Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2: I've defended Republicans for thirty five years in public, and
Speaker 2: then we wound up in a war with Iran that
Speaker 2: has gravely hurt the United States. Trump has been disloyal,
Speaker 2: totally disloyal to the United States. He cheated on the
Speaker 2: United States with a foreign power.
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson on breaking with the leader he helped re elect.
Speaker 1: At the point that we're talking right now, President Trump,
Speaker 1: without Benjamin Netanyahu by his side, has said the ceasefire
Speaker 1: is over and the United States in the last twenty
Speaker 1: four hours has hit more than eighty Iranian targets. Isn't
Speaker 1: the more honest and direct thing to do? Hold him
Speaker 1: fully accountable for his actions.
Speaker 3: It's his fault.
Speaker 2: He's the US president and a huge part of the
Speaker 2: job is resisting pressure from outside forces, and he didn't,
Speaker 2: So he's weak.
Speaker 1: From Bloomberg Weekend. This is the Mishal Husain Show. I'm Mishal Husain.
Speaker 1: What was envisaged as a short but overwhelming war against
Speaker 1: Iran by the United States and Israel has turned out
Speaker 1: five months on rather differently. Ceasefires have proved fragile Iran's
Speaker 1: power over the Strait of Hormuz is still apparent, and
Speaker 1: the war may yet have a significant political fallout in
Speaker 1: the United States, a president who promised no more wars
Speaker 1: has in fact repeatedly used force in his second term.
Speaker 1: But it is the Iran war that has sparked a
Speaker 1: spectacular fallout between Donald Trump and one of his most
Speaker 1: prominent allies, the former Fox News host and conservative commentator
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson. He worked hard to get Donald Trump re elected.
Speaker 1: He was dismayed when the first strikes against Iran took
Speaker 1: place last year. Then came the start of this war
Speaker 1: in February, and at that point the Carlson Trump relationship imploded.
Speaker 1: Since then, in episode after episode of The Tucker Carlson Show,
Speaker 1: he has gone after what he's portrayed as a betrayal
Speaker 1: of America first, and he's gained a larger audience along
Speaker 1: the way. Episodes now get tens of millions of views
Speaker 1: across social media and podcast platforms each time, and Tucker
Speaker 1: Carlson has more than seventeen million followers on x He
Speaker 1: has long been a polarizing figure, disliked on the left
Speaker 1: from his bow tie wearing Fox News days. Now, though
Speaker 1: he has lost friends and allies. That's partly because of
Speaker 1: his rift with the Republican Party, but also because of
Speaker 1: the way that he talks about Israel, amplifying narratives and stereotype.
Speaker 1: His critics say that cross the line into anti Semitism.
Speaker 1: Our conversation was recorded between London and Maine, where Tucker
Speaker 1: Caulson lives, and we do go into some tough territory.
Speaker 1: There are a number of responses and some extra information
Speaker 1: that you'll hear at the end. In fact, for this
Speaker 1: episode in particular, please do read my notes, which you'll
Speaker 1: find at Bloomberg dot com forward slash Mitchell. That's where
Speaker 1: you'll get a sense of why a question was asked
Speaker 1: in a certain way, what might have been left out
Speaker 1: of an answer, how I prepared, and indeed what I
Speaker 1: read afterwards, the places where I've added context. So that's
Speaker 1: the background, and here's how my conversation with Tucker Culson began.
Speaker 1: Thank you for talking to us. Oh, of course, you
Speaker 1: know I was thinking about your home and Maine, because
Speaker 1: I was reading the last bit of this book where
Speaker 1: you'd you write quite emotionally about tiding up the house
Speaker 1: at the end of the summer, and I was thinking
Speaker 1: that you don't have to do that anymore, right because
Speaker 1: you live there all year around.
Speaker 3: Now, that's true, That's true. I'm grateful, Yeah, Tucker.
Speaker 1: You know, in this conversation we are going to range
Speaker 1: far and wide how you see the US, how you
Speaker 1: see the rest of the world, especially the Middle East
Speaker 1: right now, But before we do that, I really wanted
Speaker 1: to understand your influences, because I think you're clearly in
Speaker 1: the midst of a really intense time in your life
Speaker 1: as well as in the news. Can we talk a
Speaker 1: little bit about your father? First of all, of course,
Speaker 1: I was reading as I prepared for this, what you
Speaker 1: and your brother wrote about him when he died last year,
Speaker 1: and I was just struck by what an unusual life
Speaker 1: he had, and obviously curious about how that influenced you.
Speaker 1: A difficult start to life in many ways he had, well.
Speaker 2: It influenced us enormously. He had the most interesting life
Speaker 2: of anyone I've known personally. He was born in orphan
Speaker 2: grew up in an orphanage in foster care, then was adopted,
Speaker 2: never finished high school, joined the Marine Corps, whent into journalism,
Speaker 2: started working for the government, traveled the world, knew everybody,
Speaker 2: it was just a fascinating, self educated person, intensely curious,
Speaker 2: very smart, very honest, kind of swashbuckling, complicated, and just
Speaker 2: a great guy. And my brother and I had the
Speaker 2: privilege of growing up alone with him when we were little.
Speaker 2: Our mother left when we were small, and my father
Speaker 2: got custody because she wasn't there, and so we grew
Speaker 2: up with them in this kind of eccentric not kind
Speaker 2: of eccentric, extremely eccentric environment, but a happy and wholesome one.
Speaker 2: And for many years I really never told anybody other
Speaker 2: than my wife about my childhood because it sounded so bad.
Speaker 2: But it wasn't bad. It was great, and we really
Speaker 2: sincerely enjoyed it. But it was not mainstream at all,
Speaker 2: in the sense that my father never felt like he
Speaker 2: had to believe something because everyone else believed it.
Speaker 3: He came to his own conclusion.
Speaker 2: He wasn't always right, but he was very often right,
Speaker 2: and he was consistently more right than the majority of
Speaker 2: public opinion in the United States. He was just an
Speaker 2: independent thinker and very American in that way, and there's
Speaker 2: so little of that left.
Speaker 1: And I also thought particularly internationally minded. He had seen
Speaker 1: a lot in the sixties in the US, But then
Speaker 1: you wrote that he was involved in intrigues around the
Speaker 1: world in the last twenty five years of his life.
Speaker 2: He was, and I wrote that obituary on an airplane
Speaker 2: the day after he died, and was sort of confused
Speaker 2: about what he had been doing from the mid eighties
Speaker 2: until he passed and was criticized widely. You know your
Speaker 2: dad worked at the CIA. You must have known that,
Speaker 2: you know. I still am not exactly sure what he
Speaker 2: was doing. He did work, apparently with various intel agencies.
Speaker 2: He was not an employee of CIA, ing I'm a
Speaker 2: badge or anything like that, But I think you know,
Speaker 2: the American intelligence network is a global network, and they
Speaker 2: work with all kinds of other countries intel agencies, and
Speaker 2: it's not exactly clear very often where you know where
Speaker 2: one starts in the next begins, and so it's not
Speaker 2: easy in retrospect to piece together even what your own
Speaker 2: father did for a living.
Speaker 1: There's another part of what you said about him that
Speaker 1: jumped out to me, which is that his motto was
Speaker 1: who dares wins. You know people in the UK will
Speaker 1: know that well as the as the SAS. But I
Speaker 1: wondered if that has come to you in this period,
Speaker 1: because you have had a very public break with President
Speaker 1: Trump with the Republican Party. At the same time, you've
Speaker 1: seen a big increase in the reach of your show
Speaker 1: since the Iran War began. Has that spurred you on
Speaker 1: in given you more conviction that the path you're on
Speaker 1: now is the right one?
Speaker 2: No, you know, I've never been business minded. I mean,
Speaker 2: I was fired three and a half years ago. I
Speaker 2: probably could have retired, so I'm not thinking about our ratings.
Speaker 2: I've never thought about my ratings. Again, you don't have
Speaker 2: to believe me, but it's just true. Ask anyone who's
Speaker 2: worked for me. I don't even know what they are.
Speaker 2: I was in agony when I criticized Trump. I liked Trump,
Speaker 2: I didn't want to and I endorse Trump and campaign
Speaker 2: with Trump and spoke at the Republican National Convention. And
Speaker 2: I've defended Republicans for thirty five years in public, and
Speaker 2: I had zero interest in having a spat with them,
Speaker 2: and so I felt driven to my positions. Trump allowed
Speaker 2: the US government to be completely steered by this tiny
Speaker 2: little country in the Middle East, Israel, to our great detriment,
Speaker 2: and I watched it happen I was offended by it.
Speaker 2: I argued against it directly to him. That had no
Speaker 2: effect at all, and then we wound up in a
Speaker 2: war with Iran that has gravely hurt the United States.
Speaker 2: And it was out of my frustration that I said that,
Speaker 2: but not some calculation that I'm going to get rich
Speaker 2: or something by saying it.
Speaker 3: You know, that's just true.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I must be energizing to have a greater reach
Speaker 1: right now than you did a few months ago.
Speaker 3: So I look at it different.
Speaker 2: It's funny. I don't know that we do have a
Speaker 2: I mean, I really don't know if that's true. But
Speaker 2: from my perspective, you know, the year that preceded this war,
Speaker 2: I spent pretty I don't know tireless is the right word,
Speaker 2: but I mean I was very focused on preventing a
Speaker 2: war with Iran and wrapping up the war between Russia
Speaker 2: and Ukraine, which is also damaging the United States gravely
Speaker 2: and Europe gravely. And from my perspective, I had no
Speaker 2: effect at all, Like nothing I wanted to happen happened.
Speaker 2: I had no power, I had no influence, and I
Speaker 2: think I'd kind of talk myself into believing that I
Speaker 2: could have some effect, and at the end I didn't.
Speaker 2: And so that part of that was my vanity and
Speaker 2: my silliness. And you know, men tend to think they're
Speaker 2: more powerful than they really are, and I think that
Speaker 2: happened to me to some extent. But I felt like
Speaker 2: all of my efforts came to not and I didn't
Speaker 2: like a winner. I felt like a loser.
Speaker 1: At the point that we're talking right now, President Trump,
Speaker 1: all by himself without Benjamin Netanyahu by his side, has
Speaker 1: said the ceasefire is over and the United States in
Speaker 1: the last twenty four hours has hit more than eighty
Speaker 1: Iranian targets. So isn't the more honest and direct thing
Speaker 1: to do hold him fully accountable for his actions as
Speaker 1: the most powerful man in the world.
Speaker 2: I don't think he's the most powerful man in the world.
Speaker 2: I have held him directly accountable. It's his fault. He's
Speaker 2: the US president. He was elected. That's his job, and
Speaker 2: a huge part of the job is resisting pressure from
Speaker 2: outside forces. I mean, many presidents have, to varying degrees resisted,
Speaker 2: you know, attempts to control them from outside, and he didn't.
Speaker 3: So he's weak. I'm not pretending otherwise, but.
Speaker 2: It's also just a factually verifiable statement that Israel pushed
Speaker 2: us into this and Trump allowed them to do that.
Speaker 2: The Secretary of State himself said that on camera. So
Speaker 2: this is not like a conspiracy theory, It's a fact
Speaker 2: the United States is unwilling to or maybe unable. Who knows,
Speaker 2: to restrain Israel. Like you know, I'm on the outside.
Speaker 2: I'm not talking to Trump anymore. I haven't spoken to
Speaker 2: him since late February, so I don't really know. But
Speaker 2: I have a news feed, so I know that we
Speaker 2: did not restrain our ally and partner in this war, Israel,
Speaker 2: and so of course it was never going to work.
Speaker 1: Okay. But it's one thing to seek to influence the
Speaker 1: US president. Many countries have done that with greater or
Speaker 1: lesser success over the years. It's another thing to look
Speaker 1: at the elected leader of the world's only superpower, only
Speaker 1: real superpower at this point, and say he is not
Speaker 1: the most powerful man in the world. Are you really
Speaker 1: saying that Netanyahu is a more powerful figure than Trump?
Speaker 2: No, I don't, so who is the most powerful man
Speaker 2: in the world. The United States is not the world's
Speaker 2: only superpower. China has a larger economy didn't just lose
Speaker 2: a war to Iran, So you know, who knows what
Speaker 2: Chinese military strength actually amounts to. We are much less
Speaker 2: powerful than a lot of us thought we were four
Speaker 2: months ago, So we're not the only superpower at all,
Speaker 2: and that actually that assumption is part of the problem
Speaker 2: that leads to hubris and overreach, and it's a very
Speaker 2: familiar path. But you overstate your powers. I would say
Speaker 2: that there are all kinds of forces in the world.
Speaker 2: One of them is China. There's also the international business community.
Speaker 2: We have a globalized economy, so there's no such thing
Speaker 2: as an American business or a British business or a
Speaker 2: German business. You know, these are all interconnected, and global
Speaker 2: capital is more powerful than any voting block in the
Speaker 2: United States period.
Speaker 3: And Israel as a nation.
Speaker 2: I'm not just including the nine million people who live
Speaker 2: in Israel, but also it's many agents in the United
Speaker 2: States are enormously powerful because so much of the money
Speaker 2: that funds campaigns in the United States comes with the
Speaker 2: express per the intent of tying American foreign policy to
Speaker 2: Israel's foreign policy. So like it's a complicated thing, but
Speaker 2: the closer you look at it and I've looked pretty closely.
Speaker 2: The more you understand that the elected president of the
Speaker 2: United States has power, for sure, but he does not
Speaker 2: have sovereignty. He does not have unlimited power or full
Speaker 2: freedom of motion to act on behalf of his voters.
Speaker 3: He just doesn't. I mean, we're watching it now on
Speaker 3: this and many other topics.
Speaker 1: We will come back to all of this. I want
Speaker 1: to go back in time, though, to this remarkable ten
Speaker 1: years President Trump came to power ten years ago. You
Speaker 1: also got your primetime show on Fox News ten years
Speaker 1: ago that made you a household name in the United States.
Speaker 1: So tell me about twenty sixteen, because you wrote this
Speaker 1: piece in Politico, which is also in this book at
Speaker 1: the start of that year, in which you said that
Speaker 1: Trump was not your ideal candidate for president, but that
Speaker 1: he did have things to teach the Republican Party, amongst
Speaker 1: them that the depth of anger on immigration and also
Speaker 1: the fact that Washington really is corrupt, you said, and
Speaker 1: you saw Trump as being someone who could address that
Speaker 1: in some way. So tell me first about how you
Speaker 1: saw him then and why you wrote that.
Speaker 2: Well, I hate to sort of delve in my own
Speaker 2: personal psychodramas because they're not that interesting, but it's they're
Speaker 2: inextricable from the rise of Trump, because I was a
Speaker 2: product of the system in Washington very much, and I
Speaker 2: believed in the system, and the rise of Trump was
Speaker 2: one of the reasons that I was forced to confront
Speaker 2: the fact that the system was not serving the population
Speaker 2: of the country that put it there, and was paying
Speaker 2: for everything, and in whose name all these things were
Speaker 2: being done. There was just too wide a disconnect between
Speaker 2: what people wanted and what they were getting, really simple,
Speaker 2: and I couldn't really see that, and Trump's rise forced
Speaker 2: that question. And I just noticed that everyone around me,
Speaker 2: people I liked and respected, hated Trump and in an
Speaker 2: irrational way, and I didn't understand what the hate was about.
Speaker 2: And I understood ultimately what it was, which was he
Speaker 2: was threatening them. He was threatening their hegemony over our
Speaker 2: system like they were benefiting. The country was withering. They
Speaker 2: didn't want a conversation about that, they didn't want to
Speaker 2: change course, And in the end, I just took Trump's
Speaker 2: side because I thought that he was an alternative to
Speaker 2: this system that we had that had grown, you know, sclerotic, corrupt,
Speaker 2: whatever word you want to use. It wasn't working as intended,
Speaker 2: and I was really upset about it. I mean, Trump
Speaker 2: was running against not just the Democratic Party but the
Speaker 2: Republican Party, and I thought we needed that, and so
Speaker 2: that's why it was so heartbreaking. In fact, it was
Speaker 2: almost paralyzing for me to see what happened in February
Speaker 2: and you wake up and you realize this guy you
Speaker 2: think is taking on both parties has joined the consensus
Speaker 2: of those parties, the uniparty on economics and foreign policy,
Speaker 2: and like, wait a second, you know, if Trump can't
Speaker 2: fix the system can't be fixed.
Speaker 3: That was really scary. It's still scary when I think
Speaker 3: about it.
Speaker 1: You had, though, before twenty sixteen, seen him as a
Speaker 1: difficult personal character. At one point you said he was
Speaker 1: interesting but horrible, Right, Yeah. I think you didn't like
Speaker 1: the showmanship, you didn't like the gold everywhere.
Speaker 3: No. I mean culturally it was always just a huge stretch.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 2: I just come from a culture that's so different, and
Speaker 2: it was just beaten into me as a child. Don't
Speaker 2: talk about yourself, don't brag about yourself, you know, never boast.
Speaker 2: And here's a guy whose entire life, whose brand is
Speaker 2: basically bragging, And that was difficult but I thought to myself, Okay,
Speaker 2: you know, I don't like that. I don't have the
Speaker 2: same taste, I don't have the same affectations. I don't
Speaker 2: have the same instincts about a lot of things. But
Speaker 2: this is a guy who's brave enough to take on
Speaker 2: a system that really needs to be reformed and cannot
Speaker 2: be reformed from within.
Speaker 3: I still think that.
Speaker 2: I'm just so shocked and disappointed that he joined the
Speaker 2: people he hated.
Speaker 1: You did have this extraordinary influence yourself, did you, even
Speaker 1: in the first term, Because when you put someone on
Speaker 1: your show, someone like Chris Rufo for example, talking about
Speaker 1: critical race theory, within hours they could and he did
Speaker 1: get a call from the White House saying come in
Speaker 1: and talk to us, and he ended up drafting an
Speaker 1: executive order. How did that feel? Because you must have
Speaker 1: gained a sense of your own power through that.
Speaker 2: Well, I tried to ignore it. In fact, I don't
Speaker 2: even remember that. To be totally honest with you, I
Speaker 2: don't read about myself. The second you start thinking like
Speaker 2: I'm in charge now, I'm an important person, that's when
Speaker 2: your soul rots. And I just always wanted to remember that.
Speaker 2: In the not famous enough words of Conan O'Brien. In
Speaker 2: the end, every grave goes unvisited, Like that's the perspective
Speaker 2: that people need that you know, we do our best,
Speaker 2: but in the end, nobody cares, and we're not in
Speaker 2: charge of history.
Speaker 3: We're not God, and so I.
Speaker 2: So anyway, No, I really fought against thinking, oh, you know,
Speaker 2: I have got a cable news show on some stupid
Speaker 2: cable news network that takes prostate health and pillow ads,
Speaker 2: and so I would try to not think about that
Speaker 2: at all.
Speaker 3: I never visited the White House. I never went to
Speaker 3: the movies or dinner there.
Speaker 1: But he called you didn't he?
Speaker 3: In the first Yeah, I talked to Trump all the time.
Speaker 1: I mean, that doesn't happen. That doesn't happen to just anyone.
Speaker 3: Well, but I knew him.
Speaker 2: Trump called me before before he announced in twenty fifteen,
Speaker 2: I'll never forget it.
Speaker 3: I was in the car and he's like, I'm gonna
Speaker 3: run for president.
Speaker 2: And I made fun of him because he did this
Speaker 2: in two thousands, so twenty six years ago, he like
Speaker 2: faked a presidential campaign to sell a book.
Speaker 3: So I laughed and I said, oh, yeah.
Speaker 2: You're gonna sell another book and he goes, no, Actually,
Speaker 2: I think I'm gonna surprise you this time. And I
Speaker 2: just want to be clear. Trump is one of the
Speaker 2: most entertaining, charming, insightful people, fun to be with people
Speaker 2: in the world. And anyone who's ever had dinner with
Speaker 2: Trump can tell you. And I don't care how much
Speaker 2: you hate him or dislike his policies or whatever. You
Speaker 2: have dinner with Trump, You're gonna have a great time.
Speaker 2: So no, I always liked him, always, you know. But anyway,
Speaker 2: I didn't expect this.
Speaker 1: So summer of twenty twenty five, when Israel began military
Speaker 1: action against Iran and the US then joined in and
Speaker 1: bombed the nuclear sites, you were clearly publicly upset about
Speaker 1: what you called warmongers, but you did patch things up
Speaker 1: with the president.
Speaker 3: Correct.
Speaker 1: How did that happen?
Speaker 2: I mean, it got so intense. So I don't work
Speaker 2: for Trump. I've never obviously never worked for Trump. I'm
Speaker 2: not in any business deals with anything related to Trump.
Speaker 2: I don't I'm not beholden to Trump. So I always
Speaker 2: tried to be honest. I wasn't always as direct with
Speaker 2: him as I probably should have been, but on these
Speaker 2: questions I was very direct, and I said, you're getting
Speaker 2: led around by the nose by Israel. Everyone can see it.
Speaker 2: Nobody cares about the Iran nuclear program. There are a
Speaker 2: lot of bad people with nuclear weapons. We don't want
Speaker 2: more of them. But this is not about nuclear weapons.
Speaker 2: This is about sucking us into a regime change war
Speaker 2: against Iran. Flat out told in that a bunch of times,
Speaker 2: and he's like.
Speaker 3: No, no, no, that's not true.
Speaker 2: But it was true and it turned out to be
Speaker 2: provably true now, so that was extremely upsetting to me.
Speaker 2: So I was supposed to meet with him in the
Speaker 2: White House. Israel bombed, We allowed them to bomb. We
Speaker 2: paid for it. Of course, we paid for the missile
Speaker 2: defense when the response came into Tel Aviv, like it
Speaker 2: was our war with Israel prosecuting it for us. So
Speaker 2: I was so mad that I didn't I was suppossed
Speaker 2: to meet him with the White House. I didn't go,
Speaker 2: And then he called me and we had this kind
Speaker 2: of intense conversation, and I was very upset, and I
Speaker 2: just said, look, it's demeaning for the United States, like
Speaker 2: you're the president. I don't even hate Netanyahu. It's not
Speaker 2: even about that. It's were the United States. We've got
Speaker 2: three hundred and fifty million people. You cannot be led
Speaker 2: around by a tiny country, Like what are you doing?
Speaker 2: He really hated that. I said that because it's true.
Speaker 2: It was true. It is humiliating. This whole thing is
Speaker 2: humiliating to the United States and to me as an
Speaker 2: American who his family's been here for hundreds of years.
Speaker 3: It's outrageous. Anyway, and then.
Speaker 2: He like said I was crazy. He gave some statement,
Speaker 2: Tucker Carlson's crazy. Well, obviously I'm half crazy.
Speaker 3: I mean I know that.
Speaker 2: And so somebody pushed me and said you should call him,
Speaker 2: and so I called him and he picked up first
Speaker 2: ring and I said, Yep, I'm kind of crazy, like
Speaker 2: I've never denied that. I mean, look at me. Well anyway,
Speaker 2: he laughed. And then our relationship, you know, that was
Speaker 2: like one day. But when we actually killed the Iyatola
Speaker 2: bombed a girls' school, like this whole thing was so
Speaker 2: nuts that I was like, I'm out.
Speaker 3: I can't. This is too much, it's too damaging to
Speaker 3: my country.
Speaker 1: Who else did you call? E've been friends over the
Speaker 1: years with so many others who are in that circle. JD.
Speaker 1: Vance for one, Stephen Miller another. What are the other
Speaker 1: conversations you've had, if yours exercised as you clearly were,
Speaker 1: an are I can't believe your only conversations were with
Speaker 1: the president.
Speaker 2: Between the Twelve Day War in June and the regime
Speaker 2: change war on February twenty eighth. I talked to everybody.
Speaker 2: I mean, I visited the way. I don't know how
Speaker 2: many times I went to the White House. I know
Speaker 2: I went three times in the month proceeding, but I
Speaker 2: went many times and saw Trump and saw you know,
Speaker 2: it's a very small buildings. You run into people, and yeah, well,
Speaker 2: I talk to everybody about it constantly. I think that
Speaker 2: my views represent the views of most Americans. My views
Speaker 2: are not ideological, they're not radical. What's radical is taking
Speaker 2: orders from Netanyahu to enter a war that's going to
Speaker 2: hurt your country. That's crazy. That's extremism. It's religious extremism.
Speaker 2: By the way, I'm not a religious extremist. I'm just
Speaker 2: kind of a garden variety Christian, and so I'm not
Speaker 2: the crazy person here. Actually, I'm representing common sense and
Speaker 2: I know that. And no amount of streaming at me
Speaker 2: or calling me a Nazi or an anti semi, which
Speaker 2: I'm obviously not. None of that is going to change
Speaker 2: my view. And I told Trump, you're going to destroy
Speaker 2: I appeal to him because I think that's what he
Speaker 2: cares about most honestly. Obviously, I said, you're going to
Speaker 2: destroy your legacy, your administration, like your name will never
Speaker 2: be uttered except with reference to this disaster that you're
Speaker 2: about to start.
Speaker 3: So don't do that. That's what happened to Bush. I
Speaker 3: knew bush Well.
Speaker 2: I knew Bush Wwll, and Bush had all kinds of
Speaker 2: plans in two thousand when he got elected to do this,
Speaker 2: do that, and prove America. What's Bush remembered for now?
Speaker 2: You know the Iraq War and the financial crisis.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's it. You supported the Iraq War.
Speaker 2: I certainly did support the Iraq War. Oh yeah, I
Speaker 2: bought into it completely. And I not only supported it,
Speaker 2: I argued against and attacked people who opposed it. And
Speaker 2: I'm sorry, and I'm I remained sorry, but I also
Speaker 2: was chastened. And I learned something, which is you can
Speaker 2: get carried away by propaganda and you can end up lying.
Speaker 2: You know, I didn't mean to lie, but I did,
Speaker 2: And so don't do that again. And I'm resolved. I'm
Speaker 2: never going to allow that to happen to me again. Ever,
Speaker 2: I will never do that again, and I haven't.
Speaker 1: In that period. When you're arguing to anyone who will listen,
Speaker 1: or anyone you bump into in the White House against
Speaker 1: the war with Iran, do they say to you, we're
Speaker 1: doing this for Israel, Like, why are you so convinced
Speaker 1: that Israel has actually controlled this, not only influenced it,
Speaker 1: but controlled it well.
Speaker 2: Because again, there's a ton of pressure from Israeli agents,
Speaker 2: the neocons, whatever you call them. We've watched it for
Speaker 2: four months. The United States, the President himself will say no, no,
Speaker 2: we're doing this, and Israel will just immediately do the
Speaker 2: opposite and destroy the peace negotiations. I'm not even attacking Israel,
Speaker 2: by the way. They have a different view of what
Speaker 2: the end of this should look like. They have a
Speaker 2: different set of interests, They're a different country, they have
Speaker 2: a different goal.
Speaker 1: But this suggestion that you've made on Israel's goals that
Speaker 1: the Israeli goal is chaos, it's dysfunction. What would be
Speaker 1: the natural, obvious, world documented effects of this migrant crisis
Speaker 1: in Europe further destroying Europe. That's always been an Israeli
Speaker 1: goal destroy Europe? Yes, do you really mean that?
Speaker 3: Well, I don't know.
Speaker 2: Netanyahu means that he said it? No one watches see
Speaker 2: the thing is nobody nobody watches?
Speaker 3: Where is he said watches?
Speaker 1: Where has he said his goal is to destroy Europe?
Speaker 2: Rome is the enemy Rome meaning Christian Europe. The Prime
Speaker 2: Minister of Israel has said this on camera. I would
Speaker 2: refer you to the internet. You should watch it. It's fascinating.
Speaker 1: Why would think he's talking. He's making a reference to
Speaker 1: history and the Romans destroying the temple rather than present
Speaker 1: day Rome in.
Speaker 2: Why would Well, I don't know. Why would something that
Speaker 2: happened in seventy AD be relevant for a secular, modern
Speaker 2: head of state. I don't understand that. Like what is
Speaker 2: he saying? I mean, look, the worldview here is totally different.
Speaker 2: That same prime minister has said repeatedly that we are
Speaker 2: fighting Amalek and people are so biblically illiterate they don't
Speaker 2: know what he's referring to. He's referring to the Amalekites.
Speaker 2: And there are a couple of different stories in the
Speaker 2: Hebrew text and what we call the Old Testament that
Speaker 2: describe what he's talking about, and what he's talking about
Speaker 2: is the elimination, truly the genocide of a group commanded
Speaker 2: by God and described in great detail called the Amalekites.
Speaker 2: So this is not a Western view of war. The
Speaker 2: Western view of war is, you know, we punish the wrongdoers,
Speaker 2: and most people have nothing to do with this, so
Speaker 2: we don't.
Speaker 3: Kill them too.
Speaker 1: So Israeli leaders and many ordinary Israelis as well, reject
Speaker 1: the idea that this is a genocide. I hear that
Speaker 1: that is your view. I will just say that the
Speaker 1: idea of who fighting a war in a just ways
Speaker 1: is not simply a Western idea. It's not only a
Speaker 1: Western Christian idea that there are limits to war and
Speaker 1: you only strike in self defense. I'm a Muslim and
Speaker 1: I can tell you that actually, if you read the Quran,
Speaker 1: that idea is there as well. So it's not a
Speaker 1: purely Western concept.
Speaker 3: Oh.
Speaker 2: I wouldn't claim that it is a purely Western concept.
Speaker 2: My point is it's the basis of Western civilization, and
Speaker 2: to the extent that other civilizations share that view, I
Speaker 2: applaud it, of course. And by the way, you say
Speaker 2: that the Israelis, some Israelis don't think it's genocide. Well,
Speaker 2: everybody else on the planet, so far as I can tell,
Speaker 2: looking at the facts, concludes it's genocide. I don't know
Speaker 2: if there's any other group on planet Earth who doesn't
Speaker 2: see this as genocide.
Speaker 1: Many governments don't see it that way. Your government doesn't,
Speaker 1: The British government doesn't.
Speaker 2: Well, your government and my government are paying for it,
Speaker 2: so of course they're implicated in the genocide, and they
Speaker 2: share the guilt of this genocide. It is happening. There's
Speaker 2: no excuse for it. We should do everything we can
Speaker 2: to stop it immediately.
Speaker 1: You know, the bigger picture of the use of force
Speaker 1: in this second Trump administration is that the president, quite
Speaker 1: apart from striking Iran with the help of Israel, has
Speaker 1: used force many times. Yes, Yemen, Venezuela, Nigeria, Syria, Iraq, Somalia.
Speaker 1: This has actually been a very frequent phenomenon of the
Speaker 1: last year and a half, and he's been comfortable with it.
Speaker 1: So this is the man that you worked really hard
Speaker 1: to get re elected. Yes, perhaps you didn't pay attention
Speaker 1: to something that was always there.
Speaker 2: Oh, I paid close attention to it. That's why I
Speaker 2: was so involved. I knew that he was under enormous
Speaker 2: pressure to do the things that he has since done.
Speaker 2: I knew exactly who was pressuring him, and I was
Speaker 2: arguing the countercase and doing everything I could to.
Speaker 3: Make you pressured him.
Speaker 1: Who pressured him to hit Nigeria or the targets in
Speaker 1: Syria or Iraq or Yemen. Who was pushing him on Venezuela. Well,
Speaker 1: he pushed into all of these things.
Speaker 3: Oh a.
Speaker 2: Of course, obviously, by the way, every president is pushed
Speaker 2: in different directions on all kinds of different topics, not
Speaker 2: just foreign policy, and not just by the Israeli lobby
Speaker 2: or whatever. And again, the whole job is figuring out
Speaker 2: who to listen to, when to bow to the pressure,
Speaker 2: when to resist the pressure, Like that is the job. Okay,
Speaker 2: So none of this is new. Every part of American
Speaker 2: Middle Eastern policy is driven by donors to both parties,
Speaker 2: of course, I mean it's allied. To pretend otherwise. Some
Speaker 2: of that is just inevitable. You take money from people,
Speaker 2: you need money to run a campaign. I'm less judging
Speaker 2: maybe than I sound. I understand how it works. You
Speaker 2: have to listen to everybody. By the way, people should
Speaker 2: listen to the Israeli lobby. They've got a perspective. You
Speaker 2: should listen to the Muslim lobby. I mean, it's a
Speaker 2: big country. Everyone gets to say I get it, and ultimately,
Speaker 2: when you're looking at the potential of a third World war,
Speaker 2: which we are. I was obviously very distressed by what
Speaker 2: he did in Venezuela. I thought it was crazy and
Speaker 2: embarrassing and immoral. You can't just roll in and arrest
Speaker 2: a president and say I own your oil, like that's crazy.
Speaker 2: And I thought that, and I said that to some extent,
Speaker 2: but I didn't I didn't lose control of myself on
Speaker 2: camera because I felt like, what really matters are the
Speaker 2: biggest things, and maybe my calculation was wrong.
Speaker 3: It wouldn't be the first time.
Speaker 2: But I just wanted to avoid this war because I
Speaker 2: knew that once we got into this, we wouldn't get
Speaker 2: out until we were gravely diminished, gravely diminished.
Speaker 3: I don't think that's good for us or for the world.
Speaker 1: What do you think it's going to do to the
Speaker 1: Republicans in the midterms.
Speaker 3: I mean, they're going to be spanked.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they're gonna be punished for it, of course, But
Speaker 2: the question is does that make the country better No,
Speaker 2: I mean not really. I don't see any political leader
Speaker 2: right now speaking for the majority of Americans. I mean,
Speaker 2: the American economy is so lopsided at the moment that
Speaker 2: younger people are legit struggling, at least by American standards,
Speaker 2: and I don't see any political leaders really thinking about
Speaker 2: how to fix that or moving their priorities from you know,
Speaker 2: a whole suite of different foreign conflicts back to the
Speaker 2: United States and spending the time thinking about how do
Speaker 2: I elevate my people, how do I help the people
Speaker 2: who put me here?
Speaker 3: I just don't see that mindset.
Speaker 1: Is your third party idea a real one? You've floated it,
Speaker 1: You've said you want to help build one. Yeah, what
Speaker 1: are you thinking?
Speaker 2: Well, I just want to be clear. I'm not running
Speaker 2: for any office ever. Okay, you know I'm not being
Speaker 2: coy or pretending, you know. And then I'm going to
Speaker 2: like announce I'm not announcing the president, I'm running for president.
Speaker 2: Well that's a nightmare and I'm not doing that. But
Speaker 2: I I just want to help. I want the promise
Speaker 2: of democracy to be real. That like, you vote for
Speaker 2: someone and that person makes a good faith effort to
Speaker 2: represent your interests, like it's not complicated. Self government is
Speaker 2: not that complicated. It's disappearing. But there are a lot
Speaker 2: of very ominous trends in the United States domestically that
Speaker 2: are just completely being ignored, and I would like someone
Speaker 2: to address them. And after Trump's performance over the past year,
Speaker 2: it's hard to believe that he's the guy who's going
Speaker 2: to reform. I mean, he is closely allied with the
Speaker 2: leaders of both parties and this whole partisanship thing, and
Speaker 2: this is true in the UK too, with respect, it's
Speaker 2: kind of a ruse actually, Like they fight over these issues.
Speaker 2: They'll pick an issue transgenderism, and they'll tell you that,
Speaker 2: you know, they just got completely different world views on transgenderism,
Speaker 2: and that's like the most important thing. But what that cloaks,
Speaker 2: what it hides, what is designed to obscure, is the
Speaker 2: fact that on economics and foreign policy, the big questions
Speaker 2: that determine the fate of nations, they are aligned.
Speaker 1: I don't think that's true, Tucker. In the UK, of
Speaker 1: the big parties on economic issues, there are very well
Speaker 1: distinct differences.
Speaker 2: Then I shouldn't. I mean, I've made this mistake so
Speaker 2: many times. I have family there I spend a lot
Speaker 2: of time there, and I am imagine that I understand
Speaker 2: the system that I don't understand very well. So I
Speaker 2: should probably shut up about UK politics, okay, but.
Speaker 1: Tell me about the third party? Is it? Well? I'm
Speaker 1: wondering whether you're watching the rise of Nigel Farage. You
Speaker 1: know someone you've talked to, you've had them on your show.
Speaker 1: Is that some kind of a model, and are you
Speaker 1: serious about a third party or are you just throwing
Speaker 1: it out there just you know?
Speaker 2: I am, yeah, I know Nigel very well and I
Speaker 2: was just with him in London not long ago. But
Speaker 2: I will say yes, I'm watching the rise of reform
Speaker 2: and with some amazement and delight. Not that I think
Speaker 2: reform is the answer necessarily, but an option is a
Speaker 2: good first step.
Speaker 3: And I do think that.
Speaker 2: You know, and there are meaningful differences between the Democratic
Speaker 2: and Republican parties to the extent that their voting bases
Speaker 2: do disagree in real ways. I'm saying that the people
Speaker 2: who run the parties are fundamentally aligned. And one of
Speaker 2: the ways you know that is because Trump brings us
Speaker 2: to war on February twenty eighth without making the case
Speaker 2: to the American public without convincing the majority of Americans
Speaker 2: this is a good idea. Like, no one was for
Speaker 2: this from day one, So you would think, given this
Speaker 2: a country with a long history of boisterous public protests,
Speaker 2: that there would be massive protests against the war. No, none, zero.
Speaker 3: Why is that?
Speaker 2: Where were the Democrats on this? Like they could mobilize
Speaker 2: a million people and put them on the National Mall
Speaker 2: in Washington, but they didn't because they're for it, that's why.
Speaker 2: Because Chuck Schumer is one hundred percent for this. There
Speaker 2: may be details he disagrees with, but basically he's wanted
Speaker 2: regime change on behalf of Israel in Iran for many years.
Speaker 2: So that's not acceptable. It's not acceptable to have a
Speaker 2: system where these average.
Speaker 1: Person is he's just one. He's just one Democratic leader
Speaker 1: and there are others who have very different views on
Speaker 1: the war.
Speaker 2: Really much more like to name a democratic leaders a
Speaker 2: sincere Zohran Mamdani, he's the mayor, he's the mayor of
Speaker 2: New York, Okay, he has no foreign policy portfolio.
Speaker 1: That is, that is a prominent and arguably very influential
Speaker 1: physician right now to hold as a Democratic politician. But
Speaker 1: let me go back to the Republican Party, famous person
Speaker 1: with no power to affect foreign policy.
Speaker 2: So he's kind of I'm sort of in that category,
Speaker 2: so I kind of know what that is. He doesn't
Speaker 2: have a vote on these questions, but the people who
Speaker 2: do are aligned, and that is not democracy, and it
Speaker 2: would be nice to have a democracy. We had one,
Speaker 2: I would like it again.
Speaker 1: That's it, the Republican Party. The fact that you've left it,
Speaker 1: does that mean you've given up on JD. Vance leading
Speaker 1: the Republican Party, being the next presidential candidate, and it
Speaker 1: being a different Republican Party to what you see now?
Speaker 2: Well, I think if JD Vance for president, of course
Speaker 2: he would not be at a war with Iran. It's
Speaker 2: impossible for me to imagine JD Vances standing up and
Speaker 2: saying we need to have two wars to defeat a
Speaker 2: phantom nuclear program. It's like too insane, you know. I
Speaker 2: think he has too much self respect to say something
Speaker 2: like that. I don't think he believes it. I think
Speaker 2: JD Vance would have led the Republican Party to closer
Speaker 2: alignment with its own voters. But he was not the president.
Speaker 2: He's the vice president and he doesn't have the authority.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but he could be the next presidential candidate.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I mean, we'll see.
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, I wish he had been elected
Speaker 2: president in twenty twenty four, but that didn't happen.
Speaker 3: I love JD. I've never been shy about that.
Speaker 2: I've taken a lot of abuse for saying that I
Speaker 2: probably haven't helped him at all by saying that I
Speaker 2: don't agree with him on everything, of course, but I
Speaker 2: think he's an honest, very smart, decent person that puts
Speaker 2: him above almost all politicians I've ever met, and so
Speaker 2: I'm on some basic level rooting for him. But it's
Speaker 2: just hard to imagine how the Republican Party after this,
Speaker 2: after truly betraying its own voters, betrayed its own voters.
Speaker 2: It told them Washington is an inside game. A small
Speaker 2: number of people are getting very rich. They commit crimes
Speaker 2: with impunity. They're protected by the US government. It's called
Speaker 2: the deep state, and we're going to uproot it. And
Speaker 2: then not only did they not uproot it, tacked anyone
Speaker 2: who asked to see the Epstein files, Like what you know,
Speaker 2: betrayal is the worst thing. So like if my neighbor
Speaker 2: leaves his wife and kids and runs off with a stripper.
Speaker 2: I disapprove of that. If my dad leaves me and
Speaker 2: my siblings and my mom and runs off with a stripper,
Speaker 2: I never get over that for the rest of my
Speaker 2: life because that's betrayal.
Speaker 3: And that's exactly what happened.
Speaker 2: Trump betrayed not just the country, but the people who
Speaker 2: vested their hopes in him.
Speaker 3: And that is low and wrong.
Speaker 2: And every culture, every people, every person recognized that intuitively
Speaker 2: recognizes betrayal as the worst thing. That's why Judas is remembered,
Speaker 2: why his name lives an infamy for all eternity, because
Speaker 2: he not because he took the wrong side, but because
Speaker 2: he betrayed.
Speaker 3: So, yeah, that's what this is.
Speaker 2: It's betrayal, and I think it's very hard to get
Speaker 2: past that in the short term.
Speaker 1: Have you been in touch with JD Vance in recent months? Well,
Speaker 1: what's the state of play between the two of you?
Speaker 3: No, I haven't.
Speaker 2: I mean, I haven't been to Washington. I you know,
Speaker 2: I'd love to go see him. I can't, you know,
Speaker 2: I can't. Trump's all mad at me. They're all mad
Speaker 2: at me, calling me an anti Semite, or it's just
Speaker 2: so ludicrous. Look, I think at this point it wouldn't
Speaker 2: be good for me to contact anybody I'm seen as disloyal.
Speaker 3: Disloyal. First of all, loyalty goes two ways.
Speaker 2: Second, the loyalty that matters is the loyalty of our
Speaker 2: leaders to the country they represent.
Speaker 3: Okay, and they're disloyal.
Speaker 2: Trump has been disloyal to the United States, totally disloyal
Speaker 2: to the United States. He cheated on the United States
Speaker 2: with a foreign power. So I'm not the one who's
Speaker 2: been disloyal.
Speaker 1: So what are you going to do next?
Speaker 2: I don't know what I'm gonna do. I don't know
Speaker 2: where I'm having lunch today. But I would say I
Speaker 2: am open to any alternative that serves or makes a
Speaker 2: good faith effort to serve the American people above and
Speaker 2: really probably to the exclusion of foreign interests and corporate interests.
Speaker 2: Like it's an orientation. Okay, you know what makes a
Speaker 2: good parent loving your kids. It's not reading some book
Speaker 2: on it or knowing the instructions or some esoteric knowledge
Speaker 2: you know that makes a good parent. No, it's just
Speaker 2: the desire to help your kids, and that desire comes
Speaker 2: from love. And if you have leaders like that, they
Speaker 2: don't always make the right decisions. They're not perfect, but
Speaker 2: over time their people will thrive, just like a family
Speaker 2: presided over by parents who love their kids will thrive.
Speaker 2: So we don't have that. We have leaders who have
Speaker 2: contempt for us, who take us for granted, who use us,
Speaker 2: who lie to us, who really don't care about us
Speaker 2: at all. And we know that because when life expectancy declines,
Speaker 2: when people die younger with the middle class disappears as
Speaker 2: it did eleven years ago, and nobody.
Speaker 3: Says anything about it.
Speaker 2: So I'm just looking for an alternative to that, Like,
Speaker 2: that's not hard. We should be able to find that.
Speaker 1: It's a really bleak picture.
Speaker 3: You paint a normal human picture. Look, you have successful systems.
Speaker 2: That happens in company, it happens on sports teams, that
Speaker 2: happens in any human organization. Success breeds decadence, which spurs collapse.
Speaker 2: Like this is a very recognizable cycle. And the United
Speaker 2: States has been the most successful country in the history
Speaker 2: of the world. And so needless to say, just like
Speaker 2: in successful families, fourth generation affluence, you have an entire
Speaker 2: ruling class that is living testament to this. You know it,
Speaker 2: Like this is what happens when you succeed. Over time,
Speaker 2: you get flabby, and you get decadent, and you become
Speaker 2: contemptuous of the people you lead, and you forget the
Speaker 2: qualities that made the organization successful in the first place.
Speaker 2: And then you have a reset, and hopefully it's a
Speaker 2: non dramatic reset where people just kind of come to
Speaker 2: their senses and recall why they were successful in the
Speaker 2: first place and do those things like that's my hope.
Speaker 2: I don't want revolution, but we're going to get a
Speaker 2: revolution if this continues.
Speaker 1: And you have talked on your show about America heading
Speaker 1: towards civil war? Do you really believe that? Because that
Speaker 1: is a I mean not just bleak, it's also a
Speaker 1: really inflammatory thing to say. And I can't help thinking
Speaker 1: about political violence and the awful ways we've seen it
Speaker 1: in the US within the last year. Do you you
Speaker 1: know when you say, well, it's like that million interviews
Speaker 1: and listeners, how much do you weigh up like the
Speaker 1: responsibility that you have given your reach.
Speaker 2: Well, the responsibility is one hundred percent on the people
Speaker 2: who are perpetrating political violence. I abhor all violence, I
Speaker 2: a poor the violence of war, I abhor the violence
Speaker 2: of abortion. I abhor the violence of euthanasia. So there's
Speaker 2: no chance I'm going to take credit for political violence.
Speaker 2: I'm against it. What I'm saying is that if you
Speaker 2: convey to people that their vote does not matter, that
Speaker 2: there's no nonviolent way to be heard, they will, by definition,
Speaker 2: over time, resort to violence. I don't want that. Democracy
Speaker 2: was supposed to be the answer to revolution. We've never
Speaker 2: had a revolution in the United States. Despite a couple
Speaker 2: of World wars, a Civil War, a Great Depression, the
Speaker 2: anti war movement in the sixties civil We've had a
Speaker 2: lot of drama in the United States, the murder of
Speaker 2: a couple of several presidents. We've never had a revolution
Speaker 2: in the United States. Why is that? Because democracy is
Speaker 2: the pressure relief valve that keeps people from storming the
Speaker 2: best deal.
Speaker 1: We're nearly at the end, Tucker and we started talking
Speaker 1: right at the beginning about your dad. I know your
Speaker 1: family's important to you. You've mentioned them. So I'm curious
Speaker 1: about one more thing, which is that I heard you
Speaker 1: on a recent episode talking about marriage. Why is respecting
Speaker 1: husband's authority resting with the man as the final decision maker.
Speaker 1: You are a father of daughters and so I just
Speaker 1: wanted to understand what you believe. Whether you think in
Speaker 1: their relationships like their husbands should always be the final
Speaker 1: decision makers.
Speaker 2: Well, obviously, I'm never going to talk about my children.
Speaker 2: That's an insane question that I'm going to ignore without
Speaker 2: being offended. But I can give you my views, which
Speaker 2: are these in a happy marriage? You know, everything is symbiotic.
Speaker 2: I don't really think anybody's in charge of a happy
Speaker 2: marriage at all. I think people, at least I know
Speaker 2: in my own I've been married thirty five years next month.
Speaker 2: You know, I wouldn't say I have more power than
Speaker 2: my wife, you know, at all. And I think any
Speaker 2: happily married man feels that way. There's no one whose
Speaker 2: opinion I care more about. There's no one who's bidding.
Speaker 2: I'm more anxious to do. If my wife wants something,
Speaker 2: I'll just do it, you know. And I think most
Speaker 2: men who love their wives feel that way. So you know,
Speaker 2: it's certainly not a matter of bossing anyone around. But yeah,
Speaker 2: somebody has to be ultimately has to make the decision,
Speaker 2: and women in general want the man to make the decision,
Speaker 2: as you well know, and men who won't make well, no,
Speaker 2: I do know, and I do know, and and the
Speaker 2: women who won't admit that are not telling the truth.
Speaker 2: And in fact, the thing that I have noticed that
Speaker 2: women dislike most is men who won't make decisions, and
Speaker 2: they have contempt for them. And I've never met a
Speaker 2: woman who didn't feel that way. I've met a lot
Speaker 2: of women who pretend they don't feel that way, but
Speaker 2: in real life, I think that women see that as weakness,
Speaker 2: which it is, and they despise it, they have contempt
Speaker 2: for it. So I don't think we should lie about
Speaker 2: the way people are. Men and women are not the same.
Speaker 2: They're not even close to the same. They're incredibly different,
Speaker 2: and that's not bad. I think it's a good thing.
Speaker 2: It's a source of endless wonder For me. I didn't
Speaker 2: grow up with any women at all. I had no mom,
Speaker 2: I had no sister, So like I'm still learning, I
Speaker 2: find women. The most interesting sort of thing about life
Speaker 2: is trying to understand women. And I really have tried
Speaker 2: my hardest. I've probably got into about sixty percent. But
Speaker 2: it's like fascinating to me. But I do think we've
Speaker 2: pat like the pretending that men and women are the same,
Speaker 2: which has kind of been mandatory. Certainly, it's like wrecked
Speaker 2: in the UK, I can say, and I think really
Speaker 2: hurt the United States also, that's going to end.
Speaker 3: The rest of the world makes fun of it. It's
Speaker 3: too stupid. It's like the.
Speaker 1: Muddling of gender and biological sex.
Speaker 3: It's just the whole thing.
Speaker 2: It's like in every part of our society, it's like
Speaker 2: they're an active effort to deny that there are any
Speaker 2: innate sex differences. And until you know that and grapple
Speaker 2: with it, honestly, you can't have a happy relationship with
Speaker 2: a member of the opposite sex. And that's one of
Speaker 2: the reasons we don't have very many happy relationships between
Speaker 2: members of the opposite sex, because liars have told us
Speaker 2: that acknowledging sex innate sex differences, sex difference is determined
Speaker 2: before birth leads to the oppression of one of the sexes,
Speaker 2: and in fact it's wound up resulting in the oppression
Speaker 2: of women. In the United States, I'll speak for my country.
Speaker 2: By big companies, our economics system has applied a lot
Speaker 2: of pressure on young women to choose like working at
Speaker 2: city bank over having kids, and I think women should
Speaker 2: be able to choose whatever they want. If you want
Speaker 2: to work and not have kids, that's up to you.
Speaker 2: I don't believe in coercion. However, I do believe in honesty.
Speaker 2: In most people, men and women find the deepest expression
Speaker 2: of joy in their lives, in their families, in their spouse,
Speaker 2: and in their children. And if you lie to them
Speaker 2: and wind up denying them that greatest source of human joy,
Speaker 2: you are evil. And so I just want to say
Speaker 2: that out loud, that feminism is an op run by
Speaker 2: big business to lower the price of labor and to
Speaker 2: free up a massive and incredibly productive female workforce, and
Speaker 2: that's been bad for the country.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'll tell you why I asked this, because
Speaker 1: I was curious about your views. And it is really
Speaker 1: hard for young women figuring this out, having a family
Speaker 1: as most but not or want to do, and you know,
Speaker 1: trying to reach your full potential in the workplace. And
Speaker 1: I know that my life chances have been fundamentally different
Speaker 1: from my mother's, and a lot of that is because
Speaker 1: of the feminist movement. Right she had aspirations to work
Speaker 1: outside the home, it just wasn't possible. There was more
Speaker 1: of a patriarchal system, There wasn't childcare. You know, it
Speaker 1: would have been frowned upon. And I've been really lucky
Speaker 1: to be able to have a marriage and children and
Speaker 1: contribute to my families economic well being. And I would
Speaker 1: say I do owe that to the feminist movement that balance.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean a lot of women feel that way.
Speaker 3: And by the way, congratulations.
Speaker 2: I'm all for happy endings and people getting what they
Speaker 2: want and people being content. I mean, I'm totally for that.
Speaker 2: So I would never in any way criticize your choices.
Speaker 2: But are women in the West happier than they were
Speaker 2: in nineteen seventy two? And the answer is no. And
Speaker 2: the second fact we should grapple with is that, yes,
Speaker 2: there are all kinds of different views about how a
Speaker 2: family should be organized, and there are people who take
Speaker 2: the traditional side, and we talk a lot about them.
Speaker 2: But there's another side to this that is an economic
Speaker 2: interest in convincing women that their loyalty belongs to a
Speaker 2: company and not a family. And I think there's going
Speaker 2: to be a real change. I notice it now among
Speaker 2: young people. I have a bunch, as I've said, and
Speaker 2: I employ a bunch, and like they're all getting married
Speaker 2: way younger than kids did when I was just out
Speaker 2: of college, and they all want to have kids way
Speaker 2: more than young people did in nineteen nine one when
Speaker 2: I got married. So like I do think people are
Speaker 2: starting to realize that the government doesn't care for you.
Speaker 3: Your employer, they don't care about you.
Speaker 2: They told me at Fox they love me, we love you,
Speaker 2: and then one morning they like fired me without notice.
Speaker 2: It's fine, I'm happy they did, but they didn't care
Speaker 2: about me, of course, not or my family, which is fine.
Speaker 3: I never thought they did.
Speaker 2: But if you tell young people like the company is
Speaker 2: dad and the company really loves you, you're lying to them.
Speaker 3: Don't do that right.
Speaker 1: It's been an intense six months in the news. This
Speaker 1: has been quite an intense conversation. Before I let you go,
Speaker 1: can you just cast your mind ahead twelve months to
Speaker 1: summer of next year. Donald Trump will still have eighteen
Speaker 1: months left in the White House.
Speaker 3: Gosh, I you know.
Speaker 2: My hope is that the Iran situation will be resolved.
Speaker 2: I just I would like people to come to their senses.
Speaker 2: I don't think Trump is as big a factor now.
Speaker 2: Trump is weak. It's obvious he couldn't re store piece.
Speaker 2: The strong leader restores peace. That's what strength looks like
Speaker 2: it's it's order and peace. He hasn't been able to
Speaker 2: achieve that, so he's I'm not sure how even really
Speaker 2: relevant he is, But I just hope all global leaders
Speaker 2: wake up to the fact that we're kind of on
Speaker 2: the precipice of something awful and walk it back.
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson, thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Thanks for having me. I enjoyed it.
Speaker 1: Thanks for talking to me. On with the rest of
Speaker 1: your day this afternoon. Well you got planned? How are
Speaker 1: you going to decompress?
Speaker 3: Oh?
Speaker 2: Decompress? I mean, my life's intense all the time. No,
Speaker 2: I've got a live show in a few hours. I'm
Speaker 2: going to go write that.
Speaker 1: And before we go, a few notes here in addition
Speaker 1: to those that you can read at Bloomberg.com/mishal. We did
Speaker 1: approach the White House for comment on what Carlson said
Speaker 1: accusing President Trump of being disloyal and controlled by a
Speaker 1: foreign power. A White House official said, Israel is one
Speaker 1: of our strongest allies. No country or leader pressures President
Speaker 1: Trump to do anything. He makes decisions based on what
Speaker 1: serves America's interests and will never allow our country to
Speaker 1: be taken advantage of You'll also have heard Tucker Carlson
Speaker 1: suggesting that Benjamin Netanyahu has said Rome is the enemy.
Speaker 1: This appears to be a reference to a video in
Speaker 1: which the Israeli Prime Minister is asked what book he
Speaker 1: is reading, and he names one called Jews Versus Rome.
Speaker 1: It's about Jewish revolts in ancient Rome, and Netanyahu adds
Speaker 1: the words we lost that one. I think we have
Speaker 1: to win the next one. Carlson also references the story
Speaker 1: of Amalek in the Old Testament. This is a complex
Speaker 1: area because there is more than one biblical mention of
Speaker 1: that tribe which attacked the Jews in ancient times. Netanyahu's
Speaker 1: office have said that where he has compared the present
Speaker 1: day to fighting Amalek, he means Hamas rather than all Palestinians.
Speaker 1: The way Carlson talks about Israel has been criticized by
Speaker 1: the Anti Defamation League, which says he regularly legitimizes the
Speaker 1: idea that Israel or Zionist actors exert hidden, malevolent control
Speaker 1: over the US government, and similarly, the Nexus Project, which
Speaker 1: describes itself as a Jewish watchdog organization, has called Carlson
Speaker 1: one of the most important enablers of antisemitism in the
Speaker 1: United States today. And finally on Senator Chuck Schumer. His
Speaker 1: position on the Iran war is detailed in my notes.
Speaker 1: He has spoken of confronting Iran's malign activities, but when
Speaker 1: the strikes began, he said vital questions on the administration's
Speaker 1: plans were not being answered. He also pushed for a
Speaker 1: Senate resolution that would have curtailed the president's war powers.
Speaker 1: That failed because Senators largely voted along party lines and
Speaker 1: the Republicans have the numbers on Capitol Hill. And with
Speaker 1: that my final note, which is on the team. The
Speaker 1: producers are Jessica Beck and Chris Martlew. The video producer
Speaker 1: is Andy Hayward. Our social media is by Alex Morgan,
Speaker 1: and the music is composed by Bart Warshaw. The audio
Speaker 1: mixing was by Richard Ward. Our executive producer is Louisa
Speaker 1: Lewis and at Bloomberg Weekend. Our thanks to Brendan Francis
Speaker 1: Newnnam and our executive editor Katherine Bell. Until next time, goodbye,