Speaker 1: Live from vall Hartband and the Crossroads of America. It's
Speaker 1: Tony Katz today. The deal is so close you can
Speaker 1: almost taste it. A deal with Iran and Oman and the.
Speaker 2: Strait of Hormuz and blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
Speaker 2: I hate the fact that I have to start this way,
Speaker 2: but I got to assume more. The lack thereof is
Speaker 2: the top story.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 2: Maybe it is Abdullah l said, being the tough guy.
Speaker 2: It's so adorable. He is precious, he really is. He's
Speaker 2: like having your very own TAMAGATCHI don't forget to feed him.
Speaker 2: Or there's Tucker Carlson with his ten point declaration of
Speaker 2: what a political party in America should be, which sounds
Speaker 2: like a lot of things we would say, except of course,
Speaker 2: without the insanity of Marjorie Taylor Green. Tony Katz, Tony
Speaker 2: Katz today, an absolute pleasure to be with you. I'm
Speaker 2: going to get into what he said, because it's the
Speaker 2: funny thing is that I think Tucker doesn't understand how
Speaker 2: he's coming across. And I am more and more convinced
Speaker 2: that the marketplace for his madness is slight, very very slight,
Speaker 2: and certainly who he is picked to align himself with
Speaker 2: puts in the same position. Certainly when it comes to
Speaker 2: the idea of war, certainly comes to what's going on
Speaker 2: with Iran, there are people who want to scream America first,
Speaker 2: with all due respect, If taking out a terrorist that's
Speaker 2: trying to kill you isn't America first, I'm not exactly sure.
Speaker 3: What is Marjorie Taylor Green.
Speaker 2: Again, I repeat myself, No serious political anything is done with.
Speaker 3: Marjorie Taylor Green, none. Zero.
Speaker 2: Tucker has still has the opportunity to be taken seriously,
Speaker 2: far more seriously than her. But you're gonna align with her, Okay,
Speaker 2: all right, Sure, we're gonna spend even less time thinking
Speaker 2: about you. I'm gonna get into that. I will get
Speaker 2: into the tough guy commentary of Abdul al Sayid, because
Speaker 2: if he thinks that the issue is nobody can pronounce
Speaker 2: abdra Chran, well that's not the issue. The issue is
Speaker 2: whether or not you're an Islamo Marxist, whether or not
Speaker 2: you have connections to care. The Council of American Islamic Relations,
Speaker 2: which is a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood, as
Speaker 2: said by the UAE designated a terrorist group by Florida
Speaker 2: and Texas, and oh, by the way, not a very
Speaker 2: good group of people as Islamist apologists my take on
Speaker 2: that one. They may disagree, but you're gonna complain about APAC.
Speaker 2: Oh honey, kit and boo boo, and then you're gonna
Speaker 2: get tough with Mike Rogers, the Republican running. We'll get
Speaker 2: into that too. But can I start not even with
Speaker 2: what's going on with the RAN because there's nothing really
Speaker 2: to report. It's the same as it ever was, and
Speaker 2: the oil prices are showing this.
Speaker 3: We're actually up this morning.
Speaker 2: Like when I was doing my morning show, we were
Speaker 2: at seventy five dollars a barrel. Now we're at seventy
Speaker 2: seven dollars a barrel midday. The Brent crude was just
Speaker 2: at about eighty now is at.
Speaker 3: Eighty two thirty eight.
Speaker 2: The Brench crew is what comes out of the ocean,
Speaker 2: so we're seeing a tick up.
Speaker 3: But put that to the side, as well. Can we
Speaker 3: agree The.
Speaker 2: One thing in American society can we agree on, please?
Speaker 2: Is f the flock cameras say that, right, Parducier Landing,
Speaker 2: Can I get a ruling?
Speaker 3: Yes, as long as the last three letters do not
Speaker 3: get spelled.
Speaker 2: Okay, as long as the last three letters not get spelled.
Speaker 3: Of the flock camera, Oh that one? Yes, Oh that
Speaker 3: I can say.
Speaker 2: Okay, So I did it right, Yeah, yeah, I got
Speaker 2: it confused.
Speaker 3: That could have just been terrible.
Speaker 2: There is a story out of NewsNation Newsnationnow dot com.
Speaker 2: All eight flock cameras, according to the Wenona Police Department, Winona, Minnesota,
Speaker 2: all eight of them which are next to the Wisconsin border.
Speaker 2: We're missing. Somebody stole all eight flock cameras. Now, I
Speaker 2: do not condone the theft, and that is wrong.
Speaker 3: But let us discuss the American discussed of the flock camera.
Speaker 3: So what is a flock camera? Great?
Speaker 2: Great, great, great question. This is the idea of surveillance.
Speaker 2: So if flock safety is the website flocksafety dot com
Speaker 2: clear evidence, safer, communities, privacy first, and it reads their
Speaker 2: website right there on their page, flock connects communities, businesses
Speaker 2: and public safety. So incidents may be understood clearly and
Speaker 2: decisions can be made on facts.
Speaker 3: Okay, I should be clear that what.
Speaker 2: I'm about to discuss has nothing to do specifically with
Speaker 2: the company Flock. I don't know much about the actual company.
Speaker 2: I don't mind a company being in business. These are
Speaker 2: not the things that I concern myself with, and they
Speaker 2: are not the only company that is in this business.
Speaker 2: There is also a company called is it a lawn aln?
Speaker 3: That does this picture the scenario.
Speaker 2: You want to keep your community safe, You want to
Speaker 2: keep an eye on things, so you work with a
Speaker 2: group like flock and they install cameras all around your
Speaker 2: city and that allows the local police department to keep the.
Speaker 3: Better eye on things.
Speaker 2: And so if there's a criminal on the loose, or
Speaker 2: if someone's doing this, that or the other, the police
Speaker 2: can handle it and we can stop the crimes. When
Speaker 2: a private business does this, I have zero issue with
Speaker 2: it whatsoever. So I work with a group, right, I
Speaker 2: work with a group called Who's Your Security?
Speaker 3: I do work with them. I'm very clear about this.
Speaker 2: They have a website Catchthebadguys dot com, which their entire
Speaker 2: world is how do you utilize as a matter of fact, Armando,
Speaker 2: give me a call, how do you utilize your camera
Speaker 2: like your existing security camera with their AI tech? And
Speaker 2: the philosophy is, why can't we stop the crime while
Speaker 2: it's happening? Really before it gets going, so we can
Speaker 2: actually arrest somebody instead of having a camera saying, oh,
Speaker 2: look there's the guy who robbed me stole all my stuff,
Speaker 2: you could actually do something about it. I have zero
Speaker 2: issue with that whatsoever. On the private level, none, absolutely none.
Speaker 2: And they've got like tools that you can get for
Speaker 2: this kind of thing, and trailers you can rent, like
Speaker 2: if you have like like car lots or construction sites
Speaker 2: and things like that. Totally fine, absolutely fine. The prime
Speaker 2: if you have home security and you have cameras, that's fine.
Speaker 2: I have cameras, of course I do. I don't like
Speaker 2: the idea that government comes and knock and saying, hey,
Speaker 2: can we get access to your footage. Oh that's where
Speaker 2: it starts to get weird. I am discussing the idea
Speaker 2: of government surveilling the citizenry, no matter how it is described.
Speaker 3: In the end, what is happening is.
Speaker 2: That local governments are utilizing these cameras and putting these
Speaker 2: cameras up, and oh, the police departments love them. They're
Speaker 2: surveiling the citizen ry. Where I happen to live, the mayor,
Speaker 2: she's lovely, by the way, I like her. On a
Speaker 2: great number of subjects. She's wrong on this. The police
Speaker 2: department is thrilled with these cameras. They were able to
Speaker 2: catch three people who were wanted from a county just
Speaker 2: below us.
Speaker 3: The only way to know that.
Speaker 2: Is if you are surveiling all the people who are
Speaker 2: walking down Main Street and where I live quite literally
Speaker 2: Main Street, right, That's the only way it can happen.
Speaker 2: The government has absolutely no right to surveil the citizen,
Speaker 2: and no citizen should think a rational society has surveillance.
Speaker 2: China has surveillance, NonStop cameras and all plays at all times.
Speaker 3: They have what.
Speaker 2: Are referred to as social credit scores. Do you smile enough?
Speaker 3: Did you pick up that piece of garbage?
Speaker 2: Well, if your social credit score isn't high enough, no
Speaker 2: travel for you, no.
Speaker 3: Opportunities for you.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, you get less your rights
Speaker 2: to the extent that you can have a right in
Speaker 2: a communist nation, whether that be in all of China
Speaker 2: or in Manhattan under Bondani, they get.
Speaker 3: Taken from you because you are not acting appropriately and
Speaker 3: the camera is watching. That is some Philip K. Dick
Speaker 3: kind of low class stuff.
Speaker 2: That is gross, ugly beyond the pale obscenity. This is
Speaker 2: the last thing a society should want. If you want
Speaker 2: to know the real last thing a society should want.
Speaker 2: What that happens when a society tries to equalize.
Speaker 3: Out in certain ways.
Speaker 2: You should read Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut. You can
Speaker 2: actually see the movie with Julie Haggerty.
Speaker 3: I think it's George c. Scott.
Speaker 2: It's a short film. It'll turn, it'll turn your stomach.
Speaker 2: But neither here nor there on this subject. We do
Speaker 2: not want a society where we are surveiled. And I
Speaker 2: will have this conversation with anybody in law enforcement anywhere,
Speaker 2: at any time, whether you're a police officer, whether you're
Speaker 2: a police chief, whether you're a sheriff, whether you're FBI retired.
Speaker 2: I start with a baseline. It is not the job
Speaker 2: of the citizen to make easier the job of law enforcement.
Speaker 2: When I say easier, I am saying that my rights
Speaker 2: do not get abused, misused, or taken, so it is
Speaker 2: easier for law enforce.
Speaker 3: Not now.
Speaker 2: Not Ever, The answer is no, I understand the role
Speaker 2: of police. I'm not a defund the police guy. Was
Speaker 2: it Bernie Sanders who.
Speaker 3: Just said.
Speaker 1: That? No?
Speaker 2: Serious democrat is talking about defunding the police. Oh, I know,
Speaker 2: I've got this to Oh, it's gonna kill me.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna find it.
Speaker 2: I think Bertie just said that, no serious democrat is
Speaker 2: talking about defunding the police.
Speaker 3: Adorable. Of course they are, and of course they want to.
Speaker 3: I am not.
Speaker 2: But I'm also not going to have a conversation about
Speaker 2: putting my rights up for grabs or up for debate.
Speaker 2: Do you have a right to privacy in the public square.
Speaker 2: We've answered that question really in America by saying no.
Speaker 2: If my eyes can see you, you're not private, and
Speaker 2: a recording device can be seen as nothing more than
Speaker 2: your eyes. Now I'm paraphrasing this, but I I have
Speaker 2: the general concept right that is of the private citizen.
Speaker 2: If I am going to name the restaurant and someone
Speaker 2: has decided that they're going to take my picture and
Speaker 2: post it, oh look, Tony Katz went here.
Speaker 3: First of all, that's weird. But secondly, they can do that.
Speaker 3: They can do that.
Speaker 2: That's different than whether your government should be able to
Speaker 2: do that. Your government being restricted is what is so great.
Speaker 3: That is what matters most.
Speaker 2: When President Obama complained about the Constitution, he complained that
Speaker 2: it was a charter of negative rights. It was a
Speaker 2: negative charter, which is to say that the Constitution, if
Speaker 2: you were to give it a read, talks about what
Speaker 2: government cannot do to you.
Speaker 3: It does not.
Speaker 2: Discuss what government must do for you. I always thought
Speaker 2: that was a very frightening and ugly thing for him
Speaker 2: to say. It is really a great example of how
Speaker 2: diametrically opposed I am to that philosophy. I do not
Speaker 2: want my government to do for me outside of Article one,
Speaker 2: Section eight, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare,
Speaker 2: right solid.
Speaker 3: Do I want them to have a military? Absolutely?
Speaker 2: Do I want a government as small and as lean
Speaker 2: as possible doing the basics, Yes, I do.
Speaker 3: Everything else should be up to me.
Speaker 2: What with the tenth Amendment ensuring that the rest of
Speaker 2: the rights are mine that are not actually laid out
Speaker 2: there within the Bill of Rights or within the Constitution itself,
Speaker 2: it belongs to us. Restraining the government was the whole point,
Speaker 2: and Barack Obama, the wait for it, constitutional scholar, seems
Speaker 2: to have missed them. He missed the points of the thing.
Speaker 2: That's like reading the New Testament being like so so like,
Speaker 2: who is this Jesus.
Speaker 3: Guy, again, you have missed the point.
Speaker 2: If you're not, if you can read that not under
Speaker 2: the Constitution is about constraining government. It is about amplifying
Speaker 2: the concepts of liberty now in and of itself. If
Speaker 2: we have a constitution that we are saying that freedom,
Speaker 2: absolute freedom, pure freedom is not the thing we were
Speaker 2: going for.
Speaker 3: We are going for a rule of law.
Speaker 2: We're looking for the maximum amounts of liberty, which means
Speaker 2: by definition, a level of guardrails. And we keep those guardrails,
Speaker 2: and we keep them as wide away from each other possible.
Speaker 2: That's a liberty society. That's the society I favor. Governments
Speaker 2: can't track you. If they could track you on the
Speaker 2: street just because they put up the cameras well, then
Speaker 2: what happened to the idea of search, Whatever happened to
Speaker 2: the idea of the Fourth Amendment, whatever happened to the
Speaker 2: idea of a warrant. They're already keeping tabs on you,
Speaker 2: keeping tabs in the location. And we have seen the
Speaker 2: videos out.
Speaker 3: There, a police officer saying we know when you left town,
Speaker 3: we know when you came back, we know what you did.
Speaker 3: Is that right? And the worst is the officer acts
Speaker 3: like a total scumbag.
Speaker 2: In the videos, which must be something they train, because
Speaker 2: no real person should ever.
Speaker 3: Act like that.
Speaker 2: So there in Wyoda, Minnesota, they tore down the flock
Speaker 2: cameras to stop this surveillance. You can't condone the law
Speaker 2: breaking of the vandalism there. But should you vote out
Speaker 2: people who want the flock cameras that? Should you vote
Speaker 2: remove them?
Speaker 3: Yes?
Speaker 2: And should you vote for any any politico who wants
Speaker 2: to install them? No? No, you should not keep it here.
Speaker 2: This is Tony Katz today,