Tucker Carlson and Russ Vought Break Down DOGE and All of Trump’s Cabinet Picks So Far
01:56:45 Share

This episode is brought you by live lock. The holidays mean more travel, more shopping, more time online and more personal info in places that could expose you to identity theft. That's why live lock monitors millions of data points every second. If your identity is stolen, their U S. Space restating specialists will fix IT guaranteed or your money back, give more holiday fun and less holiday worry with life lock save up to forty percent your first year visit live lock dog com slash podger terms apply.

So you ran O M, B before and you don't have to come in. And this that sounds like you are very likely to run O M B again. Tell us what O M B is for those who aren't from washington, what IT doesn't and what you would do with that.

So omb b is the nerve center of the federal government, particularly executive branch. So IT has the ability to turn on and off any spending within the office of the biceps budget has to turn off the spending that's going on at the agencies. IT has all the regulations coming through IT to assess whether it's good or bad or too expensive or could be done a different way or what does the president think? And then all of government execution.

So anytime you have cabinet executive branches conflicting with each other are working together. Or on something, for instance, you, the wall present, want to fund the wall. We at on b gave him a plan to be able to go and fund the wall through money. That was the department of defense to use that because congress wouldn't give him the ordinary money at the department of homing security. So IT really is president, use O M, B to tame the bureaucracy, the administrative state.

Welcome the tucker carlson show. We bring you stories that have not been show cased anywhere else. They're not sensor, of course, because we're not gatekeepers. We are honest brokers here to tell you what we think you need to know. And do IT honestly check out all of our content and talker croson doc com here.

The episode IT was really prying near honestly by fd r. Uh, and then president nicks on also was really learning from F, D R and how to use IT to tame the the bureaucracy.

And we have seen he created the office, rose bell.

the the office was formally the bur of the budget for blast hundred years, right? And then nixon re named IT office a management budget and um IT becomes kind of more of a statutory thing reporting directly to the president, no longer within treasury. And so since then you've had IT a still there still really important, viewed by the country largely as a budget cutting exercise. But IT IT is the president most important tool to dealing with the bureaux acy administrative state and know the nice thing thing about present trumps. He knows that and he knows how to use IT effectively.

So you can't get any domestic policy done without our own band.

So you can know you will be in a situation where you will have, at best, really awesome cabinet secretaries who are dealing on sitting on top of massive bureaucracies that largely don't do what they tell them to do. And you have to have statuary tools that you're disposal that forced that bureaucracy from the White house to get in line. And that is really the main thing that om b can accomplish in addition to what everyone would think of from a budget office, which is, yeah, you cut spending, you figure out how to deal with your fiscal finances and all of that.

you making me anxious. I mean, I can't handle at this obedient dog. I can imagine what a this obedient federal agency looks like. How resistant are they to democracy? They're .

incredibly resistance. I mean, think about a ukraine. And the president in the first term wanted to caught off funding for ukraine. why? Because it's a corrupt country.

And we, you know how I was going to be spent is totally Normal policy process to go through that the people lost their minds about. But the bureaucracy was literally just ignoring IT. And quite Frankly, his political points like john bolton were ignoring him as well.

And what we then did IT only be was I had been personally told, like, you know, I want the money cut off until we can figure out where it's going and we cut the money off. IT was, like all helper loose within the barki got peach. And so and yeah and so you have the ability at that point, can't bring them to come to heal and to do what the present has been telling them to do. And we can do that. And four and a, we can do that all sorts of place.

It's kind of a crazy if I mean, everything i'm from your earth, but if you think about IT, that's the end of democracy because the only author and the executive branch comes from the president, the vice president also elected um but IT comes from voters through as expressed through elections so burek rats and federal agency and points and the federal agency have no authority to act independently that I more under our constitution do they?

no. And this is really, the left has innovated over one hundred years to create this fourth branch of an administrative state. I, you and I might cause the regime, the administrative state that is totally unaccountable to the president that lets IT move in the direction that he has been going.

But the president is accountable to voters. So our members of congress and um the system is designed that way. That's why we say it's a democracy or constitutional public because the voters convey both the authority on their leaders. And so this seems not only illegal their behavior, but on constitutional.

I mean, at the most basic level. And cons totally on N. W. Williams stem, he would wanted constitutional amendments. The left stopped talking about constitutional amendments because they innovated to this new fourth branch, which is totally different than anything the founders would have ever understood, that the notion of independent agencies that think of up and in congress is designed them to be divorced from the president. But even the notion of like um this is this is worth most to be technic craters and experts and we don't have to listen to what what you say we work for and I caught this tucker, uh, people would say what we we work for the office of the president, uh, what what is that and .

what is IT in its authority?

They get their authority. They have essentially taken. They have no legitimate theory, have no legitimate thora in the constitution, but they are part of this, this fourth branch that I still believe reports in, in large measure to congressional and in in the case, street interest, right? You have very powerful interest that direct them to keep going in the direction that they want them to go.

It's why these bills are written in such a way that they are uh, anything you can read anything in into that, right? When anti polis says we're going to find out what the bill says, he wasn't actually being inaccurate. That's their strategy.

They pass bills and then they let the experts fill them in. But over the phone, they put massive pressure on them to go along with their their directions in their ends. And low and behold, do you get conservative republicans that take office? And then you find that it's incredible difficult to wield power, to get them to deal with all that muscle memory, to get them to do what you want.

And so you got to have statutory authority that the president person says, I am fully aware where I sit in a constitution. I am fully aware the tools at my disposal, and i'm going to use them on behalf of the american people, because I just won a massive agenda setting election, and i'm gonna go do what I said I would do. That democracy, correct, that is democracy that is not all of arc. And when they say we're going to preserve democracy, we know that they have been meaning all they they want to do is preserved. They are kind of a morph oligarchy, administrative deep state.

I don't think that's an overstatement at all. I mean, I just think I don't even see the kind of argument against what you just said. So let's just um if you don't mind walking us through what happened in the example that you gave ukraine.

So you just said the president comes into office in two thousand and seventeen and says why we say in almost money to ukraine where are going is no what we don't know. It's the most club country in europe or the most crop in the world. Maybe we should find out we don't know.

okay? We're cutting off till we know. I think it's what you said. And the agencies like now we're going to continue to fund the ukrainy.

How do they do that? They ignore the president and there in in, in officials ignore the president. And I think one of the things you'll see in this this next trump term is policy officials, his political appoints, that are not looking to get out of what he has clearly told him to do, right? So assume that if he was solved, but at the veaux rac, the issue.

I think what you saying is let's assume that he appoints people who agree with them and i'll do what he ask, correct OK.

So first is my staff is was part of what we call the policy process, right? Where you would go and you defend the and you would articulate what you're trying to accomplish. And we had put the hold on the the ukraine funding.

And my guy goes to the the all of these meetings. And he's like literally the only one in the room that wants to do what the president has asked to do. Everyone's kind of just ganging up on him.

And that is think of that often for all of our political points, they are surrounded by people that have no idea about what the reasons in the agenda that the present has been put in office. And they're just bombarded with reasons of how can you do this? What are you thinking? Did you know that this is you can't do this most of the time, that's not true. And so you have to cut through all of that um and to have the courage of your convictions and quite Frankly, tucker than know how to know, to have read a lot, to get in the granular details yourselves, to not be staff ed by your and people working for you you this notion that you can just come in and presides is not true. You you have you have to be in the weeds and to drive these agencies to be able to fix where we have the the undergrowth in the muscle memory that we've had for decades.

So why can't you just know if the president says again to refer your example? Um I don't think we should be funding ukraine. I'm elected.

We're going to cut this off. If congress wants to fun ukraine, they can go ahead, do the APP of the agencies, not to fun. Usain, so why would do .

you just .

fire the people who did so bad? Who who tried to survive democracy?

You've gotten know how to fire them, and there are tools to do that in. The president was was innovating in that space himself with what's called schedule of of essentially saying, if you worked for me in your policy, a career official think you're turnkeys who are writing regulations, then we're going to create a new classification for you. And you are you are going to be what most of the country is, which is at will employ. That's where we're headed. But there was also ways .

that why I don't understand the system where a president, any president, don't trump comes in and doesn't have control of the executive branch because constitutionally, he doesn't. How come you can fire them? Why is that just not as simple as .

saying your fired IT should be? And this is one of the the, the mountains of the administrative state. This is how they have built their their institution by essentially having been incredibly difficult to hire and fire employees.

And so another, when the president decided to take money from defense to build the wall, we had clear legal grounds to do IT that congress had given us. They called transfer thorning, and I told this to the hill. And obviously, this was controversial, shouldn't been controversial.

Congress had given a very clear transfer thora. I must have had at least three times someone relitigate that decision from the career staff who work at home. B, are you sure? Are you sure? I think we should post.

I think this as guys, the decision has been made. Execute the decision and you see that everywhere, right? And if you don't if you don't drive IT. You're gna get Better. You you're not gna be able to, uh, accomplish what the present needed.

How about if you were just just start the meaning with any OK? This is how democracy works. The people elect the leader he Carries out there.

Will anyone standing in the way of that is converting democracy? We will not allow that. Anyone who does that is fired instantly. Could you do that and just say you're fired for on constitutional behavior?

You can do that increasingly when you move towards the schedule left system and and there are other tools in the tool box. But under the current system.

what would happen if you tried that if you last? But if you find a mall, you look.

you've got a lot of tools undertake yeah.

it's just so infuriating.

IT IT is one of the most infuriating things that you could do possibly imagine. But I think that the the good news, and this is I think the good news, not just in hiring, firing, the good news at large is that most of the time, they have been able to get as far as they can. Because if IT is the way that is, it's precedent and laws that are not drafted precisely, but purpose.

Sly vae. And as a result, we can then do IT in reverse. You can have a president and steps in and says, you know what, there is no constitutional amendment for me to take control of the administrative state.

I'm going to do in reverse everything that you have done. And I think that is the great hope. What you need is people who are able to absorb, uh, political heat.

They don't have a fear of conflict. They can execute under wetheral enemy fire. They are up to speed, and they are no nonsense in their own ability to know what must be done.

And they are unbelievably committed to the president in his agenda and believed and truly believe in their bones that they're not there for their own agenda. They're there for what president trump was elected to do. And so his commanders intent matters a great deal.

And that's the the view that I was had talkers. How do I get the mind of the president to think through? What does he trying to accomplish? And then i'm going to go figure out how to .

do IT yeah because once again, he is the authority and no one else does because only he was elected. And I just i'm fixed this question of like water career biocon ATS think they d drive the authority to make these decisions. I could make them god I think is very a known I never asked that question in D C. Or consider the free if you do but I think it's a key question. Um so one of the problems that you had last time was the media explain how that works, how the media works in conjunction with the permanent state and the congress to through the president.

Well, I think number one, they are always frame framing, narratives and messages that both are lies and are also designed to destabilize the republicans in control who want to be for however that narrative is being framed. You used one already with democracy, right? Uh, if you're not aware that when they say democracy they mean all of our here, like I don't want to the entire actually .

the whole point is preserving democracy is what we just .

step you you if you have a plan to deal with the administrative state in the next frame at his authority an you don't want to cast of your own allies saying, I don't want to be anti thordis an, we saw this in coit where we they decide they define something as anti science or anti public health.

IT causes our political points to just completely wilt, right? And so that I think the beauty of president trump is this kind of mune to these these media generated narratives that conflict with common sense reality that I think is the main one because that that is there that is controlling the skies from a military standpoint, right like that is their ability to to shape the conversation in such a way that IT makes IT very hard. Number two, are there obviously working in conjunction with with leakers and um individuals with no how to know when a hole has been put on ukraine, uh to be able to send that and have IT explode in the public arena.

And so you have to you have to be prevent leaks. You have to uh govern well from the to be able to manage all of that as best you possibly can. Um and but I I also think there's an opportunity there because they will they will they will report on conflict. They will report on confrontation. And when when they do that, you can get the word out as to what you're doing, uh, at least you can get the word out on on shows like this and in the the new and developing ecosystem.

well, that's kind of IT right there. I mean, that was the base of my question. I do think things have changed, right? I mean, if you still care with the new york or washington, say or hinder linea nbc news, like, I hope you're not working there, right, right? Do you think anybody still cares what they think? No.

I the whole ball game has shifted, right? Like, I don't know why you would do many of these interviews at all because if you can't get you know you've gotta be able to get your words out without just complete combat inss. And I think the best example ples remembred the the killing Collins interview with president trump.

I mean, it's just constant interacting um and misuse of lies actually. You so like that's the kind of thing that you're up against um but you can shape them. You can uh particularly the print media and I think there are no I think it's important uh to at least attempt to do that um but you have to make the measure of the person that you're dealing with and sometimes they're complete activists themself.

Do everyone democrat used to refer to abortion and something that should be safe, legal and rare? We've change you on that. I went from a right to a screen. This isn't the pro choice movement. You may remember from thirty years ago, this is something much darker.

And that's why we have joined forces with pre born their response, or of the show and of our speaking tour to do something about is the largest prolife of organization in the united states. And they are doing what they should do, which is speaking up against this attractive killing babies after birth. No one seems to have the bravery to call that wrong, which IT is.

But pre born is calling IT out. Their networks of clinics are position in the highest abortion areas in the country, and y've rescued three hundred thousand babies when a woman considering an abortion searches under baby's life pre born. Is there the power of ultra sound, combined with the love of god, doubles the baby's chance of being born? A single ultra sound caused twenty eight box, five alter sounds are one hundred and forty bucks, giving women the information they need to make, the decision that many of them actually want to make to have a baby. Any gift will help, and all gifts are tax deductable to donate security, go to pre born dock com slash tucker or call pound two fifty on your phone and when asked, use the word baby.

This episode is brought to you by live lock. The holidays mean more travel, more shopping, more time online and more personal info in places that could expose you to identity theft. That's why live lock monitors millions of data points every second.

If your identity is stolen, their U. S. Space restoration specials will fix IT guaranteed or your money back. Give more holiday fun and less holiday worry with life lock, save up to forty percent your first year visit live lock down com slash podcast terms apply.

Blind stock comes taking off the savings early with black friday megadeals. A blind icon design expert can help me make the perfect selection on your schedule. We can even handle everything from measure to your cost.

Just one with over twenty five million windows covered line stop com is the number one online retailer of custom window coverings get up to forty five percent of wide. And the free professional measure right now at was an refections. May I.

IT does seem someone asked what the intel agencies that does seem like one of the main vectors of control as briefings and the number of people i've spoken to congress executive branch like I know know if you only got the briefing. I think I live there too long. I just don't believe the briefing. You know, maybe sometimes they are accurate, sometimes they are not, but they are almost always designed to control the person being briefed. Did you see that?

I did. And I very rarely ever learned anything particularly interestingly reading.

Is that true? Yeah.

they didn't tell you kill Kennedy. They did not, right. And so you know, I think I came away with the similar skepticism of these briefings in the information in the over classification, in the system.

Yes, they classify everything. Are reading this thing you're like you realized that's all just Normal stuff that's out in a confession research service. I think that's a huge thing that we've got a fix in over classification in system.

But I think they they both create this environment where it's very exclusive. They are trying to bring you into their kind of priestly role so that, no, I I saw the briefing. If you had seen the briefing, you you would be OK with us not having.

If I requires exactly, you would be OK with us. Just another hundred billion dollars for ukraine. Just we can't have ukraine fall that none of this is is is is is rigorous analysis. And honestly, I think that's the biggest thing that I was um but moning is the extent to which rigorous analysis that I thought would be there wasn't there .

what you know about rigorous analysis?

Uh, I don't expect people to agree with me constantly. I want, I want to, I want well prepared memo that that may they have a conviction to them, yes, and then support them. It's not these are not like i'm onna. Plant the flag yeah. And then we can, we can to see, okay, who's the right, who's that, who had Better supporting na. It's like i'm going to give a blob and exercise to report on something and the blob is going to kind of like all, uh, it's not a google spatch y, but it's gonna be a an interactive google spatch y to just spit out something that is a consensus document and you're reading the thing you're like this makes no real claims other than to affirm the narrative that we just talked about.

right? So what's the point other than the pressure of the status quo at that point?

The point is just to know what the intelligence community is writing on. You're not going to learn anything from IT.

I talk to someone recently the last few days who works in the in talking the um who is saying that you can see people come to washing for the first time in high positions and other branch before and after their briefings and they're like different people and they they fall for IT like all of them fall for IT no, no. We're going to tell you all the things you wondered about what can tell the truth.

President, especially trump, seems, as you said, immune from this and this stand up before. But this person said, you should see how much they change. Like deep inside, once we lay, you lay the bullshit on them. They just, they are not the same.

Have you noted that seen IT? No, I think part of the problem and this is endemic of not just the I C, but are we don't read enough in general, we don't have our own convictions. We don't search for understanding ourselves.

And so you have people go in, they're like i'm I kind of need this career step to tell me what to think I don't want look stupid, right? And so that has killed us on our side of the eye, the conservative side, to say, we don't have people that are driving policy and bring their own opinions in history. And so they they are subtitle to feeling like the, the. And they still, they still believe that these people have an authority of stance on things, and they don't have enough scepticism that, in fact, there's no the emma r has no close, right? And and then that is the and you've gotta bring that perspective there.

We said what you're saying.

a lot of people, I do think that I do think that the case from the standpoint of I see the other thing that they would do is they they would keep you from being briefed, right the brief and we've already discussed what the brief um is and sometimes like what present trump s to say I am not going initially get the brief fine but I would find that I wasn't read into certain things until they needed my signature.

So once they needed some reason to get my signature, then obvious ly, I get this brief right. And is that not the way that should be if you're trying to provide oversight and accountability? You you don't know what you don't know and so you have to be able to uh, we have the the whole entire uh uh landscape of things that you could, uh that that's interesting, that we should do something present tramplin like that.

And I find that was very restrictive unless they needed me. And so I basically said, look, i'm not going to, you are knocking in my signature unless you get me briefed up and I want, I want to access to all of these things that I need to be able to provide oversight for the federal government. And one of the things that we did talker is that since the rise of O M B, the ability turn funding on and off had always been done by a career individual, not a political point.

And so we changed that. And I was like, IT was like, the world was going to end. They said, luck. You're going to destroy the agency. You can, you can handle the band with.

you can handle the band with .

k OS will be will be unmatched. And we changed IT IT. And next, you know everything flown across our desk that's interesting are not doing that. You know like IT was just amazing. And if you don't know and have that thesis that says this is what must be done, you could be the most incredible conservative in the world, you could be the most policy y consistent person with the president, but you don't know how to put your hand in the glove and and use that agency for the presence behalf the present not going to be able to be well serve at that agency.

I saw David, the natives who was long time water Carrier for the C. I. I don't know if they're paying him, but they should be because he does their bidding and has for decades at the washing post.

And I heard him saying yesterday that we can have tosi gabbard at DNA com national intelligence because IT will cause, quote, chaos because the intel community doesn't like her. And basically he's making the argument that we should not have silly control these agencies because the agents won't think that basically so again, that's dictatorship is what he's describing. But um he used chaos as kind of the thread h OK.

But you've been there. If you really did, everything was needed in order to root out the corruption that defines our government, you would cause some chaos. You would wouldn't you .

you you will certainly read on the papers like.

right?

It's good, fair you know as to what what just is Normal good government behind the scenes, managing, pushing, pushing through whatever. Uh I think IT can be done very uh uh wisely and and and done in a way that um you know anyone who had a bird I view into that would be able to say that's exactly what we put the ministration into office. But you're going to have to kick over people's paradigms.

You're going to have to kick over people's turfs. You're going to have to change people's understanding of things that they have invested their whole life into a view of the world. And none of this is their views of the world and not rooted in the constitution.

In some, in some cases, any know version of the facts uh but you're going to that's gonna cause a lot of term oil within these bureaucracy. You you got to fight through IT and then they're going to overlay the aspect of, oh my gosh, he gets a racist and you know you guys know don't care about us as people like you know, you're going going to deal with that too, right? Um they are you know one of the arguments that they're using in the press against me right now, as they say, he, he he called for trauma within the bureaucracies.

Yeah, I called for rama within the arms reaux racy. Hate the american people. They want to put a seventy seven year old and did a seventy seventy year old navy veteran in jail for eighteen months for building four pounds on his range to fight while fires.

It's not the department of justice that the E. P, A, you go every agency, and it's not just a big government, is weapon zed against the country, of course. And so yeah, we I would want to provide trauma against that bureaucracy way that freeze the american people from the people that have assumed the the type of power that the constitution is, no law, no public debate ever gave them.

Does that mean we dislike everyone working at federal agencies and want them to have a bad life? Now, of course, there's a lot of people there who would come to serve and do great public service. And we want to firm that and we want to turn over the bureaucracies that are traumatizing the american people. Yeah.

the outcomes are terrible and they're terrible because it's crop. That's what IT doesn't change. The dc metro area is the richest in the country and they don't make anything. So it's just like that's the most obvious marker for corruption that I can imagine. Um tell us about what congressional confirmation hearings are gna look like for trust appoints.

They're gonna be um they're going to be exhilarating if you have the right approach to, but they will know they're going to come at everything we've got right you know um everything they've got with with what they are able to put someone in the dark and that individual is going to have to face the baLance of I wanted to defend everything that they've have done um in life and belief and at the same time, you the the thing that's a little hard about as you you're no longer yourself, right?

You you are yourself but you are also going to do a job for a person so what I think about a particular issue doesn't mean as much as what president think about something right like that. And so IT is a different thing. Then coming on and doing an interview about what your viewpoints on our patio that exact a cable new set, right? So um I I think, look, I have i've had experience bernie centers went after me a very, very hard in my first. A confirmation hearing as deputy will be. For essentially believing in john three sixteen um and he was away he hit.

he attacked you on the best I was .

a and I should not serve in the federal government because my Christian faith in believing something that essentially comes down to what articulate at sports schemes would join three sixteen and that was those whose whose the bigger who is the bigger right that's a the perfect question goes by that most nominees will not go through what I went through, but I will tell them you will get through IT.

You will get to the other side, and IT will be the most freed thing in the world. You will come out through the end of the process like that. And you will, I find IT to be, at that point, exhilarating, because IT prepares you to take on an enemy fire.

Where are they and what are afraid of in colony bigger? Racist, Christian, centralist, authoritarian? If you, if you are, if you are not afraid of these attacks, and you give them no credence, no credibility, then even you will be able to get through these things. You will be able to a convince enough senators and you'll be to serve and you'll be serve more effectively. But but um the bright lights and will be on in this .

confirmation here is so how much of IT is like theatrical and how much IT is real? Like so you go into a hearing like that your confirmation hearing um do you know the outcome at the beginning? Or do you think that votes really change based on the testimony of amies?

I don't think most votes change at all. I think that you you may have one or two anomaly senators that are trying to you answered something to their satisfaction or they're trying to get a feel for for you that they have in otherwise. But I think increasingly in the in our the partisan world that we live in, the democrats are voting no. And it's a matter of making sure you know, you've convinced .

that and you've brought .

in the you but the .

republicans are always voting for the what I mean, Linda gram, vote for any democrats uncomfortable situation. But there are plenty of republican centers who are liberal democrats effectively, and they vote for all kinds and ominous. But you don't see that on the other side.

You never see that on the other side. And they they have an appreciation that they have to attack our people at every level because they know that every level is a stepping stone for the next level. Exactly right? They don't make as anal as is, just like .

the, well, you but promise a perfect example of you.

Well, but certainly the first term, right, I become deputy. And next, you know, mix goes to the chief of staff. And so I have an opportunity service deputy as director and so um that is uh h they understand government, they understand the career path that um is is opening for people. And they when they sense it's not always the case, but when they sense that this is a committed conservative, it's a part of online down the road.

For thirty five years, liberty safe has been the number one manufacturer of safe made in this country, american made from start to finish. They make high quality gun safes. I've got one vault doors, home safes, hand gun, volt, whatever you need to protect the things you value.

And again, I can tell you, from personal experience, these guys know what they're doing. I use liberty safes. The things that I don't want stolen, the things that really matter.

My father shot guns, the documents that i've gotta have, and a lot more not to tell you what else, but you need one. Primaries are way up in a few of anything you would like to protect that you need to protect. Liberty safes is the way to do IT.

Now, liberty safe has over three hundred and fifty dealers nationwide who specialize in delivery and installation and answering any questions you have. If you've got someone to protect, they've got a way to protect IT visit liberty safe dog com, pick out what you need and be sure to use the code tucker at check out to let them know that we sent. You'll take care of the rest.

Liberty safe is park. We frequently believe in liberty safe. You are always protected.

Is the role of republican leaders, particularly now since truck on the majority of popular vote, overwhelming majority of our votes, house and senate, or republican majority state houses of government ships that a man, eight. So that means that republican leaders, the two head guys in the house and senate should be helping. Are they going to I have .

high hopes that they that people are seeing what trump just accomplished and you're going to be polonies ods to get things done as soon as possible. And I think the jury is out, right. I think um I I want to see and i'm hoping to see people looking for ways to move these appointed through the process um and sounds like they're trying to do that.

Um we'll see. But you know we we have to do things not based on how IT has been done recently, like this whole notion the recess sap pointless, right? You have some people out there who saying this is a constitutional was not the way IT was meant to be. It's totally wrong, right? IT. IT is a specific provision in the constitution to be able to allow a presented if he does, if he got has to stand up in administration quickly and he's dealing with the senate that won't move quickly enough to be able to install as people so that he can actually function as a government, right?

That is specifically mapped out. And yet you have so in the definition for so .

you yet you have republicans, one of women, particularly at wheelin right now, who's attacking trump for .

even mentioning who's said .

women he he writes one he's one of the main kind of uh legal luminary on the right and uh ethics and public policy and one of those things takes and he's out there opposing the whole notion of recess appointments uh for for for whatever reason I don't know .

other so don't I mean, this is a whole separate question. It's a broad brush but in general, conservative think tanks, with some exceptions, are not conservative. The tools in the left and sort of repositions aries of broke down people with no other job prospects. Why would anyone pay attention to them?

I think they should increasingly not be right.

Yeah and Better way. There are some good ones that I I love every Roberts inheriting that they're good people on something. Thanks for sure. But in general, it's like the world of general golden g it's like cares what you .

think the only matter to the extent that people in the arena listen to that, right? And that is increasingly they're not being listen to. And I think that's part of one of the reasons why there. So i'm about IT right? National view itself is what is the interview .

that was a magazine in the fifties, right?

And and I think that, but at my point, is extend to which people have a post trump and in in the amErica first agenda, I think ultimately is a loss of power because they didn't get to set the agenda. They don't get to be the traffic cop.

Uh they don't get to kind of say, ah this is this defends my sensibility and more no if if you have a radical constitutionals ism and that's really what i've been calling for given this crazy on constitutional situation that we're finding ourselves in. If you are radical constitutional ism, it's going to be destabilizing. You may find that you can use the James medicine, could have put a whole and more resistant, pointless, and then you would have ever imagined. But it's also exhilarating.

And why, if you're trying to preserve the country, would you make arguments against that? Why would you be making arguments for us? As when the reasons we just put out, uh, five page paper will put out a forty page paper in next s two. This is the constitutional grounds for recess appointments of we even present trump and decided to do IT. But if he does, he will be in the .

same vein as our founders is a little weird. And again, you haven't well, as of right now eighteen to not announced no, yeah, I think you will be hope so. Uh, but you haven't been.

So I don't want put you in awwad spot because if you are, you're going to have to deal this. But why would mmc o still leader of republicans? Why would he say we're not doing request appointments?

Again, I can am spoke in the center mcconnon. My guess is that the senate is going to want to know the argument and the, and they probably have been told and may have been told, and i'm going to 就是 keep as positive as possible， that this is not inappropriate. You can't do IT and I want to show them and not, in fact, you can, uh, IT is entirely appropriate and to win the argument.

And then if you win the argument and then people are like now we don't want to do this, then it's a different matter, right? It's like a IT is just kind of reveals that there they're not actually on board with those particular nominees going into office and that's a different issue. Um so I I think that we don't know yet to whether will the senate have an issue.

I mean, to some extent, the senate knows that has an issue because they couldn't move these nominees fast enough in the first term because the democrats were fill of us during everyone, right? And so and by the way, you know, a lot of these hearings, and you read the history books and people got approved by the end in the day, you know, like the system wasn't meant to be the slow and IT has been bogged down and slow down. And we'll see you center soon. Majority leader then soon will have a chance to put his own in print on the senate. And I want to see how .

he does yeah i've got, you know, high expectations, low hopes, hope i'm wrong. Um would be one thing if the outcome was positive, if the country was thriving. You know you say, okay, this system is functional, but you don't really need a lot of change right now.

So that's fine. But the outcome is not positive at all, its total destruction of the country. We grow up. And so gotto fix IT. Why would you want to enter back into this?

Well, you know, i've always said last four years, I would never want to miss out on another chance to be at president side. I find in him to be someone who so uniquely situated for the moment. And you go back, and i've done some reading on this, you go back and read some of the federal papers, and they actually design the system for someone like him, who's his his interest would align with the country's interest to such an extent, to which IT actually works.

Like separation of powers is meant to have strong opinions, conviction leadership that go as fast as they can and hard as they can in direction and for the system to then have true separation of powers right uh an example of that is um is what he's proposing and reset sap pointless if the constitution allows you to do IT, why wouldn't you do IT if it's in your interest? And then let's see what congress does in response to that. But that's real separation.

Powerful is not like this kind of fake for in a fourth brand administrative state where none of IT works in the all kind of cartel behind the scene uh, wherever all you get is kind of different parts of each of the branch uh, coming together almost as a blob. And I I I think he's so unique in terms of being a historical transaction, formative person that we can actually save the country. And that's really what IT comes down to.

Um the hours late, it's eleven fifty nine. It's not too late, but it's really late. And this is an election where you you can just have c saw will will be up and you'll be down.

No, we we if we don't win in, he's one electoral Mandate. Now is time to actually execute. If we if we don't execute, we may never have this chance again.

And so you have the president who's ready to go now you need know how people who can do that and do IT with the attacks that are coming. And they will come, right? They they will come hardest at the people that they believe are the greatest threats.

And but, but that's what the president needs. The president needs those types of people or is not going to be successful in the country, won't be saved. And I just I think that is in combat on those of us who have that skillful said, who have have had the the experiences we've had.

You know, we're put here for a reason. We we're here because we god has given us a particular purpose for a particular time, and it's incoming us to be responsible with those moments that we're given. So I don't know what the future holds. I don't know if I serve or if I continue at my senate to be chain the ideas that is working on a unhappy with both of those scenarios. But it's in combat on us to to to give everything we can to be successful in this moment because I don't think we will get another moment like this if you .

doubt how serious the opposite dish is to the public and trump, but to the majority, the country they voted for trump, they're trying to leave him with world or three on the way out. You I can't imagine a more desperate or evil thing for tony black and who I think is desperate and evil, my view um to do leave them with the war a lame duck president trying to start a war with the world's largest nuclear power, russia. What do you make of that?

Uh, it's incredibly insidious. And then add to the fact he can't put two sense this together and he's largely not in control of his own government and so you have almost an unelected president with individuals behind the scenes that are doing this um is IT doesn't surprise me though I mean these are the same people that um have weaponized the department of justice have the low fair I have a colleague of mine jeff Clark cuz you has they're trying to disparage because of the the care that he had on behalf the present to deal with voter integrity and election fraud after twenty twenty and so the system has thrown everything at the warriors that are on the field.

You're seeing that with tosi. You're seeing that with my gates. I mean, why? Why is all of this stuff being thrown at him? Slanderously.

can you say I thought I started to grass, but since you mention gates, we don't accuse book D, O, J leaked that he was a child sex trafficker. Okay, so at that point they will have a moral, I would say, legal obligation charging for child's sex trafficking, improving in cording if they can shut the f but they didn't do that. They did not. They leak that should mac gates, a guy they didn't like whose views or threat to them is a child's sex trafficker, the mini that hang in the air and all the repulsive minions like joe garb, like, is a child sex or africa? You want to live in a world to the secret police can just slander you through the media like that.

I read in my bible this morning that you don't believe something unless two or three people are witnesses and say.

there is none of that .

in in in fact, the weapon, zed, department of justice said, we don't have the proof to pursue these allegations, I know.

And so then you read the story.

accuse them of IT, accuse, they make the case. The reporter said, right this and then they say, IT should be known. That magazine denies that these allegations occurred.

Course he denies because they're not true. And the department justice, there's no accounting of the fact that these things have been proved not to be not to be true. And yet people and there's a tendency on our side, and this is very trouble, is not just the the left, which is kind of state regime propaganda.

There is a tendency on our side to believe that if the smoke there must be fire. Why do we do that? why? Why do we? Why does our side? Why does republican congressman and republican senators believe that where there must be smoke, there must be fire? Only because this person has been a confrontational, courageous conviction leader in, in, in a true generational talent. I might that .

so that what the last point is in dispute. Legis effet, I mean, gade is the most articular member of congress, is not something close. So they hate him for that.

As he said, danger. My explanation, of course, i've noticed that republicans believe most of what the old part of IT is. I think there's an I Q gap at from just being honest.

Part of IT is they believe in the system and democratic believe in the system at all. They don't believe in any system that that curtails their power, basically. But republicans really believe in IT to their great credit.

And so that like what's the deo J, I mean, this kind of corrupt on the margins, you know me there are some bad apples, but most of are really great. Really why when the great ones resigned, I don't think there's any evidence or mostly great at all. I think they're really danger, heavily armed. Maybe that the answer .

I I think that is fundament is too old. I think the left is made up of of revolutionary and for sure, right? And there are marxist one. If you have read, witness, everyone knows that right like that is not a new phenomenon. It's become militzer over and over which .

one thousand and fifty five.

So now now what that looks like is not someone who behind see by now that looks like, you know some of their members of congress, right, like an aoc, their Marks as revolutionary are voting in congress. So that's their side. And our side doesn't really grapple with that.

We don't make every decision realizing like that's what they think and that's what they're doing. So i'm gonna listen to what they just on a chic t conversation. I'm going to to govern and make decisions based on what I know they are pursuing.

Know you're enemy. Secondly, we do have trust in kind of the media and the the the institutions like tony, without you can't be lying, right? IT IT can't really.

He, he must not have been doing gain function research if he said he wasn't his, tony found you right. Like that's what we were up against. That is the wrong. But you ve got to have a skepticism. And all of these people, and in their institutions and their bureaucracies.

Okay, what needs to be done? And just just thought I went out while shut up. I'll stop with my stupid dw comments. You just go through the top three or four things that you think this income administration, which has a rare Mandate, should achieve in order.

I believe that the there's a lot of policy issues downstream, the border inflation, wars across the world, all of them are downstream of one reality. And that is we don't the american people currently are not in control of their government in the president hasn't been either. And so we have to solve that.

We have to solve the woke in the weapon zed bureaucracy and and have the president take control of the executive branch. So my belief for anyone who wants to listen is that you you have to the present has to move executive's as fast and as aggressively as possible with a radical constitutional perspective to be able to dismantle that democracy in their power centers. And I think there are a couple of ways to do at.

Number one is going after the whole notion of independence. There are no independent agencies. Congress may have viewed them as such as C, C, or the F, C, C, C, F, P, B, the whole alphabet soup. But that is, that is not something that the constitution understands.

So there may be different strategies with each one of them about how you dismantle them, but as an administration, the whole notion of an indian age, he should be thrown out, particularly with the department of justice, in which there literally no all IT is as president from put the water gate era that the ordinary general and those lawyers don't work for the president. And who do they work for? They think they work for themselves.

So they have the power to kill people because they warded themselves that power.

power kill people. And they believe that they have the power for for a all of the, the, the prosecution, and that the president doesn't get a saying any that and that we have to go at that as hard as we possibly can, whether that's the military. We have a whole military industrial complex of generals and Tommy to be kind of exposed this this last year with a fight about life.

But IT really became a fight about whether we have a essentially A A military that is not subject to civilian leadership. So you, you can apply the concept of of of destroying independence at every agency. I even thought in aspects of one b with regards to who gets to make the decisions on on statistics, right, like there are little pockets of independence that have to be um just you got we got to remove those right it's their own constitutional number.

Would you include the fed .

in the so I am not a huge thing of the fed. I can't um I can't look at the constitution and the massive decades long decisions that they have made totally undemocratic and and see that that is a place where there deserves to be an exception for I don't .

even understand who controls the fed. I mean and what does their authority come from god? They are they speaking directly .

to god like IT? They're wrong. And they've been for decades.

Zero states for years happened. Present trip has run on that. And so i'm to speak but i'm you've .

looked into the question of what authority does the consequence but to into whom? no.

And give me an example. If you go on a if you watching news, you're going to have seen in the last two years ads saying oppose the feds regulations on capital bank capital, right? Well, who is supposed to call? They are not call your commerce man.

Commerce man has no power. The issue is like the call to action is against the fed. Sorry, you're kind of add a luck.

And what's the ever we would use .

influence over, right? And so they they have existed with this notion that they have this prissy ability to make decisions. And in fact, I don't actually think they are that good at IT.

I think people like president and trumpet in fact Better at IT. And there is no reason that they should be uh exempt from the Normal democratic process. And if if congress wants to come along and pass rules that says, you know, this is how we want the money supply to go, all that is in their interview.

But I I think you you know this is not some exception to the rule doesn't mean any way that you know present trump has any interest in doing anything in this area. But I don't think IT, I don't think it's the exception that proves proves the rule on independence being something that is important downstream to the cdc, the nih. I think everything that people like bob Kennedy have been running on and others is about, no, you're not some priests role, you are politicians yourself, you just don't have to face voters, right?

So independently, I think first and formal s number two, bring back the notion of impotent and and this is something that of what of impalement the ability to not spend money for two hundred years, presidents had the ability to not spend a congressional appropriation, that that that has always been the constitutional system might have been brought. It's been a paradise that been brought from from the U. K.

And how we understood the the constitutional principal is certainly power of the purse means that congress gets to set the ceiling you can't spend without a congressional proprium, but you weren't ever meant to be forced to spend IT and has become a floor. So two hundred years, presence are using important. They get money for something present us.

I don't think it's a good idea, or I certainly can do IT Better, or I have events that are happening overseas that caused me not to want to spend on the gunboat when I want to get some treaty done. All manner of executive decision making that would be a part of that into in in the one thousand nine and seventies, at the lowest moment of the presidency, congress steps in to some extent of courts and they passing the implement control act, which was really the implement elimination act. And in that from that moment, they had destroyed separation of powers on spending, on fiscal issues. But IT was beyond that, IT wasn't just about dollars and sense. IT was about .

control the bureaucracy. So that effectively the exactly brings the president's agencies have to spend every dollar they are sent by the congress, correct?

And and and I believe as a budget guy, that was the original sin on why we can do anything fiscally from that moment on. It's also where we get armed of this bills because if I only need you to get my dear signature and I lose all of my ability to throughout the rest of the fiscal year to push and pull and not spend and have make different decisions, I just got to get you one signature. So i'm going to put everything in that one bill, right, thousands of pages, and i'm going to push IT through at the most, the hardest time for you politically, you might have .

some diplomatic visit to a yes.

And so implement is in vitally important, not just to save the country fiscally IT is vitally important to be able to arrest control of the bureaucracy. Because when you combine congress, giving the agencies vast authority, interpret the laws that they passed, overly broad, make laws, sensually make laws, essentially, that has no repercussions on the people who voted IT they to vote on what the right blended was for.

And then you would say that your funding is going for congress and the present has no ability. Sorry, i'm the Price you don't. That's a little you can you can turn off my funding.

Now imperial congress still exists. Just a lot more subtle. So that's a number two, bring back impounded. Number three is is dramatically going at restoring at will employment as as far as you can. Lot of ideas on the on on on the agenda, but so all these .

companies always tell me how much money they're giving to charity. Oh, so charity. But what are the charities they're giving to these brands that you buy, that you have in your house? You don't even want to know very often their charities that don't the same values that your family has.

Sometimes they are charities that don't like your family at all. But when you use pure talk, which is a cell phone call ing lot of us use, you can be certain that your money is going to cheries that you yourself would give to veteran LED companies. For example, to date, pure talk has gotten rid of ten million dollars in debt held by veterans.

They spent tens of thousands more every month to help prevent veteran suicide, that is, give fifty grand to make row works, which gives scholarships to veteran learning the trades after they leave military service at set at seta. So you've seen companies once a year are not their named name's badly, but they do business with lunatics again, charities that run contrary to your world of you, that despise your world of you. But the pure talk, you don't have to worry about that.

This is accompanying the support causes that you can support. Pure talk gives you the same great cell service that america's most dependable five g networks provide for half the cost. They will also support small businesses with excEllent and affordable business plans.

They are powering us here at t. cn. So we can vouch for IT. They could probably save you money too. Find out a pure talk duck com sash tucker today, switch to a company that allies with your values. Peer talk when you sign up a peer talk duck com slice docker, you get an additional fifty percent off your first month. We recommended.

We go back actual time a super quick. So what was the idea in during water gate of forcing the president to spend all the money the congress sends them? Like why would you want that?

You only want IT from the standpoint of control if you want to be able to say you're going to spend what I tell you to spend that IT is nothing more then an institutional uh, desire to force the president to spend an example of money. But again, it's never just about that. It's always about where they have tried to innovated from really the gressier era, like they wanted congressional government.

That was the, that was the the the title of vidua Wilson's book. He wanted a system where essentially the agencies largely worked out of the congress or associated with congress, not unlike what you would see in the house of comments, right, where their cabinet lives in their house of parliament and it's largely, you know the monarch, the executive, a overtimes becomes tutors that's essentially what they have wanted and have pursued at every turn here. And you saw that on steroids with them using uh the events of water gate to promote ate new paradigms in ways of of finding the constitutional system from working. So everything post water he is largely, you can just make an assumptions, not the IT way I was meant to work. So you have our guys defending post water gate paradise um instead of trying to think through, okay, but let's go back let's go back to what the founders would have actually visioned amazing.

Um okay. So to your third point, thank you for this but way um so your third point um that the president has to be able to fire people who are subverting democracy um why can't how did federal bureau ATS wind up with a kind of super tenure when no matter what they do, you can get rid of them like I don't understand they work for .

the public right laws that have been passed perhaps not chAllenged, the laws that have been passed that give them bargaining power ah, that give them a certain processes that have to be followed before they can be dismissed. But I think in that and has certain ly made a very, very hard and heard a higher and fire. The current system needs to be changed.

Uh but IT also can be used to deal with these same kind of actors if you're willing to do IT. And um I don't want to get into all of the tools that are available, but they exist. One of them is the the reduction force. I mean you you can in vive has talked about this.

I mean you can proceed on the basis of what is good for the efficiency and the effectiveness of the agency to be able to dramatically lower um at A A macro level, the size of the workforce um and that will give you certain legal abilities to begin to move people off of the payroll. So there's a lot of things that being creatively discussed in this space, but IT has to be front and center schedule left with present. Trump has already run on that seems to be like a day.

One thing he has already instituted in the first term, we just didn't get to get across the finish line. Um every agency has to go in categories, how many of his employees or policy and therefore subject to at will employment. I I put ninety percent of O M B in that category because I wanted a IT was true and B I wanted to set a high bar for the rest of my colleagues at agency head that this should be viewed maximum you're willing to .

find your own staff. What you really, really saying, you are willing to run ingush some power. Because personal man power is power and .

is always not just about firing. Although there are certainly we must the layoff s and fire, particularly across some of the agencies that we only even think should exist. But what I found was that you get Better software when people are now in their mind realizing, okay, i'm not immune from all all accountability. And I would tell people, you know you'd apt to have these uh, conference calls were in middle cove IT and explain you know what we're trying to do and a lot of a lot of people were very absense like guys, we're republicans. We don't believe in this in these you know um these laws that give you these protections that we think make you less good at your job of serving a particular president.

So it's just on this face, just like everyone else in the country faces the institute to the job market. I've been fired so many times with a lot of kids, and I am not winning, but most people have been had moments like that works like, oh, well, I am amt of money. Why are the people that we pay with our tax doors immune to the pressure the rest of us feel it's like .

so reading reading that you can tell your boss what you think like the most crazy thing .

in the world would yeah you know, I worked for some prior work for some pretty authoritarian people, by the way, over the years. And the last people I work for, very nice to me, I will say, but like they really strong views on a couple topics. And I like, kept my views on those to myself at dinner.

There are my bosses. I mean, I don't really understand what, well, how a is an entirely separate set of rules apply to our employees. The public employees are housekeepers, how I think of them, they work for us. And when they when your housekeeper works for you, you get to find steals .

from you get to fire her. correct? yeah. And there's no other way to run any business.

any government. But it's like on what what grounds do they get to be treated Better than every other category of employee in the world? And there also some of the sucked est employees as the sounds of the federal employee.

I can tell you some of them are great. Most are not great. Sub, which is tracts running.

say, right.

because most of the say employees like suck and they don't come in because I cover they take three lunch breaks are like not effective telling the .

truth here are telling the truth. I know that's why you've got to have a massive effort to dramatically reduce this so that the good ones rise the top and everyone else, uh, is is find another work.

okay.

starting to get some good no. So and then the last thing is, is dismantling all of the the specific things like over classification, the FBI background checks, all of the things that deny information to the political class that are the political points that prevent them from doing their job.

Okay, but this is where people start getting murdered or getting cancer, whatever other doing, to maintain control. Because if you start threatened, I think this is whether are terrified to told the gabbard, you start threatened to expose things to the public, know what its government is doing. You're going to be exposing crimes because they are committing crimes.

I know they are for a fact. I know that you know IT too. So that's like, what a kind of a scary mission is that not IT.

IT is one that caused you to count cost. But the notion that you dish .

I love IT to the reality .

and I think is that I would encourage everyone to think this way. There is no place in amErica where you're going to be protected from the walls closing in on you and your family. And um the only extent to which that may not be true yet as the which you know Kevin bacon degrees of separation, you don't have someone that immediately improve improve the FBI rating their house or being the the victim of law fair.

I mean I know a two people very, very closely who have been in jail and four people that have multi million dollar lawsuit, and so they're common. And the only way to stop that from happening for people that are in this community trying to rebuild from a storm or run their coffee shop, the only way to keep that from happening is for those of us in the political arena to stand tall and and and unabashedly um and to to lean forward no matter the costs. And that's the moment that we live in.

And so it's not meant to be provocative IT just meant to know that if you are uh not loud and proud that's the wrong way to think about IT. But if IT is um uh aggressive in public and articulate in how you go about IT IT will make IT so that more and more people can come along beside you and make IT so that the present has enough people that are willing to take on the system. And I believe that he has a growing number of people that are like that and IT will make IT very difficult for them to move against individual actors.

And you know the nice thing about being out of office as you get to read kind of a wide and understand what happened, you know and have new perspective. And i'm just blown away by the number of people that they went after individually like like wounded individuals. And we never heard about I didn't hear about him until after the administration adam avenger, uh, mark moye, these individuals that blew the whistle on corruption and their agencies conspired with their political appointment to make them go away. And I don't think it'll be able to get away with that this time around. And in some cases.

really hurt them.

They wasted to three, four years. You know they're dealing with suffer their families, life happens and you're dealing with the intelligent cie multiple working behind the scenes together, never giving you due process. And and and and I think that is we know their playbook and we we we know not only what to look for but how to be prepared to um ensure that that cannot happen again. I've noticed in .

the north of imaging, huge percent people who criticize the intelligencies wind up with Kitty point on their computers. One of the reasons I don't use the computer um I know that gets because proportions .

in computer, first of all, you can't respond anything without of being foiled, right? like. And so we have to have A A total different view about going into government.

But the intelligencies are not allowed. Well, almost them are not allow to Operate domestically.

period.

They were never allowed. They do IT, but they're definite not allowed to play in american politics to influence. Election now comes and are absolutely doing that. How do you stop that?

Well, I think you need to have people that are there who are fearless and obviously tulsa in R F K, not intel, but saying there are, we know there are certainly health aspect for national security, a map being A D O J. Uh, those are the types of people that you need to get under the hood of and to push as much as you possible. You've got a shut their funding off until they can prove to your satisfaction that things are. And then but we we're not even .

allowed to know what their funding is. We don't know what the C S budget is. Well, we don't even know black.

When you're within government, you can know those those and answers and .

individuals you know the size, the black, right? So um I have never been in government, but i've solely been around this a lot. They're huge.

Yeah yeah no. And so why do we have black budgets? It's a great question, tucker, and the dramatically more transparency needed. And I would say it's one of those areas where uh, not unlike the other classification um is there are there are there are things we need to know a lot more about uh, and I can't tell you what what's the optimal level of transparency on that front. But the extent to which you can have as a citizen and understanding of what the size of your I C community is.

that's kind of a problem. I just think you're ensuring .

corruption and the size of these these buildings like you go around and you realize all that alphabet has an enormous institutional presence that the country never even heard about.

has a real estate footprint that's beyond what you can imagine. I I believed to a child in with my brother in a house in George town in high school that was earned by C. I.

So there's just a lot. You go out to north Virginia hotel corner, you take chain bridge from dc and some of the Virginia, and like how many those office buildings are owned by the C. I.

Or some other intel agency, like a huge number. And so why can't we know that? I don't understand.

We need to know a lot more, and we need demand more that we know more. But like how how is congress and yeah, they can go into A F and they can be given a brief. The bates are supposed to happen on the house and senate floor and you can you you're providing no ability to be able to share with your voters in us as voters. The whether do you ever vote for this? Did we ever vote for this industrial complex, this intel community, the extent to which is sproul all over the country, like who who got ta say in .

that he .

doesn't seem like the intel .

itunes over communities in congress whose job IT is to oversee, restrain, keep the until agencies within constitutional bounds. I in my whole life in D. C. For one thousand nine hundred eighty five, until now, i've never seen a single member of an intel committee who wasn't in the pocket of the intellect. Y S, that's my perception, have you?

I don't want I would say this David new years was kind of a um a unique character, his ability to provide leadership in that end. They came after him with everything they got and he survived. And I think he's a model not like.

say.

intel the forces and working with the intel running IT through .

foreign countries. I mean, it's never like some guy at langly you and so well.

why don't we have more than university? That would be the question that I would have what what fear factor is there um that and i'm not i'm not making an an accusation of anyone. I'm just saying that with with all congress and with all non government oriana's even are there there's this point where you're like if I don't if I go after these individuals, this issue said or this this this area corruption or this policy said.

And i've sought right after maroo, ga was raided, and we came out really quickly in syd, you know, the FBI should be radically reformed. I think I thought I should be in exploded to a thousand pieces, right? Yeah, there. Why why do we have such fear that that is such a provocative position?

Because you don't own the government.

right? And so to say that what we ve gonna after, and I think it's a systemic issue that we've got to tackle with everything we've got.

I couldn't agree more and you don't have to respond. But I would just say there are members of the you know intel committees um providing overside the intellect es. They shouldn't able to serve if they have spouses to work in the intel community. Sorry, that's like such an obvious conflict. That is pretty ridiculous that that could exist and that does so uh what tell us on a how much happier note sorry for the dark digression um what exactly are you want and fake gna do do you think with the doge enterprise?

Well, I think they're bring an exhilarating rush to the system of creativity, a outside the box thinking, uh, a comfortable ly with risk and leverage and where they are from.

both those guys are comfortable .

for amazing reason. I love IT as I mean you, in some respects, this does feel like an intractable problem that were up. Yes, yes. And I know I don't think he is, but I think he feels that way. And we're bringing people that you know are trying to get to mars so i'm pressure they can handle, you know the ability for us to bouncer our our, our blocks and run a government that that much more efficient.

Uh so I think that the things that i've heard them say um are things like really going after or from a deregulatory perspective, all of the recent court cases that have said um and chopped at the the feet of of this administrative state, you know you don't have the ability to just come up with new major questions. You rank agency ranking file agency, you ve got to have actual specific language from congress. Um you don't have the ability to get the difference for every position that you've taken as just because you're a federal agency.

These have been big uh x cuts at this at at the administrator branches. And so I think what they want to do is to use those as the basis for a massive deregulatory agenda you know came on uh I also think they want to uh look for as much that you can do to start cutting costs without congress or with congress, but to be really aggressive in some of the areas that i've mentioned. An impowering would be no a huge part of the ability just not spend the money um and so um and then of course you know being is radical or aggressive as you can um in eliminating and reducing um employees um uh full time employees, h individuals and going after contracts that may not make make sense. So I I think that that's where they are headed. And I think it'll be an enormous um boom to the country can .

you do IT from? So another one of them is going to become a federal employee himself. That's my correct me. They're not also say that. So how do you do that from outside?

Well, I think that you you they will be working with the agencies that do this. I think they'll be working with O M B, whoever in that role. It'll be working with treasury, who's ever in that role, and they will be rolling the theory of the case.

I mean, I think ultimately, that's what's most needed. Tucker is a specific theory of the case about what can be done. That's right. And then you give IT to the people in and hopefully that's been a two way conversation, but you give IT to the people that uh are on the present executive team and his administration and they run with IT. And then you get doge out there providing a political support for what must be done.

I'm take a crossing for help. No, as you know, the F, D, A requires us to warn you. Well, street ed warning, quote warning, this product contains nickey.

Nickey is an addictive chemical and quote were required to tell you that by the federal government. But we don't shy away from that. It's addictive and there's an upside to IT.

Yes, nick is an addictive chemical that is true there. A lot of things in life, you forget your car keys, your wallet. One thing you're never going to forget is out, because nicot is an addictive chemical.

You may forget to put your shoes on in the morning. You may forget to kiss your wife on the way out. You may come home and not remember your own dog's name, but one thing you're not going to forget is your out.

why? Because you're addicted to IT. Because your body will tell you, hey, Better bring your help with you and you will.

I do. I never anywhere without my help. It's by the side of my bed when I go to sleep. It's there when I wake up in the morning, is in the front power of my penis. I head out into the world.

Help is always with on the desk as I do interviews everywhere I am out is because it's an addictive chemical that's exactly right. And we're not afraid that we're not ashamed of IT. It's addictive in the same way that air, water and sex are dit.

They're so great you want to do them every day. Thankfully, it's easy to help out with you. Times just got our website, al poch dot com, and never be without IT neck. Yes, is addictive.

That's why we like IT.

And I guess I mean, even just to publicize the idea that I mean, the U. S. Government, this point is it's like a bankrupt stage for cancers like so overwhelmingly bad that you don't see a way out. Of least that's how I feel when I assess IT from the outside.

Like how would you even fix something like we haven't had spending reductions in like twenty years, right? Like but we're bankrupt t but were bankrupt and there's just this notion that nothing can be done about that. We still pass hundred million dot ukraine checks is even if you thought I was a good idea, but you can afford IT like you never have the affordability conversation at all.

And that is that true? It's totally true. I literally and ever talks about affordability and reign.

Heads of state show up mand money from us and nobody ever says you i'd like your country. I don't know whatever right? Think you ve got a good point, love to help you. But we're just out a dot like nobody even should gest that or there's think that like what is that?

They just assume the gravy trains gonna keep on going. I do what to the most with the military, right? But like, what's that like? Well, you've got some road miles on you.

You've you've done some stuff.

Well, you know, I I want to understand these things. I want to understand these systems in these institutions why people say that what they do and there's just there's no understanding what so it's like that no fiscal conscience at all with regard to the individuals is like note, we've got a performing a particular function in the world.

I read that somewhere in my educational system, I now believe IT doesn't matter whether that was never voted on. IT doesn't matter if that kind of an athena to wear our founding fathers would have envisioned. And so we are going to maintain our presence everywhere in the country.

I, the military, get to define my requirements about what's necessary to win that military objective. You civilian don't get to ever question my requirements. Those requirements now automatically cost x amount of money. And we wonder why we can ever have any cuts of defense. And we wonder why the defense spending becomes the patti an guard for the .

nondefense spending, right? Okay, I know what you drag out, but we, you flesh IT that all, I think you are the keys .

for what we have been unwilling to cut any not defense spending. The bureaucracy, which is the, quote, discretionary spending members, have a vote on every single year. They don't have a vote on entitlements that those are on autopilot. They have a vote on the bureaucracy. So everything they hate about government their members are voting on.

We haven't been able to have cuts to nine defense, not because republicans are unwilling, although many of them are unwilling as well, but because there has been a view that those two things have to be constantly considered together and the democrats insist in republican hawks insist that defense has to be growing at x percent uh, to deal with the threats in the world. And that requires youtube then bring additional non defense spending to be able to be for that political coalition. And ultimately, if you get your average republican member, they ultimately care a lot more about the defense stuff than they do about the bureaucracy. Can you say that again? Ultimately you have your average republican member cares more about the military industrial complex than they do about the walk and weapons ze bureaucracy that .

is impressing to care more about flexing their power abroad than about fixing their own country. I think I know that they're zero interest and anything that happened, not zero, but they've very limited interest in what's happening in the united states in the you know hundred thousand people dying of drug at ties every year and so ad my the invasion of more than ten million foreigners into our country without permission that's so bad ah yeah to the body. But what they really care about is toppling some government they don't like grow moving missiles to this military base or whatever.

And why is that? Well, I think this goes to the unhealthiness of the republican coalition for like fifty years, but particularly in since one hundred and eighty nine.

Tell me what that means.

So kind of national international review coalition, your fusionist republican coalition was anticommunist st. yes. IT was social conservatives, traditional conservation and IT was kind of fiscal libertarians, right? That was your coalition.

absolutely. In IT worked until an a certain level when we had soviet union. But when we don't have the soviet union, IT IT kind of takes on a life of its own. And now you have to keep us everywhere in the world to be able to justify all of the institutional build up and the the the complex that has been built up, all of these these you know a defense industrial companies and things like that and and pep can actually talks about this in his book where he says, look, this was a specific strategy hash out of the department of defense um by some of the neocons at the time to be able to continue to justify the largest from the defense point that we continue to be a tie down to that.

I also think you know is is so that's a big part of, I think, why your average republican that that grows up thinking like, okay gonna proof fence, i'm gonna uh, free market economics and i'm going to be a social concern at best, right? That's like that's what you grow up to be Better and you don't actually then think through, okay, what does that mean? Does that mean I have to then before every war that's been hatch, does that right do I not to be for, uh making, uh uh A A A defense that we can actually afford? Does that we mean that I think that from an economic standpoint, that were not actually citizens before where consumers there's just a lot of unhealth in all of those. yes.

And it's not a natural coalition. I mean, famously, you see this in the democratic party where you've got, you know, hispanic immigrants alongside transgender activists, and they clearly have nothing in common. Everyone says that, but fewer say the obvious on the republican side, which is that social conservatives aren't natural prewar people.

Most of the Christians, for one thing. So why would they be in favor of killing innocents like they're not actually, they, their beliefs in a religion that specifically prohibits that specifically and repeatedly. So I don't know how they pung together for so long. I C I find reg murders. Um so that's my view but I don't think i'm alone in that.

What concerns naturally .

defense talks.

That's what what happened in that well.

how do Christian conservative wind up? And I want to want to get to control. I want to hurt you, but because I want you to get this job.

Yeah, I just stop there. Yes, agree with too specific, but there all kinds of acts of violence against Christians around the world that it's almost always against Christians. I have noticed that Christian leaders, including the speaker, the house like, defend on Christian grounds. And I just don't think, obviously I find that evil. But even if I was in favor, but I would recognize that that's not something that can last for long because he does not make any sense, right?

Well, I do believe this is why we, we, we need to be less doctor nair on the right gosh, into actually think, you know, read those books .

you are mentioning earlier.

read and to be thinking through and ask the questions and trying to learn more and realized, like you know, a history book may have been written at a time to just to to with a particular political benefit and meaning to IT. So maybe we don't take everything, you know, I don't know, maybe some skills we learned in school and just common sense, intuition. This this is a right, something that I think is something seems off. It's off. And that's that's a god given skill that we have.

We were born with IT. I think that was given back up. But even if you don't believe in god, we are born with IT and you think .

we can use that in some of the attacks on R, F, K. They say, well, this hasn't been proven. There are gaps in our understanding, our scientific understanding. It's like their bureaucratic way of saying, yeah, your intuitions right. We just haven't proved IT to be able to will they train you not .

to use your intuition? It's like, why wait a second? I remember being in high school reading an abNormal psychology textbook that I bought at the school bookstore that had an an entry and autism that was like two paragraphs long as this etern disorder, his origins, we are uncertain of whose prime etres were unclear.

But I was and remember thinking, that sounds awful. And we know thirty five years later, it's like a central feature of life in america, like what the hell and you're trained. And by the way, I don't know what has caused a massive Spike and autism, but there has been one, right? And so IT takes a lot of training to get people to ignore that. And I do think the training is all designed to get you to ignore what .

you would is obvious. I I think IT is, I think that that the systems do IT people get in these, and they, that's where they going to get to the pair. D, I like, I am not going to do anything that would hurt national al security.

I, I, I came to dc and not to do anything, nor, and I think that's how we lose people when they go into the gifts. Just go back to our earlier conversation and you got to have courage to say, look, what happens if what happens if you're time in office. You missed a big issue like mah is a new issue to me.

I I admit IT, i'm trying to i'm trying to read and i'm trying to read the means book. I read, I listen to your podcast. You know it's a new issue, but like if I don't get my head up around IT future generations, we have to indite me for me being irresponsible on an existential sue facing our country.

So I don't think most people think like that. But in general, I think our republicans alike is unhealthy and has been for a long time, because we have and if we are the, the, the, the country will be too secular to imperial tic in global and to economic. And I come out of the free market economist lane, right? That's where I got my start.

But we're not consumers like the notion that the end of all economic good is consumption. And so consumers get to veto on everything. It's not actually what a citizen in a country in a nation are. And so in in each of those, i'm sorry you .

I feel like you're saying some really important that I just want to make sure that it's .

fully explained. What do you mean by that? Two economic to economic. You're not a socia, but I don't believe that just because um facebook is a corporation, that means that they get to not have to answer questions about how big they are. What they use, what the impact is on our country.

whether they recon .

my his brain, amazon giving me you same day service on a book or, you know, a product is awesome. I love IT. But that doesn't mean that everything that amazon does is something that we shouldn't be thinking through and that are our our Normal disposition of free market economics may make us bad at assessing companies once they get too big.

What does he like there? As you said a second ago, um we need to be less doctrine and I something group around as a conservative around conservatives there were these pillars you know hawkish on defense, free market um into a much less extent socially conservative which no one of dc actually took seriously at all and the total contempt for people like you extremely um group in D C. I did not grab you .

uh thankfully the sun of electrician in the school teacher yes .

so this exactly the kind of person everyone in dc despite like some Christian nutrition an please shot up that was their view of sorry, i'm that but it's a fact that was so but but on the free market stuff, if you asked any questions at all, I was like, shut of socialist and you should don't want to be a socialist because that hasn't worked. And IT was embarrassing. But they kind of maintain control of people on behalf of some of the worst interest in the world by invoking that that you are social or you are socialist.

Did you know talking about, yeah, I mean, they do in the foreign policy that you're useful IT for russia, or you wait .

to how you are .

useful IT in that. So you ve yes, I in every one .

of these things.

when they don't want to have the conversation, they shut IT down with slr course.

And but on the economic questions, I think i've been almost hesitant to draw obvious conclusions because I don't believe in government controlling the economy to a greater extent that he does. And just not good at IT. And I just IT about corruption.

So making that but IT doesn't mean that we have to like be in favor of user, right? Like why is IT good to charge twenty percent interest on a credit card? Do I have to not along with that just because .

i'm a conservative and that's where if the coalition was working, you'd have a lot more interesting conversations. Yeah, you'd have your krystian conservative being upset with that, having debates with market coalition to say, like where is a place that we can land um in in ways that previously the versac wasn't because in this to say OK it's that's something that would come out of the mouth of of of our of our more that I think and you're going to sit and trade right like yeah trades like the one big domino that president I think finally has now topped with this election.

But there will be a sizable number of republicans that are very grudging going on or opposed to what he wants to do with what I think is a no brain or policy with regard to universal terreros and higher terrace for china. And I want the money to be able to bounce the books, but I also want this country to be a manufacturing, producing hub. And what I found, tucker, is even I can win arguments with those who are, who are free traders because they, they themselves have seated the ground of independence. You know, if you, if you are, if you are comfortable with other countries making your stuff mayor may not be important from a national securities important just period because we don't want to have to wait for six months to have a you know, if you want independence, you've got to make IT here. If you don't want to have to rely on china and have h SHE shut down his whole economy because he's dealing with is the answer is independence in how do you get to making things more here and just I also zoom out.

and if my parents were paying my rent, i'm still a child. Doesn't make a whole day.

right, right? And like there is there is a bounce in every community. We're not all going to be carpenters or plumbers or electricians, right? Like you're not going to be independent as a personal a community across the board.

But you would kind of hate IT if we didn't have any carpenters in your community, right? You would hate IT if we didn't have any plumbers in your community. And we've gone to the point as a country where we don't make this stuff anymore, and that's a real problem. And I think it's just kind of an intuition way of getting at something that has been suppressed for decades.

what has been suppressed. And there are specific institutions that have made IT their mission to suppress IT. One is the wall street erne, the other is the american enterprise institute, which, for my whole life, fifty five years, have been sort of leading standards in the right information. You know, they, I want to, journalist people really care on the right what they have to say and I can't wait for both thing to collapse and we'll celebrate um I really will celebrate when they go wonder I mean that but like why haven't people who want to put the country first, its actual interest first, build their own institutionals to rival the wall street y journal?

L N A E. I I don't get this has been my life's work for the last four years and hopefully you know, over the next fifty is if I love, how do you we are you're .

being in the maha thing .

now so possible IT. Um you look I I think this is what is needed as new institution, is why we create the center for renewing america. Because we want to make sure there was a home to give elites, both in dc and in the grass roots. The this is actually how you do what's necessary to be done.

So like, if present, trump gives a speech in the first m term, are you from your show? Or articulating something that must be done? We felt there needed to be an institution, actually take that and turn IT into the regulations, the translating into actually public policy, and that he has to be new.

Some expert options exist. Me, Kevin is doing a great job at heritage, but that's the exception, rather the rule. My, my, my view is that you've got to create new institutions that are our scrap are hungry.

Uh, IT doesn't take them two weeks to write a paper and take them one data, right? A paper you get IT out there. And if that paper is not red, you go and you like get IT in front of people so they understand IT.

And then when they have read IT and you fear, why haven't you act? You know, like you you have to work that hard and that's going to come from from not sitting around a board table at a proceded organization. That's going to come from people who are hard and battle tested and really awesome in their mind as to what they, what they thinking, what they know.

I mean, since we've moved toward an economy where, like, you currently do anything without a billion, or on your side, i've noticed bluckburn know good people that have you on mosque. He's a billionaire, which is great, but we're big picture. It's super bad to need a billionaire to do anything meaningful. And you wonder our republican donors coming around to the idea that, you know, amErica needs to be saved and and that what we've been doing is in working. Do you think .

they see this? There's A A lot of awesome conserved donors there. Are you in many of them are are coming to our banner over time. I think the issue is, you know, do they know about your orange zing, the impact and there's a lot of griffon, and that's the problem is like you get kind of .

show yourself there's so much because .

you have to acknowledge a lot of git out here the same time, do everything you can, just get up in the morning and do your job and timeline. Then people come where I feel like the issue is, is that with everyone, you're educating them in the same journey that I think you have.

I think you've talked about IT, and I know I have of this trying is like what's what has been off about conservatism for a while? And then I think the reason why we have lost and been on the egypt ney and and sometimes there are there are there are focus that still have viewpoints on that. Like when we took ukraine, we were the first organza out to oppose ukraine funding.

That was risky, right? Because he couldn't had just invaded and gone over. And we don't we didn't want that, but we knew where this was headed. And that was a long time for us to educate all things.

And just to ask, now i'm being like, mean and bitter, but why would anybody who thought that was a good idea of power ever again? Which should that that be a limas test?

I I do believe ukraine, I should be a limit test for the national .

security team for sure. But uncertainly internals.

like getting a read on where someone is and then you can have whatever conversation is what you want to have with them.

But that was obvious to me as stupid cable news host, not a national security or expert. Um but i've been around to a lot. I was trying to applying on sense like that was so obvious in february of twenty two, this was going to hurt the united states in very serious ways.

And IT has and IT has. And so over time, that coalition, that conversation were having about what server needs, what is conservatives need to be to save the country, not protecting, you know, you're little nitch within that, but in the country, you were given resources to do nothing else but to save the country. And that's what your donors are giving a that conversation on.

The idea is why, when you come to one of our events with our donors, I hand out books like, I, I, I want, I, I don't want you just necessary read our policy paper and do anyways, I want you reading worker chAmbers. I want you reading, uh, rusty reno, this return of the strong guys, right? I I want you reading this stuff. We're giving up papa and books like I want the whole conservation movement to be going deep in these books so that you're both enlighten, encourage and you come out fighting force, whether you are the practitioner here in dc, the funder on the outside and that is a and that's a long term project, honestly, but I think it's one that's absolutely vital.

Last question. In retrospect, one of things the most guilty about was being used by mobile Christal in particular. But just as a Young man, I was used by the forces, the control washington, to attack on both rust pro and especially peppy.

Can but whatever the human being say, flaws, obviously. But big picture. They were kind write about a lot of stuff, correct? yeah. Were absolutely there.

yeah. And this has been, this has been an undercurrent. That has been popped up at times, but largely suppressed by the republican establishment and their intellectual plutoria guard, national review and others. And papin was a major A A opportunity for IT to punch through, and then Donald a really punched through.

And now it's insane, ant, and it's about us going back and trying to think through, like, what does what are some of these things? What does what these viewpoints mean? net? Like, where were they right? Were wrong? What does IT look like in health? What does that look like with A I what does that look like in all of these different areas? But I think is primarily remember, and that we're not where individuals with souls were a nation where we're not just an economy.

Uh, these are the kinds of kind of first building blocks. If you get in place then you can have a much more inherent, convincing and satisfying public policy life. But ultimately, I know I think it's like winter cr chAmbers married to papp kan and married to to uh someone like a Donald trump. I think that that movement over time is something that um trying to find how how to give IT flourish in life and institutions and and will ultimately will be successful and saving the country. Man.

if you want up to this ministration, I will sleep Better. I mean, thank you. rush. Appreciate you.

Thanks for you.

Thanks for show. If you go to go to talk across in the com to see everything that we have made, the complete library, tr croson .

dca.