that because it's true. So if you're trying to sell an illegitimate war, wage for reasons that had nothing to do with human rights at all, you would use that line, wouldn't you? Probably. Well, American policymakers have used that line, and we pulled some.

You want to hear some? this is, I'm going to get my glasses, which I've dropped. Excuse me, we pulled this and this actually made me laugh out loud. So this goes back, well, 61 years. Here's Lyndon Johnson, 1965 in a speech at Johns Hopkins, explained that the war in Vietnam, which was just getting intense then, which was three years from Tet from the height, he said this, tonight Americans and Asians are dying for a world where each people may choose its own path to change. So really we're doing this for the Vietnamese people. Okay, now. Then Bush, George W. Bush,

son of George H.W. Bush, said this, right before the Iraq war started, and we're quoting, we have no ambition in Iraq except to remove a threat and restore control of that country to its own people. Right. We did that for human rights reasons. We just wanted democracy in Iraq. Do that happen? The Christian population was annihilated. Hundreds of thousands of people. people died and political control was turned over to the Ayatollahs in Iran. Hmm, no. But he said it anyway. And so did Dick Cheney, by the way.

My belief he said in the lead up to the Iraq War is that we will be greeted as liberators. The vast majority of Iraqis would respond favorably to an effort to rid the country of Saddam's regime. Well, someone who happened to be in Baghdad in December of 2003, the day we caught Saddam at Decrete, I can attest to what you already know, which is a lot. which is that's where the insurrection started. But Barack Obama, even. Three years after getting elected president, having been thoroughly briefed and had a lie in 2011,

said this about the bombing of Libya and the murder of our sometime ally and CIA asset, Omar Gaddafi, quote, this is a plea for help from the Libyan people themselves. They're desperate for it. regime change in Libya, said Barack Obama, would serve America's, quote, broader goal of a Libya that belongs not to a dictator, but to its people. I mean, what can you do but laugh? It's so absurd.

It's such an obvious lie. It's like Bibi Netanyahu's saying, they're minutes away. As long as people believe this or are so polite they pretend to believe it, politicians will keep telling the same lies. You have to make them pick a new lie. Now, what's interesting is that the administration, I think to its credit, hasn't done a ton of this. There's been, you know, the, oh, we feel bad for the billion Iranians murdered in the streets of Tehran or some whatever. Who knows what the number is?

You can't believe any number connected to any conflict in any country ever because everyone lies about them all the time. But some number of Iranians protesting the Iranian government apparently were killed by the government. And we feel bad about that. And we legitimately do feel bad about that. Is that a good reason to topple the existing power structure and just let the country devolve into whatever happens next? Probably not. And the administration hasn't really made that case or really any case other than they can't have nuclear weapons. So you can at least feel satisfied that they're not trying very hard to lie to you.

They're basically just saying, it looks like we could have a war, because everybody knows the only reason we're having this war is because Israel wants it. This is their last chance, they believe. This presidency is the last presidency where they're going to have unequivocal bipartisan support, period. You can't primary every Thomas Massey, and there's a whole army of them coming at some point because everyone can see what's going on. And you could shut down X and you can just shut down the Internet. can be like Great Britain and arrest people who protest Israel, but attitudes are not going to revert to what they were five years ago. Sorry, and they know this. So this is their last chance. What's so amazing is that Israel, which at least is acting in what it perceives to be, its own

national interest, is joined by its shills in the United States, of course. But really, its only other ally in this is the American news media. Whose job it is to tell you the truth? and informing you as to what's happening to tell you, hey, wake up. The world could be changing and it's going to affect you and your family. That's their job. And instead, they've been lulling you to sleep with the same variety of transparent lies and propaganda. And so just for fun, we decided we would pick a cross-section. And not just from a liberal media or right-wing media, but from all media, because it's not a left-right question.

Chuck Schumer is every bit as much in fact. favor of an invasion of Iran, a regime change war in Iran, as, I don't know, pick a brain dead Republican senator, which is almost all of them. They're all for it. And so we're all the Democrats. You don't see Alexandria Kuzio-Cortez making a real case against. She's like a pro forma case because she knows that all of her constituents hate it. But is she really working to stop? Is of course not? Because they're all for it, because they're paid to be for it. And so are the media. So here's a quick cross-section. Now, it goes to that saying that the Wall Street Journal, owned by the Murdoch family, has been by far the most egregious and the most stealthy.

Because starting new regime change wars on behalf of Israel is like the whole reason to have the Wall Street Journal now, apparently. But here's just a few headlines. The diminishing risk of an Iran attack, quote, two years ago there was a strong possibility the region would spiral out of control. Not anymore. Really? Oh, really? What is the plan the day after we depose or kill the 87-year-old Supreme Leader or President Poshechian? What's the plan? Do you have a plan? No plan. But don't worry. It will not spiral out of control. The Wall Street Journal ensures you of that. Here's another. A fractured Iran might not be so bad. Well, yeah, it could spiral out of control

and break into different provinces and, you know, it could become Libya or Syria or Lebanon. That's not so bad because you know why, quote? Its borders are artificial. Oh, they're fake! And a breakup would frustrate the interests of China, Russia, and others. Okay. So our global rivals wouldn't like it, therefore it's good. And, quote, its borders are artificial.

As compared to whose borders? All borders are artificial. God didn't draw them. Sorry, Mike Huckabee. They're drawn by people. Artificial. What? No, it's a country.

Has been for a while. and if you blow it up into constituent parts and inside a civil war, they're going to be downstream effects of that. Again, like refugee crises into Europe and the Gulf States, probably the United States too, since it is the iron law of American foreign policy that once you start bombing people, you have to let all their angry kids into your country.

That's how, by the way, we got the Boston Marathon bombing and many other acts of terror. Thanks, neocons. And then there's this. John Bolton still exists, writing for the Wall Street Journal. The Gaza's ceasefire has diverted Western attention from the real threat. Tehran and its surrogates! You'd really have to be John Bolton to think that Tehran and its surrogates or even in the top 100 issues Americans are worried about at the moment.

They're not. This is knowable. It's polled all the time by Gallup and others. Tehran and its surrogates are, admittedly, an issue of concern to Israel and to its shills here, but they're not actually a problem for a continent-sized country separated from the world by two great oceans. Not a problem. As long as you don't like start a war with Iran or something. So the New Year is here, but that does not mean you've got to overhaul your whole life, despite claims to the contrary. You don't have to take drastic

measures. Make a few changes here and there, and you'll be a lot better off. And you can start with the snacks in your pantry. Now, probably The products from standard American chip brands are, let's be honest, pretty repulsive filled with chemicals that make you feel heavy and bloated. They don't even taste that good. They're not good for you. We recommend an upgrade with Masa chips. Masa is the easiest way to eat clean without feeling like you're on a diet. The chips contain three ingredients.

That's it. Organic corn, sea salt, 100% grass-fed beef towel, and that is it. No seed oils, no mystery chemicals, just food, actual food. And they're amazing, and you feel great after. You don't feel weighed down. We particularly enjoyed the Cobenero flavor lately, but they're all great. You want to give them a try? Visit masachips.com, MASA, chips.com slash Tucker.

Use the code Tucker for 25% off your first order, or you can clink the link in the video description, or you can scan the QR code to claim this outstanding offer. But here is the greatest defender maybe of all, and there'll be the New York Post, the scrappy New York tabloid, famed for its rollicking crime headlines. Headless body and topless bar.

It's a hilarious newspaper. Always has been up until two years ago when Lachlan Murdoch took full control of it. And now it's like commentary. It's like any other publication from a neocon think tank in Washington is just advocating for war and lying to you in order to get you to support it. So here's just a quick selection for the New York Post. M memo to President Trump. Don't miss this historic moment to strike Iran and end its terror regime. This historic moment.

Iran's rulers plainly fear U.S. strikes. Trump should prove them right. Mr. President, you're so strong and dangerous. You have a chance to prove that. They fear you. Memo to self. Never accept flattery uncritically because it is deeply subversive. Attacks are straightforward.

flattery is reptilian. Flattery is the true danger. Oh, President Trump, you're so strong. They're afraid of you. Prove them right by killing them. And then if Trump doesn't strike Iran now, history will never forgive him. If you don't have a war with Iran, history will never forgive you. Probably depends on who writes that history.

But hundreds of millions of Americans will forgive you. They'll be grateful to you for pulling us back from the brink of something we don't need and don't want. And then last, of course, Douglas Murray. The eminent historian, everyone respects Douglas Murray. He's got a British accent. He's not being paid to say this. Don't worry. Trump has a chance to end Kameney's reign of terror in Iran.

His reign of terror. Because if there's one thing Douglas is concerned about, it's human rights in Iran. He's been there. And now to the New York Times. And this is interesting if you're a right winger because the New York Times is, of course, like the most liberal publication in the world, it's NPR on paper. It's totally different from, say, Fox News. It's like they're polls apart, they have nothing in common whatsoever, except on a few questions

like immigration and war and the basis of our economy, which is finance and real estate, the banks, except on those issues, there's some overlap. Okay, there's vigorous consensus. In other words, except on the issues that actually matter, that drive history, that determine whether or not your children thrive in this country or not. On those issues, they're one and the same. And so here's a section. We'll put this one up on the screen because it's so amusing. Here's Mr. Brett Stevens, three different pieces he's written on this question.

He's obviously a man with a great deal of credibility and authority on a regime change wars, having advocated for all of them, none of which has worked. The case for striking Iran. can we let Iran get away with mass murder? Israel had the courage to do what needed to be done. The case for overthrowing Maduro, the Syria opportunity. We absolutely need to escalate in Iran. And then my personal favorite from 20, 23, 20 years later, quote, 20 years on, I don't regret supporting the Iraq war. Okay.

Should you be admitting that? 20 years later, I am not ashamed to wear women's underwear. Well, actually, you should be ashamed. You should be embarrassed. If you don't regret supporting the Iraq War, if that support occasioned no soul searching in you, then you, my friend, have a spiritual problem. All of us make mistakes. All of us support dumb things as someone who supported the Iraq War. I can attest to that personally. So the acid test is not, do you make mistakes, the acid test is do you admit that you did, and do you apologize? But if you refuse to do either one of those things, and instead 20 years later are still bragging about the greatest

disaster in modern American history as if it's a badge of honor, hard to know if we have anything in common as people, because that's contemptible and scary. It's never occurred to you the Iraq war was a mistake? Really? On what basis was it a success? Hmm. So if that's really your view, maybe we shouldn't trust you when you tell us that we have a moral obligation to attack Iran. throwing that out there. So that's where the print media are. But let's be honest, it's not really the print media who are driving this, because this is a Republican administration. And as everyone knows, Republicans have one main news source. And that's Fox News. I have some familiarity with the product. And I can say that even as Fox News's reach and power and influence have diminished

greatly, mostly due to technological changes, people go on the internet, they don't pay for cable. but as it has diminished, it has not broken the stranglehold that Fox has over Republicans in Washington. They watch Fox. They want to go on Fox. And so Fox has really driven this war. And if it occurs, you can thank Fox more than any other media organization, more than any other lobbyist, more honestly than any government, more than the government of Israel. Fox News has pushed for this war. Its owners personally have pushed for it personally. And of course, its employees on the channel have pushed for it with such aggression and

unanimity that as of tonight, there's not a single on-air Fox personality who is going to question going to war with Iran. There are some who may have reservations. There was one on a weekend show who very bravely spoke up and said, is this a good idea? That was the last time this topic was discussed on that weekend show. because the order has gone down to Fox employees, we are in favor of this war. And that is very obvious if you watch it. Now, one of the main cheerleaders for an invasion of Iraq and every other invasion

and every other instance of shedding of human blood, just a killing in general would, of course, be Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina. Now, if you don't watch Fox, you may have no idea what he actually says, when he goes on Fox, which is all the time. So we want to play you a short montage of Lindsay Graham and watch as you watch this, his eyes. And you can see that he is maybe for the first time that day, feeling elevated and light and happy, but also tantalized.

You can almost watch his mouth fill with saliva. Some people feel this way in strip bars, others in bakeries. Lindsay Graham is excited by killing. And if you think that's cruel, watch this. Change is coming to Iran. It'll be the biggest change in the history of the Middle East to get rid of this Nazi regime. Hit Iran. They have oil fields out in the open.

They have the Revolutionary Guard headquarters you can see from space. Blow it off the map. There's an opportunity to hit the Iran nuclear program in a fashion I haven't seen in decades. And I think it would be in the world's interest for us to decimate the Iran and nuclear. threat while we can. Be all in President Trump in helping Israel eliminate the nuclear threat. If we need to provide bombs to Israel, provide bombs. If we need to fly planes with Israel, do joint operations. So pray for our troops in harm's way. They're a risk associated with any operation. They join the military to keep their country safe and to make the world a better place.

And taking on the Aitoula does both. If I were you, Mr. President, I would kill the leadership that are killing the people. people. And to the atoas, you need to understand if you keep killing your people who are demanding a better life, Donald J. Trump is going to kill you. Now, you can look at that and say, you know, this guy's risking his soul talking like this. This guy's wrong on the evidence. This guy's clearly a buffoon with some kind of psychosexual problems that were not qualified to diagnose, but that are totally evident. But you should also keep in mind as you watch Lindsey Graham, he's taken very seriously by his colleagues in the Senate, not just the Republicans, but also the Democrats,

and he's taken very seriously by Republicans in Washington more broadly. Of course he is. He's taken very seriously. This has an effect, and that effect could get us into, you know, certainly the worst war in 23 years. So the idea is to flood the zone, the information, zone to make sure that no Republican in Washington hears anything but that. And the proponents of this war are very intent on that. They've made no effort to convince you. It's a good idea. They are staying up night and day convincing the decision makers. It's a good idea. And they're trying, by the way, to shout down and threaten and defame and slander and exclude anybody who has a contrary view, who might pipe up and say, wait a second, we sure this is a good

idea? What would happen if the energy trade gets shut down in the Persian Gulf? What would happen if Iran lobed, successfully lobbed some sort of armament into a U.S. aircraft carrier and Americans died? What would happen? What would happen if Israel felt threatened enough to use nuclear weapons against Iran, which is a possibility, despite what they tell you? That's a possibility. What would happen? Once these things get going, you don't know where they wind up, but anyone who says he does know is lying, obviously. So anyone who raises those, those people, you know, questions must be called a Nazi and an anti-Semite and you want to kill Jews. No, don't want to kill anybody. The game is to make sure that the only noise in the room comes from Graham and people

like Graham, right? Until, of course, someone pushes play and it's too late to stop it. And at that point, we can all pretend we were never for this or they just did it wrong or whatever. We've seen this movie so many times, you know exactly what's going to happen if it goes south. And the truth is, it works because people are intimidated. Donald Trump, to his great credit, listens to everybody, everybody. And by the way, in his speeches, when he starts rolling and ad-libbing and all that, the weave, as he calls it, he'll often say, I talk to the sky and, like, he actually kind of listens to people. But people around Donald Trump have been intimidated, understandably, by the level of pure aggression aimed at anybody who raises totally reasonable points about the downsides

of a war with Iran. So they haven't said anything. So keep in mind, and by the way, this is a message to anyone who knows Donald Trump, has a good relationship with him, likes him, loves the United States. Now is the time to maybe call and say, whoa, wait a second, have some concerns here. Now is the time right now because the decision has not yet been made. but it's not just aggression, it's also lying. So I'll play one last clip before we go to Clayton Morris, who's spent many years in the U.S. media and has a, I think, more tactile sense of what's going on here in information world. But one last clip, and this is from, I think two days ago, and this is from a man at Fox, a weekend show host called Mark Levine. and really nobody has elevated his own visibility to a greater extent or worked harder to get the United States into war with Iran than Mark Levin has.

And he's done it not through brilliant argument, incisive analysis, basically through screaming. But as we get closer and closer and closer to the time where this war could actually start, Levin has decided to just make stuff up. And the clip you're about to hear is from his podcast, I believe, and you can check it two days ago. And it is grounds for dismissal from Fox News, immediate grounds for dismissal. And it's also, at the very least, grounds for, like, questions to him, like, what are you doing? What are you doing saying something like this? This is Mark Levin telling his listeners, such as they are, that Iran has nuclear-tipped ICBMs aimed at the United States. Watch this.

They'd slaughter a million of their own people if it meant retaining power. That's not a government of a country. Those are terrorists that control a country. It is a police state that's slaughtering its own people to stay in power so it can slaughter us. It believes, as the 7th century primitive barbarians believed, that they must destroy civilization. They believe today that they must destroy the West. Most prominently, the United States of America, those nuclear ICBMs are in. aimed for Tel Aviv or Jerusalem.

They're aimed for New York and Los Angeles and Chicago and everywhere in between and around, the United States of America. The enemies of civilization. If you wake up in a world where Mark Levine is publicly identified with, quote, civilization, you are an upside-down world. Civilization begins with the acknowledgement

that human life is sacred, that God created each person as an individual, that identity politics is therefore wrong, and that telling the truth matters because truth is absolute. You may get it wrong, but the idea that nothing is true is a form of nihilism and that attitude is the enemy of civilization. And yet that's exactly what you just saw. Iran does not have nuclear-tipped ICBMs. And they're not aimed at the United States. That is a lie. It is a provable lie. Now, why is he saying that? not because he hopes to win an argument, but because he hopes to whip his listeners into such a

frenzy of fear and rage that they will support something that will hurt them. This will hurt the United States almost without question if it happens. This is not good for you. It's not good for our actual allies, the energy-producing countries in the Middle East, which are our actual allies. Israel is in no sense our ally in this. and yet Mark Levin will not, and none of these people will address that debate. Instead, they're just lying to scare people into supporting something that will hurt them.

Mark Levin actually tweeted this. And if you're old enough to remember the Iraq War, this is going to make you laugh. Iran producing ballistic missiles with chemical and biological warheads. We mustn't delay any longer. They have WMD. Where did that information come from? Well, it came from the free press. No, I beg your pardon.

It did not come from the free press. Don't they probably repeated it. It came from another aligned publication in Washington. Is there any evidence of that? No, of course, there's no evidence of that. And I'd be willing to bet my house that that lie originated in the same place. The original WMD lie originated in 2002 before the Iraq War. Israel, of course. Tell Americans, tell the Congress, tell the White House that the country we want

you to spend your money and your lives to overthrow so we can have a greater degree of control or hegemony in a region, that that country is a threat to you because they have weapons of mass destruction. That was a lie then. It's a lie now, but they're saying it. And so if you followed Mark Levins' Twitter feed, which I didn't until today, but it's an amazing thing, actually, you'll see that he's given up all argument. Any attempt to win anyone over and instead repeating, kill Kameney, take out Kameney, take out Kameney every single day. Now, what is this?

Well, it's really a kind of witchcraft, actually. It's the idea that if you repeat something enough, that you can will it into existence, the words alone will make it real. And by the way, that works. unfortunately that works. If you repeat a lie enough, it assumes substance. God isn't fooled, but people are. And so when you see somebody doing that, saying something is totally untrue

that contradicts the observations of your eyes and ears. I know that's not true. And you see that person brush off the fact that it's not true and continue to repeat it, you know that that person is trying to mesmerize you and put you under whatever kind of spell this is, and that person is scary. And that right now, ladies and gentlemen, is most of the American media

and most of the U.S. Congress. So keep praying. In the meantime, Clayton Morris, who once had a seat on the fabled Fox News morning show, joins us now for an update of what he thinks going on with the media. Clayton Morris, thank you so much for doing this. it was a dirty seat. It was a, so are you, I mean, tell me if you think it's fair to say that not all, but most

traditional left-right media are aligned. They have disagreements, of course, on the trans issue, but on this issue, whether or not we go to war in Iran, it seems like there's complete agreement. And there always has been. To me, there's no daylight at all between both of these parties. we call it a uniparty. That term gets thrown around quite a bit, this idea of the uniparty.

But they are in lock step on this issue, as far as I see it. Very few voices are speaking out about it. If they do, they get pushed out. I mean, look at Marjorie Taylor Green, Matt Gates, you know, questioning why we're in Syria. How dare you?

How dare you ask, why are we in Syria? Congressman Massey, very few voices, Senator Paul, but there's very few, there's very little daylight in these parties on this issue at all. They desperately want war. I was sitting here thinking, because you have the ideological push, right, from Mark Levin, he doesn't really care about the money. No.

It's the, you know, it's the Greater Israel Project. That's what his big push is. But Lindsey Graham and these others, is it really about Israel? Or is it really about the money? And I think for most of these people, it's probably about the money. It's the massive military industrial complex. You know, I got warned when I was on Fox. It warned me about much, but that was one of the things tread carefully when I was criticizing the massive buildup, the massive military industrial complex, the amount of money that we're spending on this to go to war in Iran or Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan or whatever other boogeyman of the week that you have, whether it's Russia through Ukraine, weapons that wind up in Mexico.

shut up. Don't ask those questions. So we're all just supposed to sit back. And then when you question it, why are we giving so much money to Israel? Why do we give all of our money to these different places? Shut up because these weapons are made in our backyard. And so if you, as you know it better than anybody, but the military industrial complex sits in the neighborhoods of most members of Congress. Yep. Because whether you drive to Colorado Springs or you drive to Wichita, Kansas, inevitably there's going to be some arm of Northrop Grumman or Boeing or any name it, name it, Honeywell, it doesn't really matter, who are all receiving trillions of dollars now as part of this massive boondoggle. So heaven forbid that they would ever question the money that's flowing

into the military industrial complex. So all of them are bought and paid for. And they're all part of this big cabal. And I think you bring up a great point about they're all in lock step because they want us to be fighting here, like in this narrow structure, right? Have some culture war, like, you know, whether it's funny stories on Fox News about HOA's telling people to remove like Christian symbol, whatever it is, right? You just, you fight in these like little, in this little bubble, you know, but the real stories out here and they want us fighting in here so it looks like that they're really at odds with each other, that AOC is really against Mike Johnson

and instead they're all in agreement they're all in agreement and they're all in lockstep when I read very little on this because it's also misleading but when I do read

big media outlets on this question and Epstein for that matter but Iran this week I really get the feeling that the intel agencies have some hand I get the strong feeling the overwhelming sense that some government intel agency had a hand in shaping this coverage.

That's remarkable. That is a remarkable assessment. You think you'd be on the right track. No, I think you'd definitely be on the right track. And of course, up until a few years ago, you would have been labeled a conspiracy theorist, right? This idea that, wait a second, the intel community has a hand in shaping our narratives, our coverage. We only learned about it through the church committee. by the way, one of the great, great Americans.

But go back to the JFK assassination, right? And Project Mockingbird, before it ever became Operation Mockingbird, and the infiltration of reporters at the Washington Post and the wiretapping of reporters to find out where information was coming. That was sort of like the clandestine CIA operations then. Then it morphs into the 1970s, you know, into the 1970s, or late 1960s and 70s into Operation Mockingbird, where they were installing members.

of the intelligence community in newsrooms, particularly, you know, CBS News, the New York Times and others. And then once that was exposed, it morphed into, well, now they're just on the payroll of these networks. You have, you know, Mike Pompeo. They're not even hiding in the shadows anymore, like meeting you at the water cooler.

Like, hey, maybe you ought to not cover that story tonight, or maybe you ought to look at this angle of that story tonight, wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Now you just have people like Mike Pompeo on the payroll of major networks or reporters who are embedded inside the Pentagon who are just adjacent to people like Jennifer Griffin, who the other night literally on Fox News said, it's not a matter of if we go to war with Iran. It's a matter of when. That's literally how she ended her toss back to Brett Baer.

Did she really say that? Yeah, it's not a matter of if. it's a matter of when. That's not true, by the way. I mean, just in point of fact, that's not true. I do think we're likely to go to war with Iran. I grieve that. But in point of fact, Trump makes the decision, and he hasn't made it.

So it's just a fact. So if you're reporting that we're going to war, you're lying. And it does feel like they're trying to create this sense of inevitability. I think her point was the military buildup is like, you can't put that genie back in the bottle at this point, that there's so much of a military buildup. We've moved so many expensive pieces of equipment to this region, not unlike the Gulf War.

In fact, I've talked to sources in Tel Aviv, who told me they haven't seen this type of buildup since the Gulf War. So I think her point is, oh, well, you know what, Mr. President, maybe you just sort of sit back and let other people deal with this. We're going to build it up to such a degree where you just can't put this genie back in the bottle. and I wonder how much agency he has at this point to be able to tell we're not going. We're not doing it. Yeah.

We're not going to listen to what the Israeli government wants us to do and to launch this war, which would be absolutely brutal and devastating. Hey, to brag, but we're pretty confident this show is the most vehemently pro-dog podcast you're ever going to see. We can take or leave some people, but dogs are non-negotiable. They are the best. They really are our best friends. And so for that reason, we're thrilled to have a new partner called D. Dutch pet. It's the fastest growing pet telehealth service.

Dutch.com is on a mission to create what you need, what you actually need, affordable quality veterinary care anytime no matter where you are. They will get your dog or cat what you need immediately. It's offering an exclusive discount, Dutch is, for our listeners. You get 50 bucks off your vet care per year. Visit dutch.com slash Tucker to learn more. Use the code Tucker for $50 off. that is an unlimited vet visits.

$82 a year, $82 a year. We actually use this. Dutch has vets who can handle any pet under any circumstance in a 10-minute call. It's pretty amazing, actually. You never have to leave your house. You don't have to throw the dog in the truck. No wasted time waiting for appointments. No wasted money on clinics or visit fees.

Unlimited visits and follow-ups for no extra cost, plus free shipping on all products for up to five pets. It sounds amazing like it couldn't be real, but it actually is real. Visit dutch.com slash Tucker to learn more. Use the code Tucker for 50 bucks off, your veterinary care per year. Your dogs, your cats, and your wallet will thank you. What's interesting is that, excuse me, that kind of military buildup is kind of hard to hide. And it wasn't hidden.

It was taking place in public, and anyone who was interested could read about it. But I don't think most Americans did any of the day it was happening. And they sort of wake up and you have, you know, Venezuela taking out Maduro on January 3rd. And then that moves into the Super Bowl and Winter Olympics. And like, people are just not really aware that this buildup is taking place. And you wake up in morning and holy smokes that the Gerald Ford is there. So we're on its way. Isn't the media supposed to be telling us this is building?

Well, you can if you talk to, you know, members of the military and I do, I'm sure you do as well. and they were telling us, you know, in the weeks leading up to this, that, wow, the Abraham Lincoln is now on its, I think, third deployment. They've been extended. So they were supposed to come home. This is, like, the longest they've ever been out, 10 months, which is, like, unheard of. So they're now been extended for, like, a third time. And they're supposed to come home and see their spouses. And sorry, this has been extended because of what's about to happen.

So, like, all of this information is, like, readily available. but of course, there's no journalism actually happening anymore. And if there is, it's being parroted from whatever the intelligence state wants to be pushed out into the mainstream media. People like Sean Hannity who sit there literally and wear a CIA lapel pin. I mean, look at just Google Sean Hannity's CIA lapel pin who on the news is wearing a CIA lapel pin. I mean, so, you know, this, I just, I feel. like sometimes, Tucker, I wake up and I'm living in this like weird, bizarre world because people are going about their business, they're going about their day, and then you and I live

in this world where we're seeing all of these things happening, and it doesn't touch the American people necessarily, right? They're going to go about their day. The gas prices may go up. Depends on what happens in the streets of Hormuz, etc. Unless you're one of the families of the 50,000 Americans who are currently in the region in whom Joe Biden said, without a doubt, they're, you know, they will be, it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when they are attacked. So he's expecting fully for them to be cannon fodder. So then these military families will have the loss of life. But of course, that'll be insulated and bubble wrapped from most of the American people anyway,

and it won't affect people's day-to-day lives. So we pick these fights where we're doing these regime change wars over there, and there's very little effect on the United States populace. And the mainstream media tries to bury and cover it or spin a number. narrative. It's, it's incredibly frustrating. And to see the mockingbird media like Fox News and others just pushing for this, it's, it is infuriating. But it's not simply that they lie. It's that they work to exclude and discredit people who tell the truth. People who tell the truth are punished. I mean, this is like a principle in the gospels. The one guy who got tortured to death was the guy

was telling the truth, right? So we shouldn't be surprised by it, but I am every single time. I got a text today from, and I won't say this person's name, it's an end. It's an editor at Barry Weiss's Gatekeeper publication who writes me this. I'm the features editor of the free press. We have a feature coming out about how the podcast business has leaned into conspiracy theories.

We'd love to include your voice. Let me know. I said, pretty funny. I don't think that line of attack works anymore, does it? And she didn't get back to me. But I love that the only people who are telling the truth are

attacked by the liars and that by the way your audience, you're Natalie's audience is way bigger than the free press, way bigger than CBS News. I mean,

I do think that the people I'm accusing of lying have less of a grip on the American public than ever before. So maybe it doesn't matter, but it is infuriating. Right.

We even, I think we even sell a T-shirt on our store that says, conspiracy knower, you know. Exactly. And our pronouns are, our pronouns are I told you so. So I'm, you know, like, I'm fine. You know, I wear it as a badge of honor. It's fine, whether it's COVID or what it was going on in Ukraine, the child trafficking operations. Whatever it is that we've been covering on our show, I've yet to have anyone come on our show

and say, you need to correct that mistake. Oh, okay. So, you know, conspiracy theories are just six months, six months spoiler alerts, right? from what's to come. So I love leaning into conspiracy theories because no one else is doing the job. I mean, just look at the Epstein story. Where is the mainstream media? They're not covering it at all.

And not even not covering it, they're refusing to have voices on their air who could actually provide real value, real source material. I'm speaking to a source today, actually. And who's recently been to Epstein Island. And on Epstein Island, there's still papers, Jeffrey Epstein's papers scattered all over his books, materials everywhere, just laying there. Not gathered up by the FBI, not gathered up and being investigated.

But where is this information in the mainstream media? Where are any deeper questions about Epstein's murder? And all of the inconsistencies that appeared that day at the prison. They're not in the mainstream. media at all. And even like Fox News coverage of Pam Bondi's hearing was mysteriously absent. I don't know if you noticed that, but no. Fox News loves to go wall to wall with, you know, whoever, whatever member of the cabinet is going to be there. They love to go wall to wall coverage. Let's check in now with Cash Patel. You know, he's testifying before Congress today about what the FBI is

doing. Great. Spend an hour, two hours, senators, members of, you know, have representatives asking questions, House Judiciary Committee and otherwise, Pam Bondi coverage? Shame on you. If you tuned into Fox News to see like deep coverage of Pan Bondi being grilled over the Epstein files, sorry, you weren't going to see it. MSNBC carried it, if I'm not mistaken, CNN carried it, but Fox News, like, why is, why do they, why do they not want to show Pam Bondi being questioned about the Epstein files? Normally they'd be covering that wall to wall. So there is a dereliction of duty happening in the mainstream media. And I know from sources who have sent material to like News Nation, the New York Times and other major publications, and they've

ignored it. They've ignored it and won't publish it. So why? Anyway, there's a dereliction of duty in the mainstream media. So I think it's a fair question. Why? In fact, it's the important question. Obviously, Fox's audience is interested in Epstein. You know, the guy who partied with Bill Gates and really was friends with Hillary Clinton. Like, why wouldn't they be interested? Of course, that are interested, but they're not getting the coverage from their network of choice, but that's also true of New York Times readers. So it's a left, right, once again, collusion on this cover-up, and it is a cover-up. What explains that?

I've been wrestling with this a lot, and I'm, you know, is it because, in certain sources who've told me that it is because how this hits just about every, The major power players. I mean, Marjorie Taylor Green admitted that President Trump called her and asked her to not vote for the, what am I said? The dispatch. Discharge petition. I always get the discharge position.

Excuse me. And, of course, the Epstein Transparency Act in her words, quoting her, she said, President told me that too many of my friends would be heard. And I think that's at the heart of it. And I think the money. And there's a reason also, I think, that we haven't seen any of the financial information. yet. So, you know, when you and I spoke a few years ago on the show, we talked about like Operation Gladio and NATO and there's a strategy that they have, which is, you know, the strategy of tension

that Colonel Towner Watkins, she's very eloquent on this point. And it's a strategy to keep us in this chaos, right? And it's also like a drip feed of information. So we get sort of disparate pieces of emails, but no financial information, no transactions. that connect point A to point B. We get this person said this. Peter Atia said, I can't tell everyone about you. You know, you're my friend, but man, you're kind of dirty. We get Russian models with Bill Gates emails.

We get random pieces of Pizza Gate and all of these other things. But do we get financial connections, financial transactions, which the DOJ is sitting on, by the way? Why don't we see any of that information? And, you know, to your point with the New York Times or these different publications covering this up, I, you know, I don't know, but they were actively involved in this. When you have Landon Thomas, for instance, right, whose name shows up as part of the Epstein investigation. He was writing about the Epstein from the New York Times, financial reporter writing about Epstein back during his first arrest. And then you have Nellie Bowles, who is, of course, the partner of, wife of Barry Weiss,

who gets assigned by the New York Times as a tech reporter to go and do a profile piece on Jeffrey Epstein. And it's in the files where she claims, oh, my newsroom basically, you know, they told me it was, or it later came out in her piece why she justified it, that she could go and, be with Epstein that I'd be safe. Like, so wait, the New York Times put you up to going to a known pedophile sex traffickers house? Like, what kind of newsroom is like, yeah, you should, you, you, you girl, you just run along to a known sex trafficking and pedophiles house and write a profile piece as a tech

reporter. Like, look, I covered technology for years. Love it. And I know all those people in the tech world, if you call it, like, there's no way somebody from like The Verge or the tech reporter for the Wall Street. Journal would be assigned to go do like a criminal profile piece like on financial crimes and sex trafficking or what it just wouldn't make any sense it's like bob woodward being chosen to cover watergate you know like as an as a as a as a CIA asset or intel a you know adjacent asset

it just doesn't make any sense um and then when you learn that she's cozy with epstein and then barry wise it's just so bizarre has yeah i know i know nelly bulls america's rome Ranchers helped build this country for over 250 years ranchers fed America through droughts, wars, pandemics, every other kind of chaos. Our friends at Good Ranchers built their company on that honorable legacy. Good Ranchers is a meat company. It's 100% committed to America. They raise every cut on local American soil.

The entire packaging and fulfillment process takes place in this country. Same with customer support. You know, dark basements in India. when you call, you talk to real Americans, and they donate a portion of their profit to veterans' organizations. We have Good Ranchers Meat for Dinner on our table. It is so good, and it's easy to order. Just a few simple clicks. Support a company that honors this nation's past, present, and our future. Go to good ranchers.com today, and if you subscribe to any of their boxes of 100% American meat, you save up to 500 bucks a year. And if you use the code Tucker, you get an additional $25, rather $25 off.

maybe even better than 25% dollars off your first order. That's Code Tucker for an extra 25 bucks off the order on top of $500 you'll save this year for subscribing. Good Ranchers.com American Meat delivered. Has she explained this?

Nelly Bolt. She wrote a piece about how I think I have it here actually. She wrote a piece. Nellie Bowles, the journalist and the Epstein. She published this on the third of February actually. Nellie Bowles, the journalist, and the Epstein, I had the chance to profile one of the darkest, most interesting characters of our moment. Why didn't I grab it? Why didn't I grab it?

So she writes this whole piece about regularly using him as a source because he was business adjacent. So I just thought it would be good to write, you know, we're going to write a profile piece on this. So the media, it's remarkable how incurious they are or intentionally. I don't believe they're dumb. they're not allowing, for instance, Congressman Massey to appear on television. I know for a fact that he hasn't, Fox News has not had him on in, I think about a year, if I'm not mistaken. The guy responsible along with Rocahanna for the Epstein Transparency Act, but Fox News won't allow Congressman Massey to appear on their airways. Like, is there some sort of gatekeeping going on by Susie Wiles inside the White House to keep these people from

getting this message out on their favorite network? I don't know. I mean, keep in mind that Fox hates Trump, the owners hate Trump, the Murdox hate Trump, to the point where they wouldn't have him on. So it's hard to believe it's because they support Trump.

And can I just say something because I know I'm going to be attacked if I don't say this. I have no connection whatsoever to Nelly Bowles, you know, not an intimate at all. I am dissidently related to her. So I just want to say that. But I'm not part of any concerns.

conspiracy at all. Okay. But I could just, not to be defensive, I could just, I could see, whoa, you didn't mention that.

Anyway, but no, I agree. I didn't know that. I didn't know that. Yeah, I mean, yeah,

it's not, it's not relevant to my life in any way, but I just, I just feel like I should say that, uh, in just to be honest about it. Um, so,

but Fox, it's, they're pushing so hard for the war. If the war goes off, I think it's fair to say, I voted for Trump and campaign for Trump. Trump, I just saw Trump, I really like Trump. I think this, you know, it's going to be hard for the administration to continue in its present form if this war doesn't go well. So it's a huge risk for

Trump. So if you really like Trump, you would not be counseling him to do this. You would not be. Only if you hated Trump, would you tell him to get involved in a regime change war in Iran? And second, if you, like, they're not protecting Trump by hiding Epstein. So I feel like Fox is acting on behalf of someone else other than Trump. That's, I mean, my assessment anyway. Who is that? Hmm. Is it the moneyed interest?

Is it the globalist cultists who run everything? I mean, this is where my mind goes. Yes. It's whatever the superstructure above governments is. And that's very obvious in the Epstein emails and texts is that, you know, he's part of some informal structure that's, I don't know, shorting the global. financial crisis and knows that Gaddafi's going to be killed before Hillary Clinton does or whatever. Like this guy is so plugged in. He's way more plugged in than any U.S. Senator. He's weren't plugged in than any Secretary of State, probably more plugged in than the CIA director.

So like, what is this? What are we looking at here? I think you're right. And, you know, this is where people say, oh, you're a conspiracy theorist on redacted and Tucker, whatever. But it really is true. When you understand that there's this global cultist network, pedophiles, Satanists, who are, you know, responsive. for the COVID cabal and all of it, this supra government, whatever you want to call it, at the heart of everything, then you understand that like Trump is just a small piece of this. And you understand also that Epstein is just a small piece of this. Maybe it's a window into it, in my opinion. And they're very scared. It's like circling the wagons to kind of protect this globalist network. However, it operates at many, many different levels. you know, you get glimpses into it, like with the Bilderberg group, and, you know, when

you see all these people at Davos telling, telling us how they're going to control our lives in the next few years with AI, you know, chips inserted into our brains and moving past information warfare, now they're just going to have total control of us and in all of it. So I think that Rupert Murdoch and these guys, these oligarchs, these tech oligarchs who are at the top, they're really. they're way more powerful than President Trump, and they're really running the show. I mean, when you see that we're going to have,

you know, massive biometric scanning and 6G networks rolled out and digital IDs and CBDCs and all of this digital tracking, it's all about control. Kevin Schip, former CIA whistleblower, told me 17 years at the CIA, and he said,

he said, Clayton, you have to understand that when I got to the CIA, The, you know, the number one goal at the CIA is if they can, if they know your thoughts, then they've won. And that's the number one goal of the intelligence state is for them to know your thoughts and to be able to have that control. And we're not there yet, but we're, we're damn close. And I think those are the, those are the dark forces that are really running all of it. And I think Trump is a small piece of this. But I think those power players that run all of these media networks and all of it,

You know, the Jeff Bezos is of the world and all of this have far more control than President Trump does. Do you sense that people are afraid? As I was thinking about this story today, both about the looming war and about Epstein, and how few people have stood up to say, wait a second, you know, what is this? And I grew up in a country where people would routinely stand up and say, hey, what is this? And I don't see a lot of that at all. and I'm wondering why, and mass hypnosis is part of it. Of course, people seem to be under a kind of spell. Shock is another part of it.

But fear does seem to play a role. People seem afraid. I think you're right. Maybe I don't see a lot of this fear. And I, you know, maybe I should be standing out there with like a sandwich board trying to say it. I mean, I see the people in our chat room who watch our live show who are saying, I'm terrified of what's about to happen. Where are the people who are denouncing this,

trying to get this, trying to stop it? But of course, they're all being drowned out. And the media is complicit in this. They're a huge piece of this salesmanship of it. And when you just watch, like, local news, like I'm in Colorado, you just flip on the local news for a few minutes to get maybe some weather updates.

They'll do a little quick update. President Trump says this will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. play a quick sound bite of, I don't know, Mark Levin or Senator Lindsey Graham or somebody saying that this is a threat. And then, you know, that person goes off to work and thinks, yeah, I guess Iran is a threat. I hope that doesn't happen. So, you know, we got to stop them. We got to do this.

And so I don't see a lot of the fear from just like average people going to the grocery store. And again, I think it comes back to we are always so far removed from war in the, the United States. And that's how they've thrived of this. This is how the military industrial complex has thrived, is by having these wars over there. And we don't have to see it. And it's very sanitized.

It's like getting a chicken breast from the grocery store. You know, you don't have to see the butcher process. No, you don't. You just get this nice little thing in cellophane and sold to you on the nightly news, and then you go back to taking your daughters to dance class. I wonder if people who do see it, who are paid to notice this stuff you, for example, and other podcasters, that's really where truth is being told right now. I'm grateful to be in this business unexpectedly because I feel like

there's so many great people in it. But it really is the only place at this point. It'll change. But as of right now, it's digital media, social media, and podcasts. I mean, that's where people are telling the truth. And there are lots of crazies, too, and lots of liars. But that's really where most of the truth is being told, can they continue to do this? I mean, it feels like there has to be some kind of dramatic free speech crackdown because what the government is doing at every level is too far from what the public wants. The distance is, it's never perfect. Like the government's always doing stuff people don't want. But if every big thing the government is doing is, you know, an 80, 20 against issue with the public, that's not sustainable. You have to do something or you're

going to have a kind of revolution, right? So don't you have to shut down free speech? I mean, that's exactly why we got rid of TikTok, right? I mean, that's, of course. You're going to see this consolidation of these independent voices and others will pop up and whether or not they're as successful or not. I mean, who knows at the end of the day. But of course, you're going to have this consolidation in sale and censorship. And that's, I mean, we've seen it on YouTube. And you've seen it on these other platforms. And so, you've seen it on these other platforms. And so, you saw it during COVID and you saw, you know, Elon Musk still hasn't answered the question. And I think it's still there, which is that backdoor access for Twitter.

And maybe he will answer it. He didn't answer. I followed up with him. He still hasn't answered the question. But there was a backdoor access from the U.S. government to X, formerly Twitter. And I asked him about it specifically, and he didn't know anything about it when I asked him. And he said, I'm going to have to follow up on that.

and I followed. I never got an answer on that. So, like, to steal your phrase, you know, like, what is that? Really? X still has a backdoor access from the federal government to censor users on X? I mean, you can just see people's voices who criticize a certain topic who then are suddenly throttled or, you know, suddenly shadow banned and whose messages suddenly don't appear in your timeline.

And so, again, not to be conspiratorial. but these things are going to have to be censored at a greater level, and they will have more control of it. You're already seeing it, too, with answers you get on AI, and so many people are ditching Google, just general Google searches. It's absurd. You know? So that they get new versions of Google searches,

thinking that they're getting more honest answers, when really it's what garbage in, garbage out. Whatever the programming is for AI, it's the answers they're going to get on that side. So, you know, it's very, very, very good. very difficult to get honest answers anymore. And all of these sources, especially on the media side, the digital media side,

and where is AI pulling their source material from, like mainstream media? Like I did a search the other day, and it pulled up like six different sources. And Reuters. Okay. Roiders. Vox Media.

You know, it's like six or seven sources, all like mainstream media sources. So I'm not getting any cleaner answers there. No. No. They're just repeating the lies back to you in a less transparent way. So what are you going to do when the power goes out, not theoretically, but actually in real life? Most Americans used to think total power failure only happened in unstable countries, places without functioning governments, places you only went to on vacation.

This is the U.S. people would say that could never happen here. Okay. Well, then it did. So the truth is obvious now. The government can't guarantee you electricity. And when things go wrong, no one's coming to save you. That's why Last Country Supply offers the Grid Doctor. It's a 3,300-watt battery backup system built to keep your entire household running when everything else stops.

It powers full-size appliances, medical devices, essential tools. You can use it indoors. It's totally safe. There's no fuel. There are no fumes. There's no noise. We have one at home, and it's awesome. It's got 15 output ports.

It charges from the wall when you have power, from your car when you don't. It's got a solar panel, so the sun can charge it. It's built to a system. stand EMPs, lightning, solar flares, it is durable as hell. So taking care of yourself and the people you love, the people you're responsible for is your job. Get power you can trust. Always get the grid doctor today at our very own lastcountry supply.com. Our business, this is the power supply that we use. Lastcountry supply.com. So that's pretty funny. What did you think, Mike Huckabee, we interviewed him last week in Israel and, um, I,

I found his everything about him totally disgraceful. But since we did that, but I tried to let him talk and not be a jerk, which is hard for me. And to, you know, kind of press him. Yeah, right. I'm not a great person. Don't pretend to be. But I did want to get to the root answers on a couple of foundational questions. Like if Israel is a right to exist uniquely in the world, where does that right come from?

And to whom does it apply? And what are the boundaries of the state? Like, those are, I think, basic questions. And why aren't you representing the U.S. government as the U.S. ambassador? After that interview, I mean, I think the guy, something broke inside him. Have you ever been attacked after an interview? That's usually a sign that something snapped in the person. I mean, you got attacked.

I think after your interview with Ted Cruz and then after your interview with Mike Huckabee. So that should tell you something about, you know, your incredible interviewing skills. where you're just asking the basic question. Yeah. Well, I mean, you can only ask the question 30 times and not get an answer. At some point, like, you know, this could be a five-hour interview

if I'm going to ask the same question over and over and over again, and you're not going to answer the question. Like, where does that right come from? And then, like, under bewilderment, finally, like an admission of truth at one point when he says, yes, they should just take it all, Tucker.

And I just about fell out of my chair. Natalie and I watched it together. We both looked at each other. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. And of course, widely condemned across all of the Middle East after that comment, that sure, Israel has a right to all of this land. They should just take up.

But Israel won't because they're good. They're good. So they're not going to. So we should just rest. We should all sit back because they have no history of doing that at all and just allow them to take the small sliver of land. So, but you can only ask that question so many times before, you know, and you're not going to get an answer.

not going to get a straight answer about it. But should, I was particularly, should this guy be, I mean, I disagree with him on the theology. It's not Christianity from what I can tell at all. He's a violence worshipper. That right there is disqualifying as far as I'm concerned, far be it for me to give theology lessons, but that does not look like Christianity to me. But leaving that aside, the guy is the U.S. ambassador. He works with the State Department.

He represents the president in a foreign country. And he's not representing the U.S. government. He's representing the country he's living. living in, a foreign country. He's not helping to get sex criminals in Israel extradited to the United States. He's meeting with a traitor, Jonathan Pollard. He's basically using his post to work out his weird, cultish views. How is that guy a U.S. diplomat? I just never seen anything like that. And I haven't either. I lived in Portugal for five years. And while I was there, Trump's ambassador, his original ambassador, before, you know, the Biden era ambassadors,

I mean, got in quite a bit of problems with the Portuguese government for basically telling them to, you know, back off on China. There were a couple of other issues, but it was coming from a place of American interest. Right. Exactly. And it was quite a big deal, like in the Portuguese press. Like, how dare this ambassador, how dare he tell us, like, what the Americans want? You know, this is Portugal, right? So I almost would like a little bit of that, right? Like, hey, I'm going to hold a press conference here in Tel Aviv.

And while we believe in our partnership with Israel, we also, as Americans, don't stand for pedophiles. known pedophiles. Like, why is Israel's safe haven for pedophiles? And it is. I mean, you could call up Barry Weiss and have her pull up the CBS archives, where CBS did a deep dive on Israel's deep pedophile connections and where American pedophiles can flee and find safe haven. This right of return.

Doesn't matter if you're a pedophile. Doesn't matter if you killed children or not. Who cares? So as an American ambassador to stand up there and hold a press conference and say, as Americans, even though we've got a great relationship, relationship with Israel, we will not stand for this country harboring convicted pedophiles or pedophiles under indictment who are caught in a sting operation back in the United States. Like, we want these people extradited back to the United States to stand trial and to face a jury of their peers. But

we don't hear any of that. We got hassled when we were there. My producers got really hassled, our cameraman got really hassled by thugs in the Israeli security services. I mean, unequivocally hassled, outrageous. And Huckabee didn't ask what happened. He just immediately took the side of the foreign government against my producers. So don't we as American taxpayers and American citizens have an expectation that there's someone in our government who will take our side against a foreign government or at least consider our position against their position? I mean, shouldn't we expect that? You would think we would expect that. I just reminded, it's like you see the movies, Hollywood movies,

where an American is in another country and he finds safe haven by going to a U.S. embassy, right? Huckabee would turn you over immediately to Shinbet. I mean, you would have no safe haven't in the U.S. embassy at all. I mean, I would feel safe in a lot of other U.S. embassies around the world. Like, ah, I'm kind of here. I'm here on sovereign territory. This is America, a little slice of America.

Like up on the walls, a picture of President Trump. There's the Secretary of State's picture. There's an American flag. I'm speaking English. Like, I've been to a bunch of embassies, you know, in other parts of the world. And I feel like, well, this is, yeah, this is America a little bit, a little slice of it, you know. I wouldn't feel that way there, given his loyalty. I mean, even just back in the Fox days, you know, I mean, and, you know, Huckabee's always been gracious to me.

Of course. Very nice. In fact, but there was many times where he was like, I'm going to Israel again this week. I'm going to Israel again this week. And this was back when before he was. he had a show, but before he was running for president and complaining about Trump. He said, God, why Fox puts Trump on all the air? You know, I can't get, I can't get a word in edgewise.

They won't give me any air time. He sucks up his words. Trump sucks up all the air in the room. I can't get on the TV, you know, and all this stuff. But so he would say, I'm going to Israel again and come back. Clayton, I brought you a gift, you know, and here's another, here's a Yamika. Like, oh, thanks. And I'll add it to the Yamika collection.

you, you know, you, in my office now. And here's the, here's the jar. This is right, you know, this is right from Tel Aviv. So, I mean, he was, there was a deep love, deep love there for many, many years. Yeah, I knew, I mean, I knew him well. And I was aware of that. And I, I, I don't care. Go ahead and love Israel. It doesn't bother me at all. I've never been mad at Israel. And I don't care if you love Israel. But if you're the U.S. ambassador, you're supposed to take your countryside against all other countries. I would think that. be a prerequisite for citizenship, by the way, doesn't seem to be. And the whole thing is so humiliating and shameful that it gives us some insight in what's happening with this Iran war. So in a

normal country, you would just say to Israel, look, you don't exist except for us. We pay for everything. We make everything possible for you. You'd be eliminated without us. So we're not going to war with Iran. We're going to negotiate a settlement where they're not going to build nuclear weapons. That's fine. They've already said they won't. They have a fatwa against it. Maybe you don't believe that. That's okay too. We can discuss this.

But what we're not going to do is allow you to start the war unilaterally and then suck us into it. That's actually what's going on. We're afraid that Israel will start a war unilaterally against our interests and no one can tell them no. Like, what the hell is going on? Is there any other country that has this kind of control over the United States Congress, and administrations, because I can't think of any. No. I can't think of any.

And, you know, he wouldn't get this position if he was tough on Israel. He wouldn't be in a position of flying in and being the U.S. ambassador if he was tough on Israel, or he was going to put them in their place. And we're not going to carry out another regime change war on your behalf. Like, look, we tried it in Libya, didn't work out so well, destabilized the Middle East. We tried it in Iraq, didn't work out so well, destabilized. the Middle East. And I know you've been calling for this for decades for us to help you and to carry this out in Iran. We're not going to do it. He'd be out of a job. I just don't see how

when you have literally a White House chief of staff who is formerly worked for Netanyahu, inside the White House, you don't choose an ambassador that the gatekeeping does not allow for somebody who's critical of Israel to be the U.S. ambassador to Israel. It's just not going to happen. I mean, I think this is, we've gotten to this place because nobody wants to hurt anybody's feelings. And the BB people have conflated skepticism of Israel's goals with anti-Semitism, which is insane. I mean, there are a lot of Jews who don't like BB, and they have every good reason, too, they're not anti-Semites. No person is an anti-Semite for disliking the actions of the Israeli government or not buying Zionism, whatever that is. so people have been kind of like they don't want to have that fight so they've just sort of let this fester

and then there's the other factor which is physical fear because israel is so violent and it's constantly bragging about murdering people and blowing up kids with pagers or leveling Gaza I mean this is the most violent country in the world by far per capita so there is a feeling that like if you criticize them too much they could hurt you and I get that I'm not criticizing anyone who's a because there's a reason to be afraid. However, we've gotten to a place where we're potentially going to like wreck our economy and Americans will die because one guy, Benjamin Netanyahu thinks it's a good idea or good for his political career or whatever. Like that is truly bonkers. Like, why are we allowing this? It's going to be devastating. Speaking of Vox

media, six years ago, they wrote a piece after coming, um, after, after Soleimani was killed. Yeah. But if we go to war with Iran, it will not be a walk in the park. It will be a brutal, bloody war. And it will be their quote, hell on earth.

Hell on earth. And that's just there. Every military expert I've talked to says, what, we have no strategy whatsoever. And we have, as you pointed out in your monologue earlier, what end game? Like, what is the end of this? sort of a permanent boots without like permanent or some sort of large contingent of boots on the ground

hundreds of thousands of American forces boots on the ground in that country what are we looking at here targeted strikes and that's we're just going to wash our hands of it and hope that that's the end of it and we walk away it makes zero sense so this is going to be an absolutely debilitating war it would be devastating to the American economy the U.S. dollar of course is already purposefully being devalued. You know, we're talking to like $30 Big Macs in the coming years. I mean, that's what we're heading towards. We want to further oil prices in the streets of Hormuz.

Like, what will this do to the United States economy? But you hear from the MAGA crowd who we're now energy independent. So we don't care about the streets of Hormuz anymore. That's inconsequential because now the United States is fully energy independent. and we've done so brilliantly, according to Lindsay Graham, thanks to the president of the United States, that it doesn't matter if the Straits of Hormuz are shut down,

because guess what? Like, we're all taken care of now. We're able to start drilling, Trump's drilling program, so don't worry about it, we'll be fine. Yeah, what's China's response going to be? What's Russia's response going to be? What's the Middle East? What are all of those countries in the Middle East?

What is their response going to be? And by the way, what about all the cannon fodder of American soldiers sitting right there right now, not in fortresses, many of these places are like little outposts with very little protection at all. So what's going to happen to them? I guess we don't care about them. Well, it's also I mean, just to the energy independence thing, I'm very strongly for energy, for oil and gas, for coal. I mean, I believe that completely. However, energy prices, oil and gas prices are set of the international market. So what does that mean? Would you nationalize the energy producers and

force them just to sell domestically. Every refinery has to sell its products in the U.S. Like, what does that mean? If the Straits of Hormuz are closed, if there's disruption to energy facilities in the Gulf, the price of oil as set on the international market where everybody in the world bids on it every day all the time will spike. I mean, that's just a fact. It's supply and demand. So we're going to exempt ourselves from this how. You would have to say, again, to American refineries, you can't sell in the international market. American energy producers cannot sell on the international market. Are we going to say that? Like, what are you even talking about? Who are these people? Like, what are they talking about? Well, they believe that the petro dollar is a thing

of the past, or the sort of Saudi, the Saudi petro dollar is a thing of the past. And that will now in the United States, it will be the, it'll be backed by our own oil in the United States. So the U.S. dollar as a petro dollar will now be backed the full faith and credit of the United States government, which is also $39 trillion in debt, right? So how is that going to play out on the international stage? And will these oil producers, which make bank selling, I mean, just look at, we blow up the Nord Stream pipeline. So what did we do? We sell natural gas to Germany at, what, three times the price that they were able to get it from Russia? And now you're going to tell the oil and natural gas producers that they can't sell it to Germany. They can't sell it to these other places,

because now there's no shipping lane. There's no way to get this oil and natural gas to those regions of the world. And you're only going to sell it to American consumers. So we're going to nationalize it and sort of, we'll subsidize it like the ethanol market. You know, like, and that's how we'll do it. So it'll be a snake eating its own tail. And that's a recipe for success. Let me ask you one last question.

It feels like the rhetoric. I feel like such a liberal saying this because I hate them people. although the rhetoric is overheated on all sides, but I mean, as someone who's been in the rhetoric business this whole life, and I've added to ugly rhetoric and said intemperate things,

I've said incorrect things. I have been part of the problem, for sure, at various points. But I've never seen people talk like they're talking right now, particularly on the neocan side. Anyone who disagrees is a Nazi, anyone who's not eager to regime change Iran,

wants a second Holocaust. I mean, it's true, it's the kind of language where if not slowed, like soon, someone's going to get hurt. For real. Do you feel this? For sure. I mean, just look at it on the, you know, whatever you want to call it, MAGA, Twitter, MAGAX. But if you disagree or you, you know, call for the release of the Epstein files,

that you're somehow a liberal, you know, what you want to hurt the Trump administration, you don't want us to go to war with you. Iran and you're, you know, shut up. Then you must be an anti-Semite. So you're probably pro-Islam. It's, I've never seen it like this. I mean, I'm, you know, even going back to, I mean, even like, even going back to days or early social media, like it was far, far more congenial, I think, than it has, than it is today.

And I think that's why, well, I think that's why you're going to see more censorship, because, you know, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, As much as I love the dialogue, I love the back and forth on real issues, but I think you're going to see massive censorship because they don't want us, they don't want us fighting over the things that they want to carry out like war with Iran or covering up the Epstein files or when you start to prick too closely, you get followed and people tap your phones when you're digging into pedophile networks and these other things. So I think we're going to see more censorship, unfortunately.

And I think that's the intent. I think at the end of the day they want us fighting like this to be as loud as possible so that they can censor us and that they can have total control of it. See, that's too out of control. Too many people calling people Nazis.

We've got to control it. You know, YouTube changes as terms of service all the time, adds all sorts of new things you can't talk about on a regular basis. So I think that's where we're heading. And toward violence, I mean, first of all,

there is some kind of nexus between violence outside our borders and violence inside our borders. I believe that. And in times of war, you know, and around wars, chaos and violence increase here. You saw this during Vietnam. Charlie Kirk was murdered a day after the Israelis bomb Doha, one of the craziest things that's happened in the last 20 years, et cetera. I'm not saying there's a direct connection, but these things tend to flower simultaneously. I just have always noticed that. It's a spirit of violence. It's a spirit of violence that descends for real. And for another violent acts, you just saw this in Australia, real or not, are used as a pretext to strip people of their civil liberties, of their human rights,

their God-given human rights. And so I just fear that there will be some sort of domestic terror incident in which actual Americans will actually die, which is a true tragedy, no matter who they are, but that that tragedy will be used to strip the rest of us of our God-given human rights. And I don't think I'm being paranoid. I'm very concerned about that. Well, you're speaking from historical precedence. I mean, we have a long history of false flags being used to strip us of our civil liberties

and to carry out these horribly nefarious things. We just had, I think, this afternoon, what's his name from the National Endowment for Democracy admitted in front of Congress that, They were there inside of Iran helping to basically, you know, with their Starlink materials, helping to basically work on this agitation of protesters. And Luis Devon, I think I had like shut him, shut him down, told him shut up and like, I don't think we should talk about this here. So you literally have an admission that we are involved and actively in these types of stoking of chaos

around the world, whether it's people wearing plain clothes things showing up on January 6th, whether it's 9-11 attacks on purpose to strip us of our civil liberties and get us into perpetual wars in the Middle East, whether it's, you know, William Randolph Hearst and remember the main and pushing us into war against Spain and rallying, you know, certain purposes there. Or whether it's FDR, you know, basically allowing Pearl Harbor to happen. Yeah. Which he did. Which he did. So you're speaking from historical precedence.

And I get so frustrated when people think that these things don't happen or that false flag attacks be used as a pretext for stripping us of our civil liberties won't happen. Or the massive digital ID, bio infrastructure that is coming through the likes of these tech oligarchs. It's coming. It's all coming. And they've been rolling it out and testing it in places like, you know, you know, infrastructure that is coming. Ukraine with the Dia app and making sure that everything is targeted and tracked and people can snitch on their neighbors in Ukraine. You know, you can like literally press a button on an app and basically have the SBU show up at your neighbor's house to investigate them. Like that's what they

want. And they test it out in these places like Ukraine and they want to roll it out here because as I said earlier, like what Kevin Schiff told me, they want control. And that's the most frightening part of all. We're just giving up control. Every time you did a great piece a few weeks ago on the phones and spying on your phones. It's like every time we take in these little pieces of advanced technology, it's making our lives easier. It's actually sapping of us. It's sapping us and it's taking away our liberties. So true. Part of me just wants to move out in the mountains of Wyoming and, you know, knock down any six G, G, five G towers I see anywhere around me and, you know, just live off the land and churn butter. Yeah. Use them for target practice. We're here 308. Yeah. No, I have that fantasy. Can I say one last

thing? I think this is all a fantasy on the part of the people putting together the control grid. I don't, I think that control over other people over the physical landscape over the universe, assuming godlike powers, is like the desire of every evil person. And I think history is filled with attempts at this from the Tower of Babel till present. And I don't think it's possible. And I think that people routinely overstate their own power. And they think they can do it, but they can't. And I think we laugh at them in retrospect. Like, you're going to build a tower to the sky and eliminate all different languages. And we like laugh at the Tower of Babel.

But we laugh at Mussolini or whatever. We laugh at the Bolsheviks. But, and we will laugh at these people too. That's my guess. Hope I'm right. so. I hope you're right too. I really do. Then I see these nefarious things and I see all these people drugged out on marijuana, you know, on pot marijuana and they're just like drones, you know, and then once you roll in some sort of like universal basic income, you get to be a drone as part of the system. And I don't know. I'm usually a glass half full kind of person and I'm trying to be, but I think the moves in this AI direction is so nefarious and so terrifying that I don't know if we can put this genie back in the bottle.

I sure hope so, but pretty soon in the next five years, people are going to have robots in their houses, like folding their laundry. Like that is coming. I mean, anyway, Tesla just converted one of their factories in Fremont to be the new Optimus Robot plant. So robots are coming. AI and a much larger capacity is coming. And by the way, the United States is losing desperately to China in that race. And so you can only imagine these neocons and technocrats that really want to run things are going to be pushing for trillions of dollars in the United States, you know, budget to be able to try to compete with China.

And it's, I hope you're right. I hope you're right. I'm not letting a robot in my house. Clayton Morris, it is so great to see you, as always. and thank you for your relentless search for the truth, your fearlessness, and your decency. Great to see you. Well, great to see you.

Thank you so much, Tucker. And incredible, incredible work, as always, my friend. Not everyone agrees, but I appreciate it. Thank you. And thank you. Thank you for watching. We'll see you next Wednesday. Thanks for watching the Wednesday edition of the show.

We stream live every week, Wednesday, 6 p.m. Eastern on Tucker Carlson.com. Members can watch the show live, join the members only chat, and take part in the conversation in real time. We're grateful to be doing it and grateful that you watch it. Thank you.