Transcription
And uh, I do think JD actually kind of cares, for, for whatever it's worth. You know, I'm sure I'll be attacked as a tool of Palantir or whatever, but I know him and I feel that way. But I am saying he is a rare decent man in a sea of opportunists. Again, I'm searching for words, but that is so bad that anybody associated with it is going to be badly damaged. I don't know if that's going to happen. It certainly could happen. That's confirmed.
>> No matter how you slice it, JD Vance and anyone connected to this criminal administration launching this war against Iran will be tarnished for it. Those connected with the Epstein cover-up and in this administration will be tarnished for it. But despite that, Tucker Carlson really admires JD Vance. He's his guy in many ways. So, here with the American Conservative, he answers a question as to whether he'd support him in 2028 and would that conflict with his plans to create a new third party? Let's see what Tucker has to say about this. I have the sense that we're going to disagree a lot on this one. Let's check it out though. Please like the video, subscribe to the channel, and hype it if you can.
>> If, if you think that the Republican Party is not reformable, and if you had put hope in Donald Trump and now you're very disappointed in Trump, uh, what do you think now about JD Vance? I mean, are you still as big of an admirer of him as you've always been despite the fact that he couldn't stop this Iran war and he's associated now with this administration that's doing this catastrophic Iran war? I mean, when you have broken with the Republican Party, does that mean you have at least slightly broken with JD Vance or do you still see him as someone who could fix things?
>> I mean, well, first let me just say, I, let me take issue with the term catastrophic Iran war. That's not strong enough. I think of a new adjective. I can't. But like the, the war that, you know, ends the world we knew, that brings America, yeah, brings American empire not to a kind of gradual sensible wind down but to like a screeching disastrous halt. That's what this war is. It's the, it's the worst, dumbest thing any American president in my lifetime has done. So, there's that. Um, JD, yeah, I mean, I know JD Vance really well. I make a rule, a life rule of not becoming friends with politicians, cuz that's not a good idea, obviously. Um, and for many years I thought of myself as like a journalist and like that's not allowed. I mean, I don't, all kinds of reasons. I don't really like them, by the way. They're all kind of mediocre. I became friends with JD Vance. Like I really like JD Vance. I really like his wife, like his children. I think he's really smart. I think he's a decent man. I don't agree with him on everything, obviously. But I really like him and I pushed him hard on Trump, both when he ran for Senate in Ohio and to pick him as vice president. Others did the same. I was very aggressive about it and I think I had some effect on that. So, it's really obvious like I love JD Vance. I still feel that way. I don't know exactly how much effect a vice president can have. He's got no constitutional power to send or withdraw troops. He's not in charge really. He's the stand-in in case something happens. So, I mean, I would just say the obvious. The guy hasn't had any actual authority except that granted to him by Trump.
>> All right, so a few things on this. First, it might be a little hyperbolic to call the Iran war the worst thing to happen in his lifetime, and don't get me wrong. You guys know me. I'm as fierce of an opponent of the Iran war as it comes, but what about the aftermath of 9/11, the unleashing of the DHS, the Patriot Act, the expansion of the surveillance state, the invasion of Iraq with hundreds of thousands of US troops, so many casualties, the 20-year occupation of Afghanistan or placing the Taliban with the Taliban, the TARP bailouts, also the COVID regime? There's so many different things that could qualify as that. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a lunatic idea was as always to get into this war with Iran, but I don't know if it's the worst mistake ever. Just putting things in a relative sense. And as far as J.D. Vance and not having constitutional authority, well, to some extent that's true, but under the Constitution, the Vice President is the president of the Senate. He breaks ties, so he actually does have some authority when it comes to war making. Of course, we're in a post-constitutional order where Congress just ignores the Constitution and just defers all of the power it is supposed to have over declaring war to the president where you just wake up and a, you know, like a unilateral emperor just orders us into a war with the CIA's latest boogeyman. That's what happened. Now, Trump's not the first one to do it unilaterally, of course. But at the same time, it, it's a different thing to say he has no power to do that compared to what actually transpired. J.D. Vance helped propagandize for this war, specifically going on talk shows and broadcasting a farcical narrative about the threat of Iranian nuclear weapons, which they've never had, which the entire IC, including the CIA, then to team most likely to steer us into war, denied that they have. They're not on the cusp of it. And as Tulsi Gabbard delivered in her annual threat summary last year, there's no evidence they started that program up. So, it's a big leap from well, he can't do anything to stop it to well, regardless of that, he helped propagandize in favor of it. Only kind of turning in support of the same MOU, which the administration was willing to sabotage anyway. So, that's that's worth noting here.
>> Um, I think it's tough for anybody affiliated with Trump, associated with Trump to have a political future anytime soon. I mean, what, this is so bad. If we have a like a real energy, let's just say oil goes to $120. What does that look like in the United States? What, like what actually would happen? This is a poor country in a lot of ways. And I live in a poor area, so I see it a lot. What would happen with oil at $120, $130? Honestly, like nobody talks, every, we're all so like in ideology world, but what's the actual material effect on Americans if that happens? That is a, again, I'm searching for words, but that is so bad that anybody associated with it is going to be badly damaged. I don't know if that's going to happen. It certainly could happen. That's confirmed.
>> Yeah, I tend to agree with that part of it. Anyone connected to this is tarnished, and that goes for contestants within Trump's own administration vying for the presidential nomination in 2028, like Marco Rubio. A lot of people seem to think like Marco Rubio is a big beneficiary of this somehow, and in some ways the establishment loves Rubio. They'll try to push Rubio, but anyone connected to this disastrous war is going to be tainted by it. I just don't think there's any way around that, and it's good to hear Tucker acknowledge that even if he likes Vance, which he's admitted that he does. You know, I couldn't disagree more with him on that, but at least there's that acknowledgement that this is such a horrendous thing that it's already tarnished Trump. It'll tarnish anyone connected to Trump, and really cease in some ways some of like the highest level possibilities for some of the people wanting to run or run under this banner.
>> Do you think J.D. actually kind of cares? For, for whatever it's worth, you know, I'm sure I'll be attacked as a tool of Palantir or whatever, but I know him and I feel that way. I'm not saying he's got a bright political future, not convinced that's true, but I am saying he is a rare decent man in a sea of opportunists and greed heads and violent worshippers and just men without dignity or self-respect. Like they don't respect themselves. That's why they behave this way. They've been turned out in prison. They've been raped by the system. They're to the deep state and they act like it.
>> While you're All right. So, this is pretty preposterous that J.D. Vance is unlike the opportunists in Washington. This take I couldn't disagree with more when it comes to Tucker here. And I admire Tucker for his opposition to the war in Ukraine, the COVID regime, the Iran war, the genocide in Gaza. He's heroic for all that. But to say that J.D. Vance isn't a political opportunist, J.D. Vance has reinvented himself both personally and professionally so many times to fit the situation for the orchestration of his power. Not only in his personal life, he switched his name three times. He was born James Donald Bowman and then changed it to James Hamel and now he's J.D. Vance. You have to ask some questions about that. Not only that, if you want to take that aside and say, "Hey, there were personal issues, family issues involved with those decisions." It's a little weird to switch it a few times, but professionally, in the political world, he rose through the ranks of the PayPal mafia, his political rise orchestrated by Peter Thiel, big a combination of big tech and little tech that hoped to get him in office and provide them with lucrative contracts to increase the surveillance state, increase the surveillance powers of Palantir who's aggregating data in a centralized database through a software called Foundry. They're in involved in pre-crime schemes and things that would make Edward Snowden's revelations blush. That's exactly what Palantir is. It's a sinister deep state connected surveillance state. But not only that, before that he had a different political mentor, David From. He was a neocon writing for David From's blog. David From involved in the Project for a New American Century. He was a speechwriter for Bush. He wrote the Axis of Evil speech, the ultimate neocon speech in so many ways. The first mentor of J.D. Vance. J.D. Vance once called Trump America's Hitler. Now he's sitting by his side as the vice president. The guy is an opportunist. He's the ultimate opportunist in Washington. And yeah, he represents a little bit more of a sophisticated side to the neocon apparatus, but he is an opportunist.
>> Imagining this third party will look like ideologically, what will it stand for, and what are you doing to actually make this happen?
>> Well, I'm thinking about it a lot and talking to people and trying to decide what I want to do and you know, I got to DC at 15, I think. I spent my whole life there and around, you know, people wielding power. And so I have a pretty good sense of what happens to people when they start seeking power. They're destroyed as people. You know, they may win elections. But in the end, people tend to become Mitch McConnell over time. You just do. Like that's that's the nature of it. When you worship power, you are destroyed. When you seek power over other people, you are destroyed. Again, I think this is just an unbending rule of life. And so would I ever want to be in a business where I'm seeking power? No, I don't want that. For self-preservation reasons, actually. I just don't want that for myself or my family. Not because I'm worried about getting hurt. I'm not worried about getting hurt at all cuz I can't control it. I'm worried about becoming distorted as a person. So, I just want to be clear. I'm not seeking any office. I can't imagine circumstances under which I would. But, I think that people deserve an option. And like I really believed, I sincerely believed that I could get so boring. I won't once since I thought Trump was the option. I thought he was the guy who was against not just the Democratic establishment, but the Republican establishment. And so, to see him join it and become this marionette, um, buffoonish marionette of that establishment is so shocking to me. That um, I just feel like the baseline requirement for democracy is like choice. You should be able to pick someone who sort of imperfectly represents your views. Otherwise, what power do you have? You've no economic power. Middle class is not the majority of the country anymore and hasn't been for 11 years. So, you have no meaningful economic power. Nobody cares what you think. The only power remaining is the power of the vote, political influence. And if that's fake, then you've got a system that's much less responsive to people, ordinary people, than a lot of autocracies are. There are a lot of countries that we describe as tyrannies that are more responsive to their population than ours is. And I would, I would name every Gulf country. They're all monarchies. All six of them are monarchies. The GCC. It's hereditary. You can't run for emir, okay? You're born into it or not. And yet, those governments, I've seen it firsthand a lot over years, and I know some of those people like they're really kind of aware at all times of what their population wants. And they make a good, I mean, they may blow a lot of money on hookers and private planes and all that stuff, and that's well documented. But, they do not ignore the baseline concerns of their populations cuz
>> Well, maybe that's true. There, there's some things I agree with and some things I disagree with here. So, first of all, there already are several third parties in the United States. None of them has provided a panacea to what's happening in Washington. Of course, if Tucker Carlson creates a uniquely orchestrated political party that represents a coalition, maybe among dissidents that's run the political gambit of sorts, and he's putting his money in it to it, other big influencers and podcasters are pouring money and resources into it, that might be a very different thing. But, I would say that single-issue coalitions that move the ball forward and do great things are possible regardless of a political party. You don't have to have a single libertarian or, you know, leftist or right-wing distant in Congress to push anti-Israeli legislation. You can just collaborate with the people within that body right now, and some of them are terrible. But, voting the bums out is the strategy that's led us to this point, that all you need to do is vote the bums out, get behind this other party, because again, other parties exist, they're not exactly displacing the status quo. Some of them are dissident political parties. At least the Greens to some extent are, the Libertarians to some extent are. There are other options involved in this, too. As far as democracy, it's about limiting choices in the United States. In terms of democracy, you're putting your name behind generally one of two candidates. Sometimes you have the option to vote for a third-party candidate. Sometimes races, if they're local, they're non-partisan. It, it's about limiting choices for individuals, because once those office holders get in power, they use majority rule votes to violate your rights every single day. That's what Congress is. And you can say that's not ideal democracy, but that's the modern manifestation of democracy. I think we do have a lot more choice based on how we spend our money. You do have economic power. Mass boycotts, in some ways are what started this country, what started the severance from the colonies from the mother state. That's what the Continental Association was in the first Continental Congress. That's what the Boston boycotts that Sam Adams organized was, getting people on board with stopping the purchase of of British products to stick it to them and their aspirations to dominate our hemisphere. That's exactly what that was. So, I think you have more economic power than you do have political power by pulling a lever for one of two carefully filtered candidates in the federal apparatus.
>> Well, for a lot of reasons, but one cuz it's stupid to do that cuz you get a revolution. I feel like our country is less representative of the views of its population than almost any, maybe any I've ever visited. Europe is pretty close. Canada, of course, is worse than we are, but other than that, like we're, we lead the world in non-representative government. And I, I just want that to be different because I want this. Why? Why do I care? Because I think that countries in which people feel like their government kind of represents them a little bit or at least trying to do something for them are more stable. And countries in which people have no hope of ever being heard tend to be violent and crazy. And I don't want to live in a violent and crazy country at all. Like that's a lot. I've been to many violent and crazy countries. I don't want to live in that country. So, that's it. It's literally that simple. So, I just want a democratic non-violent pressure relief valve to siphon off some of this rage. And I think a political party is the only answer and the Republican Party, you know, is not reformable as currently constituted. If you, every Republican, I think, except Massie voted to merge the US military with the IDF yesterday. So, that means every Republican commits treason in public? I, I can't even believe that happened.
>> Yeah, that's exactly what happened. They're trying to merge the military structure between the United States and the Israelis for the benefits of the Israelis having direct leverage over US foreign policy, rather than just indirect leverage, which does manifest. We're seeing that with the war in Iran. But thankfully, the Senate voted it down. Of course, in the House, Thomas Massie was the only one opposing it. I'd like to think if Marjorie Taylor Greene was still there, she would have, too. But even in the Senate, Rand Paul voted for this, and he explained this like this was a procedural vote, but I would say any procedural vote that moves you forward into this section 219 of the NDAA is preposterous. It must be objected at all costs. But thankfully, it got voted down in the Senate. It needs to stop because this is the last hurrah for the Zionists. They know that the American people are turning away from this mentality of supporting Israel at all costs. They want this in place, so in 20 years, this is written into law. This is codified. It's not as easy to repeal at that time because Washington rarely ever, you know, goes away from territory that it occupies, not only institutionally, but in laws such as this. So, that, that's kind of an aside here. But what I'll say about JD Vance and Tucker Carlson's political party is well, if Tucker Carlson's so open to supporting JD Vance, though of course, he did admit that anyone connected to this administration's probably tarnished, it won't be easy, he seems willing to support JD Vance, very willing to support JD Vance, saying that he's a friend, basically the only friend he's made in politics. If he gets the Republican nomination, you can just kiss this new third party goodbye if it's primarily bankrolled by Tucker Carlson. Now, if it isn't and Tucker Carlson is just going to push for the endorsement of J.D. Vance under a third-party banner anyway, and J.D. Vance is willing to do that, both of which are kind of questions that, you know, hang in the air and aren't certainties, well, how's that any different than what we're actually getting out of GOP versus the Democratic Party? We already have J.D. Vance as a vice president, I hate to say, and he, if he's just going to go to a different party, well, it's the same guy representing the same views, presumably, under that third-party banner. It's not going to solve the problems that it's purported to solve. So, Elon Musk floated the idea of a new political party last year. He quickly ran away from that. I think a lot of people talking about starting a new third party don't realize how many millions of dollars and activist energization campaigns are needed for ballot access in the states because the most bipartisan way that the political system shuts the door on third parties is really, really crazy roadblocks in terms of ballot access. Hundreds of thousands of signatures required in some states. New York, it's almost impossible to get on the ballot as a third party. Tennessee, where I live, I think you need something like 53,000 signatures as a third party to get on the ballot as your party's name next to your name on the ballot. That's what it takes, and a lot of people are willing to walk away from that once they see the obstacles in, in the way here, and the obstacles are Tucker Carlson, if he plans to support Vance, are going to be too rigid if the Republican Party already nominates Vance, and they might do that. They might do that with Rubio, too. The Republican Party is irredeemable, just as the Democratic Party is, but ultimately, I think it's better to work in single-issue coalitions than to just rally around the inception of a new party, rally around a particular party. That's kind of the tribalistic impulse that actually doesn't make headway in terms of reversing course, and you can see this from the Stamp Act crisis in the 1760s. You can go back to that. You can go to the fugitive slave crisis in the 1850s. You can go back to prohibition. None of these turnabouts in American history happened because of a particular composition, a particular party in power. It happened due to the natural circumstances that were downstream from a culture of people that ran the political gamut having enough of the current system. In prohibition, in the fugitive slave crisis, in the Stamp Act, you know, all sorts of other examples too seem to indicate this. But, what do you guys think? Do you think Tucker Carlson is going to support J.D. Vance no matter what, even if he gets this third party off the ground? Is a third party a solution? Let me know what you think in the comments down below. Please like the video, subscribe to the channel. Check out American Conservative, great organization started by Pat Buchanan. Couldn't agree with those guys more when it comes to foreign policy. Really like their interview with Tucker. Asked some really good questions, so props to those guys on this one. Take a look at that. Also, if you like this video, please consider joining as a member of Liberty Vault. You can do that by clicking the join button down below. Doing that makes you a member, and then you get immediate access to all of my videos before they go live to the general public. There's always several that you can watch before anyone else as a member, and it's actually not that expensive, so do check it out if you would. And I really appreciate the current members I do have. Thank you guys so much. And also, if you want a free copy of my first book, Compact of the Republic, click the link in the description down below. That sends you to a website. Plug in your email right there, and I'll send you a full free copy of that book, no obligations whatsoever. And look, I have a few demands for this sinister PayPal mafia, war regime, genocidal maniac regime, and I won't apologize for them. No more war, no more debt, no more inflation, and no more empire. Peace out, guys. Catch in the next one.