1
00:00:05,160 --> 00:00:10,360
Speaker 1: Why from val Heartland and the crossroads of America.

2
00:00:10,560 --> 00:00:12,000
Speaker 2: It's Tony Katz today.

3
00:00:12,760 --> 00:00:16,000
Speaker 1: So I followed what happened in the Supreme Court yesterday,

4
00:00:16,040 --> 00:00:19,800
Speaker 1: this case about tariffs, and went back and listened. And

5
00:00:19,880 --> 00:00:24,160
Speaker 1: it seemed to me that's Scott Besson, the Treasury Secretary who.

6
00:00:24,000 --> 00:00:24,680
Speaker 2: Was in the room.

7
00:00:25,239 --> 00:00:27,960
Speaker 1: He might be having a bit of wishful thinking, because

8
00:00:28,000 --> 00:00:32,280
Speaker 1: the argument certainly seemed to be against the Solicitor General

9
00:00:32,320 --> 00:00:36,840
Speaker 1: of the United States. Hey, John Sower, you don't really

10
00:00:36,840 --> 00:00:39,800
Speaker 1: have a great argument here. I could be wrong. So

11
00:00:39,880 --> 00:00:43,560
Speaker 1: I brought in the legal experts, Tony Katz. Tony Kats today,

12
00:00:43,640 --> 00:00:46,240
Speaker 1: Good to be with you. William Jacobson joins us right now,

13
00:00:46,440 --> 00:00:50,519
Speaker 1: Cornell Law, professor of the mind behind Legal insurrection dot

14
00:00:50,520 --> 00:00:54,280
Speaker 1: com and of course equal protect dot org. A tremendous

15
00:00:54,320 --> 00:00:58,080
Speaker 1: amount being done to ensure universities and other places are

16
00:00:58,120 --> 00:01:02,240
Speaker 1: playing things fair. You're the legal legal you have seen

17
00:01:02,280 --> 00:01:05,880
Speaker 1: more of these cases than I have. This case is

18
00:01:05,920 --> 00:01:10,800
Speaker 1: about whether or not the president can unilaterally impose tariffs,

19
00:01:11,160 --> 00:01:14,600
Speaker 1: and those tariffs then raising revenue, which was I think

20
00:01:14,600 --> 00:01:17,720
Speaker 1: a piece people weren't prepared for. Talk to me about

21
00:01:17,760 --> 00:01:20,360
Speaker 1: the case that's brought before the Supreme Court and what

22
00:01:20,400 --> 00:01:24,160
Speaker 1: you saw from the Court in its reaction, Well.

23
00:01:24,120 --> 00:01:26,520
Speaker 3: I think the media reaction has been that it was

24
00:01:26,560 --> 00:01:29,480
Speaker 3: a very bad day for the Trump administration. I'm not

25
00:01:29,520 --> 00:01:31,720
Speaker 3: so sure that's right. I think it's a lot closer.

26
00:01:31,760 --> 00:01:34,400
Speaker 3: I think this one could go either way. The issue

27
00:01:34,440 --> 00:01:39,280
Speaker 3: here is that there's a statue that gives the president

28
00:01:39,400 --> 00:01:44,240
Speaker 3: emergency powers to do a variety of things. The word

29
00:01:44,400 --> 00:01:48,760
Speaker 3: tariffs is not in the statue, but the word regulate

30
00:01:48,960 --> 00:01:51,640
Speaker 3: imports is in the statute, and a lot of the

31
00:01:51,880 --> 00:01:59,160
Speaker 3: argument was whether that term would encompass imposition of tariffs.

32
00:01:59,680 --> 00:02:03,720
Speaker 3: And there's two levels to that. One is, everybody, including

33
00:02:03,760 --> 00:02:09,280
Speaker 3: the challengers, conceded that that word regulate impact ports would

34
00:02:09,320 --> 00:02:14,400
Speaker 3: give the president the power to completely suspend trade with

35
00:02:14,560 --> 00:02:17,560
Speaker 3: foreign companies or countries, or at least the imports from

36
00:02:17,600 --> 00:02:22,160
Speaker 3: foreign countries. And so the argument is, if that extreme

37
00:02:22,360 --> 00:02:27,480
Speaker 3: power falls under the word regulate imports, why doesn't tariffs?

38
00:02:27,880 --> 00:02:30,519
Speaker 3: Does that make any sense whatsoever? And I think it was.

39
00:02:30,600 --> 00:02:34,240
Speaker 3: Kavanaugh referred to it as a huge donut hole, and

40
00:02:34,280 --> 00:02:37,720
Speaker 3: the lawyer for some of the challengers had acute comeback, well,

41
00:02:37,720 --> 00:02:40,240
Speaker 3: it's a different type of pastry. But the point is

42
00:02:40,480 --> 00:02:43,800
Speaker 3: You're supposed to read statutes to make sense. You're supposed

43
00:02:43,840 --> 00:02:49,240
Speaker 3: to read statutes to assume Congress made sense when it

44
00:02:49,240 --> 00:02:51,800
Speaker 3: did it, And how does it possibly make sense? And

45
00:02:51,840 --> 00:02:55,880
Speaker 3: I think this was Kavanaugh questioning, how does it possibly

46
00:02:55,919 --> 00:02:59,200
Speaker 3: make sense that you're giving the president the power to

47
00:02:59,200 --> 00:03:02,440
Speaker 3: suspend the imports from China but not to impose a

48
00:03:02,480 --> 00:03:05,280
Speaker 3: one percent tariff? And so that was kind of the

49
00:03:05,280 --> 00:03:09,320
Speaker 3: first level. The second level is the government argument. These

50
00:03:09,360 --> 00:03:12,640
Speaker 3: are not like ordinary tariffs, and they try to distinguish

51
00:03:12,680 --> 00:03:18,400
Speaker 3: between regulatory tariffs and revenue raising tariffs. These are tariffs

52
00:03:18,720 --> 00:03:22,560
Speaker 3: which are being used as a foreign policy tool to

53
00:03:22,720 --> 00:03:27,840
Speaker 3: negotiate trade agreements and other conduct by foreign countries, such

54
00:03:27,840 --> 00:03:32,440
Speaker 3: as releasing rare earth minerals things like that. And so

55
00:03:32,720 --> 00:03:36,400
Speaker 3: this is a tool the president is using, not intended

56
00:03:36,440 --> 00:03:41,240
Speaker 3: and primarily to raise revenue, but using the tariffs as

57
00:03:41,760 --> 00:03:46,240
Speaker 3: part of the president's foreign policy to which the courts

58
00:03:46,240 --> 00:03:48,480
Speaker 3: are supposed to give deference. So I don't think this

59
00:03:48,520 --> 00:03:50,600
Speaker 3: is as close as anyone is set. I mean, I

60
00:03:50,640 --> 00:03:53,320
Speaker 3: don't think this is as lopsided as anyone is saying.

61
00:03:53,480 --> 00:03:55,480
Speaker 3: I'm not saying Trump's going to win this one, but

62
00:03:55,560 --> 00:03:57,840
Speaker 3: I think it's a lot closer than people are giving it.

63
00:03:58,320 --> 00:04:01,080
Speaker 2: The regular conversation, completely with you.

64
00:04:01,400 --> 00:04:06,000
Speaker 1: If the president has the power under the IEEPA to

65
00:04:06,240 --> 00:04:11,240
Speaker 1: regulate trade, this should be within those powers. The argument

66
00:04:11,360 --> 00:04:14,720
Speaker 1: is if it's raising revenue and tariffs are attacks, which

67
00:04:14,800 --> 00:04:18,960
Speaker 1: they seem to agree on as I heard them. And

68
00:04:19,040 --> 00:04:22,400
Speaker 1: then their argument is taxation is something that happens in Congress,

69
00:04:22,440 --> 00:04:24,320
Speaker 1: and I was all I could think of was John

70
00:04:24,400 --> 00:04:28,800
Speaker 1: Roberts and Obamacare and deciding that Obamacare was a tax

71
00:04:29,080 --> 00:04:29,839
Speaker 1: to find.

72
00:04:29,600 --> 00:04:31,480
Speaker 2: The way to make it be legal.

73
00:04:31,600 --> 00:04:33,600
Speaker 1: That was the kind of thought that I thought they

74
00:04:33,600 --> 00:04:36,760
Speaker 1: were going with, regardless of the regular conversation, which I

75
00:04:36,800 --> 00:04:37,560
Speaker 1: agree with you on.

76
00:04:38,760 --> 00:04:41,960
Speaker 3: Yeah, And I think that that's going to be an issue.

77
00:04:42,160 --> 00:04:45,440
Speaker 3: What is the purpose of these tariffs and can you

78
00:04:45,520 --> 00:04:49,280
Speaker 3: have tariffs that are meant to serve another purpose as

79
00:04:49,320 --> 00:04:53,359
Speaker 3: opposed to permanent terriffts tariffs that are primarily a revenue

80
00:04:53,440 --> 00:04:56,600
Speaker 3: raising And so I think that's going to be the issue.

81
00:04:56,720 --> 00:05:01,680
Speaker 3: Then they got into some subsidiary but potentially important other

82
00:05:01,839 --> 00:05:07,200
Speaker 3: legal issues like can Congress even delegate to the president

83
00:05:07,560 --> 00:05:11,200
Speaker 3: the power of taxation things like that so called non

84
00:05:11,279 --> 00:05:18,480
Speaker 3: delegation doctrine, And if this is a power given by

85
00:05:18,520 --> 00:05:22,360
Speaker 3: Congress to the president. Is the so called Major Issues

86
00:05:22,440 --> 00:05:24,760
Speaker 3: doctrine going to come in When it's a big issue

87
00:05:24,760 --> 00:05:28,880
Speaker 3: that affects the entire nation and affects society, it has

88
00:05:28,920 --> 00:05:31,599
Speaker 3: to be explicit, It has to be clear. You can't

89
00:05:31,640 --> 00:05:34,560
Speaker 3: shouldn't be arguing over what is the meaning of the

90
00:05:34,600 --> 00:05:37,960
Speaker 3: word regulate that that's not enough. So there could be

91
00:05:38,000 --> 00:05:40,480
Speaker 3: some technical legal grounds, but I think this is going

92
00:05:40,560 --> 00:05:45,640
Speaker 3: to come down to John Roberts. Basically, in Obamacare, he

93
00:05:45,720 --> 00:05:49,520
Speaker 3: found the individual mandate to be a tax, okay, to

94
00:05:49,560 --> 00:05:53,720
Speaker 3: fall under Congress's taxing power. That's the one that required

95
00:05:53,760 --> 00:05:57,200
Speaker 3: you to buy a policy from an insurance company. And

96
00:05:57,440 --> 00:06:00,480
Speaker 3: that was a tax that blindsided everybody.

97
00:06:00,520 --> 00:06:00,920
Speaker 2: It wasn't.

98
00:06:01,240 --> 00:06:04,880
Speaker 3: It was an argument made during the case by the

99
00:06:04,880 --> 00:06:07,800
Speaker 3: Obama administration, but nobody focused on it. It came out of,

100
00:06:08,080 --> 00:06:10,080
Speaker 3: you know, like left field. No one was focused on

101
00:06:10,120 --> 00:06:12,640
Speaker 3: that except for John Roberts, and he found that that

102
00:06:12,880 --> 00:06:15,279
Speaker 3: meant it was a taxed Here, if he finds this

103
00:06:15,360 --> 00:06:19,159
Speaker 3: is a tax, it's just the opposite. It's to rein

104
00:06:19,240 --> 00:06:23,080
Speaker 3: in the executive branch, not empower it the way Obamacare

105
00:06:23,160 --> 00:06:24,960
Speaker 3: did or Congress.

106
00:06:25,279 --> 00:06:27,240
Speaker 2: So yeah, I.

107
00:06:27,480 --> 00:06:29,120
Speaker 3: Don't know which way this one is going to go

108
00:06:29,240 --> 00:06:32,760
Speaker 3: clearly the three liberal women are against this. I mean

109
00:06:33,320 --> 00:06:35,960
Speaker 3: they don't you know. The one thing I'll say about

110
00:06:36,000 --> 00:06:38,760
Speaker 3: the three liberal women there, they don't hide which way

111
00:06:38,760 --> 00:06:41,280
Speaker 3: they're going to go, right, you know, by the end

112
00:06:41,320 --> 00:06:44,120
Speaker 3: of every oral argument, which way they're going, at least

113
00:06:44,120 --> 00:06:48,400
Speaker 3: on politically charged important issues. The other ones, I'm not

114
00:06:48,440 --> 00:06:49,040
Speaker 3: so sure.

115
00:06:49,600 --> 00:06:52,520
Speaker 1: Yeah, talking to William Jacobs and Cornell Law professor Legal

116
00:06:52,600 --> 00:06:57,720
Speaker 1: insurrection dot Com, I would say to you that it's

117
00:06:57,839 --> 00:06:59,760
Speaker 1: it's not even a question that that happened to all

118
00:06:59,800 --> 00:07:03,080
Speaker 1: be women, the liberal justices. You never have to question

119
00:07:03,800 --> 00:07:06,920
Speaker 1: where they're at. We always know where they're at. I

120
00:07:06,960 --> 00:07:09,600
Speaker 1: want to share this with you. This was a commentary

121
00:07:09,680 --> 00:07:16,400
Speaker 1: over there at CNN regarding this case and regarding President Trump.

122
00:07:16,800 --> 00:07:18,960
Speaker 2: Let me know if you can hear this listen.

123
00:07:19,520 --> 00:07:20,200
Speaker 3: Coming from.

124
00:07:21,640 --> 00:07:24,440
Speaker 4: Questions, but we can just start with Chief Justices Robberts.

125
00:07:24,480 --> 00:07:27,600
Speaker 4: Why not use the chief justice? As he mentioned, generally,

126
00:07:27,720 --> 00:07:29,720
Speaker 4: the Congress has the power to tax, and it's a

127
00:07:29,760 --> 00:07:33,040
Speaker 4: power that's reserved only for them. Trump's lawyers or the

128
00:07:33,040 --> 00:07:36,040
Speaker 4: administration lawyers are saying that this isn't a tax. What

129
00:07:36,080 --> 00:07:39,440
Speaker 4: they're doing is essentially regulating imports. This is more about

130
00:07:39,560 --> 00:07:43,200
Speaker 4: foreign policy, and what they're doing is trying to bring

131
00:07:43,320 --> 00:07:46,440
Speaker 4: manufacturing jobs back to the United States, So they're regulating

132
00:07:46,520 --> 00:07:49,960
Speaker 4: import to allow that to happen, and that any taxes

133
00:07:49,960 --> 00:07:53,400
Speaker 4: that comes from that is incidental. The lawyers on the

134
00:07:53,440 --> 00:07:55,760
Speaker 4: other side are saying, as BS, this is a tax

135
00:07:56,000 --> 00:07:58,400
Speaker 4: and only the Congress has the right to do that. Now,

136
00:07:58,440 --> 00:08:00,920
Speaker 4: it is a note that just as illegal did bring

137
00:08:01,000 --> 00:08:05,400
Speaker 4: up that in emergency situations, the president does have more power,

138
00:08:05,800 --> 00:08:08,560
Speaker 4: and we're going to hear this question answered of Trump

139
00:08:08,600 --> 00:08:11,440
Speaker 4: has this notion now that he can decide when it's

140
00:08:11,480 --> 00:08:14,720
Speaker 4: an emergency, and he's tried to use that with immigration.

141
00:08:14,560 --> 00:08:15,920
Speaker 2: He's tried to use that with Terris.

142
00:08:16,000 --> 00:08:17,440
Speaker 4: I think we're going to get an answer as to

143
00:08:17,640 --> 00:08:20,960
Speaker 4: whether or not a president can unilaterally decide when it's

144
00:08:21,000 --> 00:08:22,960
Speaker 4: an emergency, so he should get more power.

145
00:08:23,320 --> 00:08:28,520
Speaker 1: Then he The fundamental problem with that argument William Jacobson,

146
00:08:29,040 --> 00:08:32,839
Speaker 1: as I see that's Dante Mills, a criminal attorney there

147
00:08:32,880 --> 00:08:37,120
Speaker 1: on CNN. If the president can't decide when the emergency is,

148
00:08:37,400 --> 00:08:38,800
Speaker 1: who in the world decides.

149
00:08:40,320 --> 00:08:42,480
Speaker 3: I think Trump's going to win that one easily. The

150
00:08:42,600 --> 00:08:45,880
Speaker 3: issue of ken is this an emergency? I don't think

151
00:08:45,920 --> 00:08:48,280
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court's going to second guess him on that.

152
00:08:48,360 --> 00:08:50,320
Speaker 3: If they do second guess him, then it's over for

153
00:08:50,360 --> 00:08:53,520
Speaker 3: the Trump administration. But I don't think, you know, the

154
00:08:53,559 --> 00:08:56,880
Speaker 3: statute gives the president the power to decide if there's

155
00:08:56,920 --> 00:08:59,720
Speaker 3: an emergency, and I don't see the Supreme Court, unlike

156
00:08:59,760 --> 00:09:03,600
Speaker 3: maybe some district court judges nitpicking whether this is an emergency.

157
00:09:03,760 --> 00:09:06,520
Speaker 3: So I think he wins that. The question really is

158
00:09:06,720 --> 00:09:09,760
Speaker 3: if this is an emergency and if he did properly

159
00:09:10,120 --> 00:09:14,280
Speaker 3: invoke emergency powers. Is one of those powers the power

160
00:09:14,320 --> 00:09:17,080
Speaker 3: to impose tariffs? That's where I think this is going

161
00:09:17,160 --> 00:09:18,080
Speaker 3: to rise or fall.

162
00:09:18,760 --> 00:09:22,120
Speaker 1: I've got more with William Jacobson, Cornell Law professor, Legal

163
00:09:22,120 --> 00:09:26,560
Speaker 1: insurrection dot Com coming up, talking about Heritage Foundation and

164
00:09:26,640 --> 00:09:31,520
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson that leaked meeting with Kevin Roberts the president

165
00:09:31,520 --> 00:09:33,760
Speaker 1: where people were demanding he resigned. Some people say he

166
00:09:33,840 --> 00:09:37,320
Speaker 1: wants to stay. But in either case, what really happened here?

167
00:09:37,520 --> 00:09:39,920
Speaker 1: William Jacobson has the story that's coming up next.

168
00:09:40,000 --> 00:09:40,520
Speaker 2: Keep it here.

169
00:09:40,679 --> 00:09:44,120
Speaker 1: This is Tony Katz today, So I continue my conversation

170
00:09:44,200 --> 00:09:47,959
Speaker 1: with William Jacobs and Cornell Law professor Legal insurrection dot

171
00:09:48,000 --> 00:09:52,800
Speaker 1: Com regarding all the Brujaja regarding the found the Heritage Foundation.

172
00:09:53,240 --> 00:09:56,000
Speaker 1: This defense that Kevin Roberts, the president of Heritage put

173
00:09:56,080 --> 00:09:59,040
Speaker 1: on Tucker Carlson the interview with Nick Flints when it

174
00:09:59,120 --> 00:10:01,360
Speaker 1: was seemed pretty clear based.

175
00:10:01,040 --> 00:10:03,600
Speaker 2: On the video, he didn't quite understand what had happened.

176
00:10:03,920 --> 00:10:06,240
Speaker 1: He didn't understand what Tucker was saying, what Nick Flentce

177
00:10:06,320 --> 00:10:08,800
Speaker 1: was saying, who Nick foun Dace was, what Tucker said

178
00:10:08,800 --> 00:10:14,480
Speaker 1: before there was this outrageous disconnect that was taking place

179
00:10:14,840 --> 00:10:17,960
Speaker 1: right in front of everybody's eyes. Tony Katz, Tony Katz today,

180
00:10:18,400 --> 00:10:20,720
Speaker 1: good to be with you. I get back to William

181
00:10:20,760 --> 00:10:24,800
Speaker 1: Jacobson of Legal insurrection dot com. This story is about

182
00:10:25,280 --> 00:10:31,360
Speaker 1: Kevin Roberts and his defense of Tucker Carlson's interview with

183
00:10:31,920 --> 00:10:34,320
Speaker 1: white nationalists and ju hater Nick foint Tace.

184
00:10:34,360 --> 00:10:37,240
Speaker 2: I don't think I'm saying anything that isn't one hundred.

185
00:10:37,040 --> 00:10:40,200
Speaker 1: Percent accurate based on Nick point As his own comments

186
00:10:40,200 --> 00:10:45,280
Speaker 1: and commentaries and giving this full throat a defense of

187
00:10:45,360 --> 00:10:48,320
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson, not that he would have somebody on that

188
00:10:48,360 --> 00:10:52,600
Speaker 1: you disagree with, but rather any conversation of noticing that

189
00:10:52,960 --> 00:10:56,800
Speaker 1: is siding with globalists and siding with mouthpieces The response

190
00:10:56,840 --> 00:11:01,319
Speaker 1: from Heritage has been inside the room, people have resigned

191
00:11:01,320 --> 00:11:04,840
Speaker 1: from the anti terrorism a task for us here. You

192
00:11:04,960 --> 00:11:08,080
Speaker 1: have been very very strong on this conversation, as you

193
00:11:08,200 --> 00:11:12,000
Speaker 1: often are. But Robert said, after a staff meeting was leaked,

194
00:11:12,320 --> 00:11:16,240
Speaker 1: he's staying in. He's going to remain at Heritage Foundation.

195
00:11:16,840 --> 00:11:18,920
Speaker 1: If you are going to distill this to a fundamental

196
00:11:18,920 --> 00:11:20,960
Speaker 1: to an elevator pitch, you are trying to explain this

197
00:11:21,000 --> 00:11:23,480
Speaker 1: to somebody else's to what the real issue is here?

198
00:11:24,320 --> 00:11:25,400
Speaker 2: What's the real issue here?

199
00:11:26,320 --> 00:11:29,959
Speaker 3: The issue is Tucker Carlson, It's not Nick Foenes, okay.

200
00:11:30,000 --> 00:11:33,319
Speaker 3: And the issue is that the Nick Fuentes interview did

201
00:11:33,400 --> 00:11:36,040
Speaker 3: not is not a one off, okay. This is a

202
00:11:36,120 --> 00:11:40,319
Speaker 3: two year pattern, basically since October seventh, of Tucker Carlson

203
00:11:40,360 --> 00:11:43,760
Speaker 3: trying to dram up Christian hatred of Jews, trying going

204
00:11:43,840 --> 00:11:47,640
Speaker 3: being on a jihad against Israel. So this comes after

205
00:11:47,760 --> 00:11:52,320
Speaker 3: Tucker has already platformed and promoted and called the most

206
00:11:52,360 --> 00:11:56,280
Speaker 3: honest living historian, a guy who claims Churchill was the

207
00:11:56,280 --> 00:11:59,480
Speaker 3: bad guy in World War Two and Hitler was just misunderstood.

208
00:11:59,640 --> 00:12:02,959
Speaker 3: He found himself in a difficult situation with all these

209
00:12:03,040 --> 00:12:04,920
Speaker 3: Jews who had no place to go, and he didn't

210
00:12:04,920 --> 00:12:06,839
Speaker 3: really want to kill them. I mean, that's the gist

211
00:12:06,880 --> 00:12:09,120
Speaker 3: of what he's saying. So we have that guy. We

212
00:12:09,160 --> 00:12:13,760
Speaker 3: have Tucker platforming people who are anti Israel, priests who

213
00:12:13,800 --> 00:12:18,360
Speaker 3: claim that israel I e the Jews, are responsible for

214
00:12:18,520 --> 00:12:23,640
Speaker 3: the decline of Christianity even in the Muslim world, portraying

215
00:12:23,720 --> 00:12:26,760
Speaker 3: Jews as the problem, Jews as the enemies of Christians,

216
00:12:26,960 --> 00:12:30,280
Speaker 3: Jews as wantonly killing Christians in the Middle East, when

217
00:12:30,320 --> 00:12:32,960
Speaker 3: we all know it's the Muslim world that's doing that.

218
00:12:33,080 --> 00:12:35,720
Speaker 3: In fact, Israel is the one place where Christians are

219
00:12:35,760 --> 00:12:39,680
Speaker 3: safe in the Middle East. And there's dozens of other

220
00:12:39,800 --> 00:12:43,360
Speaker 3: instances where he for two years has been on a

221
00:12:43,520 --> 00:12:48,840
Speaker 3: tear non stop, almost every show or at least every week,

222
00:12:49,160 --> 00:12:53,680
Speaker 3: platforming and promoting and nodding along with these people who

223
00:12:53,679 --> 00:12:56,200
Speaker 3: blame Jews for everything, Blame Jews for control of the

224
00:12:56,320 --> 00:13:01,120
Speaker 3: US government, Blame APAK, which is an American organization of

225
00:13:01,160 --> 00:13:05,920
Speaker 3: American citizens, for somehow controlling the United States. It's been

226
00:13:06,040 --> 00:13:10,480
Speaker 3: NonStop with Tucker for two years. And there was huge

227
00:13:10,600 --> 00:13:14,680
Speaker 3: opposition to Tucker long before the flent Day's interview. Remember

228
00:13:14,720 --> 00:13:18,640
Speaker 3: all the turmoil at Turning Point, USA involving Charlie Kirk

229
00:13:18,960 --> 00:13:22,640
Speaker 3: was not about Israel. Charlie Clerk Kirk was always an

230
00:13:22,679 --> 00:13:28,240
Speaker 3: Israel supporter. It was over TPUSA platforming Tucker. Tucker has

231
00:13:28,280 --> 00:13:33,920
Speaker 3: been a chaos agent. He is destroying the MAGA movement.

232
00:13:34,320 --> 00:13:39,319
Speaker 3: He is on his own agenda, and now he's destroying

233
00:13:39,640 --> 00:13:42,480
Speaker 3: Heritage because for some bizarre reason, there seemed to be

234
00:13:42,520 --> 00:13:45,800
Speaker 3: a lot of people, including the president of the Heritage Foundation,

235
00:13:45,960 --> 00:13:49,200
Speaker 3: who put their loyalty to Tucker Carlson over the loyalty

236
00:13:49,240 --> 00:13:53,000
Speaker 3: to their organization and over their loyalty to the conservative movement.

237
00:13:53,040 --> 00:13:54,440
Speaker 2: But give me thes.

238
00:13:54,000 --> 00:13:58,640
Speaker 1: Are give me this statement, I think hits people very odd.

239
00:13:59,080 --> 00:14:03,120
Speaker 1: Tucker's destroying MAGA. Give me give me the basis that

240
00:14:03,160 --> 00:14:03,840
Speaker 1: you take from that.

241
00:14:04,360 --> 00:14:08,079
Speaker 3: Okay, what is the MAGA movement? It is a coalition.

242
00:14:08,600 --> 00:14:13,720
Speaker 3: It was a coalition of multiple religions and multiple racists

243
00:14:13,760 --> 00:14:18,720
Speaker 3: and multiple ethnicities that united around the United States and

244
00:14:18,720 --> 00:14:21,760
Speaker 3: making us create again. He has been trying to tear

245
00:14:21,840 --> 00:14:26,840
Speaker 3: apart that coalition by ostracizing Jews from it. If in

246
00:14:27,120 --> 00:14:31,320
Speaker 3: his price of admission for Jews in American society now

247
00:14:31,440 --> 00:14:34,480
Speaker 3: political society, is you have to be anti Israel, and

248
00:14:34,520 --> 00:14:37,360
Speaker 3: you have to buy into this notion that Israel is

249
00:14:37,400 --> 00:14:41,600
Speaker 3: against Christians, and so he's tearing that apart. People who

250
00:14:41,640 --> 00:14:46,280
Speaker 3: support him on the HB one visa went after viciously

251
00:14:46,560 --> 00:14:50,560
Speaker 3: Indian Americans, Okay, And so what he's doing is he's

252
00:14:50,600 --> 00:14:55,240
Speaker 3: picking at fault lines in the MAGA movement and he

253
00:14:55,320 --> 00:14:59,680
Speaker 3: wants to make it into essentially a white Christian nationalist movement.

254
00:15:00,280 --> 00:15:02,560
Speaker 3: And if you do that, you have destroyed the MAGA

255
00:15:02,600 --> 00:15:06,160
Speaker 3: movement because you've destroyed the coalition. Remember Donald Trump had

256
00:15:06,200 --> 00:15:11,640
Speaker 3: a great victory in twenty twenty four, but it wasn't

257
00:15:11,680 --> 00:15:14,600
Speaker 3: like a twenty point victory, it was a few points.

258
00:15:14,680 --> 00:15:18,120
Speaker 3: You start picking away at that coalition, you start driving

259
00:15:18,160 --> 00:15:23,400
Speaker 3: people out, you start only accepting into that coalition Christian nationalists.

260
00:15:23,400 --> 00:15:25,600
Speaker 3: And I'm not saying they shouldn't be part of the coalition,

261
00:15:25,760 --> 00:15:29,880
Speaker 3: but I'm saying they're not enough. They cannot alone win elections.

262
00:15:30,080 --> 00:15:32,960
Speaker 3: And so he is destroying it. He's going to hand

263
00:15:33,160 --> 00:15:38,280
Speaker 3: the White House to a Democrat if this continues. JD.

264
00:15:38,440 --> 00:15:42,520
Speaker 3: Vance is the heir apparent to the nomination. Very troubling

265
00:15:42,760 --> 00:15:45,000
Speaker 3: how close he is to Tucker, and there's been no

266
00:15:45,080 --> 00:15:51,880
Speaker 3: transparency on that. JD. Vans gave got his job apparently

267
00:15:52,120 --> 00:15:55,840
Speaker 3: because Tucker lobbied Trump to back Vans for the Senate

268
00:15:56,600 --> 00:15:59,320
Speaker 3: and then to make him the VP nomination. There's some

269
00:15:59,360 --> 00:16:02,880
Speaker 3: sort of bizarre our relationship here that has not been transparent.

270
00:16:02,920 --> 00:16:05,840
Speaker 3: And I've been calling for over six months for Jagievans.

271
00:16:06,080 --> 00:16:09,160
Speaker 3: Just tell us what your relationship now is with Tucker.

272
00:16:09,360 --> 00:16:12,040
Speaker 3: I don't care whether your close friends or you're not

273
00:16:12,080 --> 00:16:15,760
Speaker 3: close friends. We as a voting public are entitled to know,

274
00:16:16,080 --> 00:16:18,640
Speaker 3: and that's not been forthcoming. So I think you look

275
00:16:18,680 --> 00:16:22,640
Speaker 3: at how Tucker is picking apart the coalition, and that's

276
00:16:22,680 --> 00:16:25,280
Speaker 3: what I mean when I say he's destroying the MAGA movement.

277
00:16:25,440 --> 00:16:28,920
Speaker 3: He's picking apart the coalition, and that coalition was the

278
00:16:28,960 --> 00:16:32,720
Speaker 3: only way Republicans can win an election. You cannot win

279
00:16:32,800 --> 00:16:35,840
Speaker 3: an election with just one group or one piece of

280
00:16:35,840 --> 00:16:36,440
Speaker 3: that movement.

281
00:16:36,520 --> 00:16:39,640
Speaker 1: So now let me remember I'm not happy with Tucker

282
00:16:39,680 --> 00:16:43,400
Speaker 1: at all. I don't agree with Tucker his comments about

283
00:16:43,480 --> 00:16:47,000
Speaker 1: Russian supermarkets, the interview with Nick Foante's his conversation about

284
00:16:47,080 --> 00:16:50,200
Speaker 1: Israel at large. But someone's going to say to you,

285
00:16:50,280 --> 00:16:53,040
Speaker 1: what's wrong with criticizing Israel. That's going to be the

286
00:16:53,080 --> 00:16:56,239
Speaker 1: response when you say that about Tucker and the Israel conversation.

287
00:16:56,800 --> 00:17:00,240
Speaker 1: Your argument is he isn't criticizing Israel. You're saying he's

288
00:17:00,360 --> 00:17:04,400
Speaker 1: lying about Israel's position vis a vie for example Christians.

289
00:17:04,720 --> 00:17:09,440
Speaker 3: Yes, exactly. He always frames things in terms of Christian Christianity.

290
00:17:10,200 --> 00:17:14,720
Speaker 3: So Israel accidentally hit a church in Gaza, he doesn't

291
00:17:14,760 --> 00:17:18,439
Speaker 3: focus on the fact that for twenty years, twenty five years,

292
00:17:19,280 --> 00:17:22,560
Speaker 3: Christians have been driven out of Gaza by Hamas and

293
00:17:22,600 --> 00:17:27,520
Speaker 3: the Islamis Okay, the popular Christian postpulation of Gaza is

294
00:17:27,560 --> 00:17:30,000
Speaker 3: down to, I think a couple of thousand people, so

295
00:17:30,280 --> 00:17:34,480
Speaker 3: they have been ethnically cleansed from Gaza. Hamas launches a

296
00:17:34,480 --> 00:17:36,679
Speaker 3: war on Israel. In the course of that war, a

297
00:17:36,800 --> 00:17:40,679
Speaker 3: church is hit, and that's what Tucker focus is on. Okay.

298
00:17:41,119 --> 00:17:43,760
Speaker 3: Has he even talked about Sudan? Has he talked about

299
00:17:43,800 --> 00:17:47,320
Speaker 3: the massacre of Christians throughout the Muslim world? He hyper

300
00:17:47,440 --> 00:17:51,240
Speaker 3: focuses on Israel, frames it in terms of well, I

301
00:17:51,240 --> 00:17:54,120
Speaker 3: think I'm almost quoting him exactly. Well, I'm a Christian,

302
00:17:54,400 --> 00:17:58,040
Speaker 3: I'm entitled to be concerned about this. Why does he

303
00:17:58,080 --> 00:18:00,840
Speaker 3: phrase it that way? And he phrased is it that way?

304
00:18:01,040 --> 00:18:03,480
Speaker 3: Because if you look at what his agenda is. His

305
00:18:03,600 --> 00:18:07,960
Speaker 3: agenda is to use Israel as a cudgel against Jews

306
00:18:08,000 --> 00:18:11,560
Speaker 3: around the world, but including American Jews, in order to

307
00:18:11,640 --> 00:18:15,440
Speaker 3: drive them out of our political system. And so, yeah,

308
00:18:16,320 --> 00:18:22,000
Speaker 3: nobody Israeli's criticized Israel. Everybody criticizes Israel. This notion that

309
00:18:22,320 --> 00:18:26,520
Speaker 3: we're not allowed to criticize Israel, well, everybody criticizes Israel.

310
00:18:26,720 --> 00:18:29,040
Speaker 3: But when you hyper focus on it, when it's the

311
00:18:29,080 --> 00:18:31,919
Speaker 3: only thing you care about, when you pose it in

312
00:18:32,000 --> 00:18:35,560
Speaker 3: religious terms, when you lie about it, when you do

313
00:18:35,640 --> 00:18:38,960
Speaker 3: all those things, there's something wrong here. And we don't

314
00:18:38,960 --> 00:18:42,080
Speaker 3: have to ignore what we're seeing. With Tucker Carlson, it's

315
00:18:42,240 --> 00:18:46,439
Speaker 3: very clear what his agenda is. And if it wasn't clear,

316
00:18:46,720 --> 00:18:49,840
Speaker 3: it became clear when he gave a fluff interview to

317
00:18:49,880 --> 00:18:52,240
Speaker 3: a neo Nazi. I think you were way too kind

318
00:18:52,440 --> 00:18:57,160
Speaker 3: towards Nick Fuentes. Okay, and think about this, Tucker Carlson

319
00:18:57,280 --> 00:19:01,359
Speaker 3: is good friends, we believe still with jd Vance. Nick

320
00:19:01,440 --> 00:19:04,000
Speaker 3: Fouente has said the worst things about jd.

321
00:19:03,880 --> 00:19:06,480
Speaker 2: Vance and jd Vance's wife, and.

322
00:19:06,400 --> 00:19:10,560
Speaker 3: Jd Vance's wife using racial epitaph to her because she's

323
00:19:10,600 --> 00:19:14,199
Speaker 3: of Indian background. And Tucker brings this guy on his

324
00:19:14,320 --> 00:19:18,119
Speaker 3: show and doesn't confront him about this. So Tucker doesn't

325
00:19:18,160 --> 00:19:21,600
Speaker 3: even stand up for the wife of his best friend

326
00:19:21,960 --> 00:19:25,800
Speaker 3: on that show with Nick Fuentes, What is going on here?

327
00:19:26,000 --> 00:19:29,639
Speaker 3: And so you know, Tucker has become a malign influence

328
00:19:30,280 --> 00:19:32,159
Speaker 3: and I think it's not going to get better. And

329
00:19:32,240 --> 00:19:35,159
Speaker 3: I really wish that Donald Trump would speak out about it.

330
00:19:35,280 --> 00:19:37,919
Speaker 3: He did speak out about it when Tucker when Tucker

331
00:19:38,000 --> 00:19:44,080
Speaker 3: sided with Iran, Okay, literally sided with Iran, and I

332
00:19:44,119 --> 00:19:47,560
Speaker 3: think Trump called him kookie Trump. I think, you know,

333
00:19:47,600 --> 00:19:50,200
Speaker 3: Trump has been so good on so many of these issues.

334
00:19:50,560 --> 00:19:54,200
Speaker 3: He's I hope he realizes the damage Tucker is doing,

335
00:19:54,920 --> 00:19:57,320
Speaker 3: not just to the present, but to the future to

336
00:19:57,359 --> 00:20:00,480
Speaker 3: twenty twenty eight. I think Tucker's doing damage to the

337
00:20:00,520 --> 00:20:05,120
Speaker 3: coalition that's necessary for a Republican to win. I think

338
00:20:05,119 --> 00:20:09,720
Speaker 3: he's doing damage to our efforts to get things done

339
00:20:09,760 --> 00:20:12,600
Speaker 3: within the government. And I think he's doing tremendous damage

340
00:20:12,640 --> 00:20:14,919
Speaker 3: to JD. Vans, who has done a great job as

341
00:20:15,000 --> 00:20:19,080
Speaker 3: Vice president. I'm not empty JD. Vans, but he's got

342
00:20:19,119 --> 00:20:22,679
Speaker 3: to address the issue that the most malicious force, the

343
00:20:22,720 --> 00:20:27,439
Speaker 3: most damaging force in Republicans sphere nowadays, is his best

344
00:20:27,440 --> 00:20:29,479
Speaker 3: friend and he's got to address that. And that's all

345
00:20:29,480 --> 00:20:32,000
Speaker 3: I've been calling for. Tell us what you think about it,

346
00:20:32,280 --> 00:20:35,480
Speaker 3: don't hide behind words, don't be silent about it. This

347
00:20:35,640 --> 00:20:37,479
Speaker 3: is not going to go away, and it's not going

348
00:20:37,560 --> 00:20:40,280
Speaker 3: to get better. Address it, and then people can make

349
00:20:40,280 --> 00:20:41,800
Speaker 3: a decision as voters.

350
00:20:41,480 --> 00:20:43,440
Speaker 2: And we will leave it. There are two things.

351
00:20:43,480 --> 00:20:45,879
Speaker 1: I don't know if the term was kooky that President

352
00:20:45,920 --> 00:20:49,000
Speaker 1: Trump used about Tucker, but he clearly disagreed with Tucker's

353
00:20:49,000 --> 00:20:53,439
Speaker 1: assessment that going after Natan's and Isfahan and Fourdeaux, these

354
00:20:53,520 --> 00:20:55,880
Speaker 1: nuclear sites would lead to World War three. And clearly

355
00:20:55,960 --> 00:20:58,720
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson was very, very wrong about what that would be.

356
00:21:00,160 --> 00:21:01,800
Speaker 1: In my life, have I been told that I'm way

357
00:21:01,840 --> 00:21:03,400
Speaker 1: too kind to Nick Fuintes.

358
00:21:04,560 --> 00:21:08,280
Speaker 2: That's universally a first for me, for sure.

359
00:21:08,359 --> 00:21:11,960
Speaker 1: William Jacobson Cortnell, Law professor, Legal insurrection dot Com. I

360
00:21:12,000 --> 00:21:14,720
Speaker 1: appreciate you taking the time to be with us more

361
00:21:14,760 --> 00:21:16,000
Speaker 1: to get to I'm Tony Katz.

362
00:21:16,040 --> 00:21:17,240
Speaker 2: This is Tony Katz today,