Israel’s Sinister Agenda to Use the U.S. Military to Defy Trump’s Plan for Peace With Clayton Morris

So, we're at it, the city of a new neighborhood in Amheld. Her looks is for the most beautiful city of the world. That means, it's the most beautiful city of Elton. One between the Super Bowl half-time show and Epstein and the Winter Olympics, most Americans probably weren't aware that we are on the verge of a massive regional war.

In the Middle East, if not a third world war, we are.

The largest movement of American military hardware is since 2003, the Iraq invasion, is now in or steaming toward the Persian Gulf off Iran, preparatory to what could be the aforementioned war. Now, most people, once again, probably didn't know this, those who did know it weren't for it,

“recent polls on this question, are you for a war with Iran?”

It's about one in five Americans support it. The rest are probably asking war with Iran, why we have a war with Iran, they said no idea. The president did address it last night in a state of the Union and at a press conference,

and he said in public what he basically says in private,

Trump being one of those rare public figures who's pretty much the same behind closed doors as he is on stage, says pretty much the same stuff, a little funnier in private, but basically he's not a different guy, he's the same guy, and he's been saying the same thing about Iran for a long time, really two things. One, Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. The cannot of a nuclear weapon, he says it again and again, he really means it.

That's not a talking point, it's a completely sincere.

“And two, I would prefer a negotiated settlement, a prefer peace rather than war, and that's obviously true.”

So to bottom line, where we are right now at the end of February 2026 on this looming Iran war, seems likely, have all his aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, planes ready, missiles ready, but it's not certain because the president hasn't decided to do it. And you may not get that impression either from watching the news. There is this sense that it's inevitable, and that's kind of a sign-up, actually,

designed to make you think there's nothing you can do about it. No, Trump has not decided to do this. Again, seems likely, all the momentum is in that direction, but the president's, the sole decider on this question, he's the commander-in-chief, and he's showing no obvious signs of enthusiasm. And why would he? There are a lot of reasons not to do this. The first being, the one just mentioned, which is most Americans don't want it.

“And though it's not a direct democracy, it's a form of democracy, and you probably shouldn't”

commit hit-street-changing acts without the support of your people, and Trump feels that way. This is someone who pays very close attention to say TV ratings. Why is that not because he worked in TV, but because he thinks there are pretty good measure of what people are interested, and he cares about what people think. And he's willing to listen to almost anybody. So that's a good reason not to do it. The public's not behind you. Maybe you've got great

reasons to do it, that they don't know about yet, but we haven't heard those, and the president hasn't really explained them other than to say, Iran is bad. Yes, that's been the official

U.S. position since 1979. Iran can have nukes. That's always been the president's position.

And we would like some kind of settlement. The reason he's not eager to start this war is because he in general is an eager to start wars hasn't been anyway, but because this would be a particularly tough war. This is the largest build-up since the Iraq war, but Iran is not a rock. It's much, much, much bigger and much more technologically advanced. Population of Iran's about 92 million. In 2003, almost exactly 23 years ago, when we rolled into Baghdad, the population

of Iraq was 25 million. So Iran is more than three times bigger. The landmass of Iran is multiple six times bigger. It's huge. It's a huge, pretty advanced country compared to Iraq. So that's a problem right there. This is a serious thing to start a war with a real country. Are we in a position to do that? Well, there's some debate about that. The U.S. military performs it a remarkable way under certain circumstances. But is the U.S. military right now

ready for a prolonged conflict with a big country? Hmm. No, it turns out. And these are facts taken from open source material. It's been published. They're on the internet. You can look it up. None of this is classified. This is all out there. But current estimates suggest that the United States is so low on some munitions, partly because we've used them in the defensive Israel already in the last 12 months. But whatever the cause, the United States is so low

our military would not be ready for like 10 years to fight a real war against a pure or

near-peer adversary. So out the window would go any hope of defending Taiwan, whether or not this good idea is kind of up to you to decide. But that would not even be on the table because we wouldn't be able to. We would be much weakened by this because we don't have the stockpiles and we don't have the necessary industrial capacity to replace them quickly. So we are not in a position to have a lengthy engagement and everyone at the Pentagon who's

gaming us out understands that. And again, this has been reported publicly, though not necessarily in the New York Times or the Washington Post, at least not in the front page. But it's widely

known. So it'd be a tough war. We're not in a great place to fight it right now. And the potential

downsides are absolutely real. Lots of things could happen. There are tens of thousands of Americans in the region, of course, in uniform and out. They could be hurt or killed. There's Israel or ally, which is probably a little more vulnerable than we pretend it is to conventional attacks from ballistic missiles. Do the math and how many missiles Iran has believed to have versus how many anti ballistic missiles is real has or when we have to defend

“Israel. They could be in trouble. And then there's a question of what happens to Iran?”

Like does it fall apart? Does it disintegrate as a country? To be clear, as if tonight, there is no Israeli plan for what comes a day after we depose the Ayatola. Knock out the leadership of the country. What happens then? You're going to put in the former King's son or something? No one believes that's real. Will the country hang together with Polavi on the throne? Come on.

No one is thinking this through because the people pushing this clearly don't care what happens after. The point is to take out Iran as a coherent country, not to protect Israel, but in order to sweep Iran aside as a regional rival. Once Iran has gone, there's no question as to who controls the Middle East. Of course, it would be the only nuclear

armed power in the Middle East. Israel. Period. That's the reason. The problem is, if the

country were to disintegrate, the downstream effects would be profound for everybody else. You would likely have refugee crises. Where would they go? Well, Europe. They have enough refugees. They might go right across the water to Qatar or UAE. That could be a huge, huge problem. So why would they push for this?

“Well, you have to think that the people pushing through this are not stupid. They thought through the consequences.”

Let's say the United States attacks Iran. Maybe Iran just says, you know, you're absolutely right. We're evil. We're rolling over everybody in charge. It's going to retire, commit ritual suicide. We're going to turn it over to some Western Democrat who brings in pro-choice politics and gay marriage. We're cool. We're going to join in with that point. That's great. But what if Iran decides better to die in your feet than on your knees and just unleashes its

conventional arsenal against American assets in the region, against Israel, and critically, against energy infrastructure in the Gulf? What would happen then? Well, you would see a global depression if they did that. If they were successful in doing that, if the extraction facilities and refineries and petrochemical plants in the Gulf were disabled,

“how expensive would oil be per barrel? How much would gasoline cost? What would steel go for?”

What would happen to liquified natural gas? Which goes to both Europe and China? What happened to Europe? If you just disrupted the flow of LNG from the Gulf to Europe? What would happen if you close the Straits were a moose? The choke point at the end of the Persian Gulf? I mean, wouldn't destroy the world forever, probably, but it would tank the economy in the mean time for sure. And who would suffer most? Well, let's see, the Gulf states, Europe, and the United States.

Kind of weird that anybody, especially in ally, would push for a conflict that's almost guaranteed to hurt. It's so called allies. Why would you do that? You can tell me you love me. But if you're encouraging me to commit suicide, you're probably lying. It's possible that we should

Is it possible that there is some hostility toward the United States, the Gulf states, and Europe,

“from the people pushing this war? Oh, there's a lot of hostility.”

And part of it makes sense. The Gulf states, the six Arab oil producing states, called the GCC in the region, are along with Iran, one of the main impediments to Israel's regional hegemony. They are very rich. They produce something that the rest of the world needs. They're also very good at diplomacy, particularly Qatar. They settle a lot of disputes internationally. They posit themselves as the Switzerland of the Middle East and done a good job at it, actually.

And so they are a rival to Israel. You hear on Fox News, they're Hamas supporters. No, no,

that's not their sin. Their sin is existing as a powerful independent country in potential

rivalry with the regional hegemony. Israel. So, shifting them would be a very good thing

“from the Israeli perspective. But what about the United States? Israel's benefactor. It's closest”

to ally. Why would they want that? Well, maybe if you're gaming us out a little bit, you've decided we need a new superpower. Public opinion in this country has swung against us so hard this bipartisan consensus that we're its closest ally is disintegrating before our very eyes. And let's be honest with ourselves, this is not going to continue forever. We need another country to be aligned with. Now, how many big countries are there to choose from? It's got to be

physically large, big population nuclear armed. Not too many. The big ones would be China in India. But China, unfortunately, is a Han ethno state. So, you can't really turn its population against itself in order to increase your own power. It's not going to work. It's resistant to this, to manipulation. And that leaves India. And it was probably no coincidence that the Prime Minister of India Prime Minister Modi spoke to Kinesi today about the ancient ties between Israel and India.

Bottom line, yes, Israel is moving on for the United States. At some point, probably sooner rather than later to India. And so weakening the United States in a war with Iran is not all bad. In fact, it might be good. Because then there's no rivalry at all in your region. It's you, the only country with nuclear weapons. And everybody else. So you can kind of do whatever you want. You don't have to worry about hostile neighbors. You can expand the size of your territory,

for example. You can move your borders in all directions. Who's going to stop you? No one. So if you gave us out for a minute, the things that from an American perspective seem horrifying, like real downsides. Holy smokes, we could tank the US economy. We could wreck the energy sector, at least temporarily. Some of our key Arab allies could be disabled by this. Those all seem very bad from an American perspective. Are they so bad from his really perspective? No, they're not,

“actually. They may be the point long term. So where does this leave our President, President Trump?”

Well, it leaves him where he began, which is very resistant to start big new wars. He of course ran for President, both times all three times on the promise that he wouldn't do that. He very famously in the 2016 campaign attacked Jeb Bush because of his brother's invasion of Iraq. That was idiotic he said. And of course he was right. And 23 years later, we know exactly how right he was. That war, which lasted 20 years, waged on behalf of our ally Israel, didn't help the United States.

It helped to impoverish the United States and sink this country deeper into debt to weaken the dollar and destroy a generation of young men, mostly from the flyover states, the most decent in patriotic among us destroyed. So from an American perspective, Iraq was a true disaster and Trump

was the first big political candidate to say that out loud. He knows this, he always has.

So why would he even be considering a war with Iran? Well, one way to think about it is the United States may not have a choice about whether or not this war starts because of course the government of Benjamin Netanyahu could always act unilaterally, preemptively against Iran and just do it. Just strike Iran. What would happen then? Well, most likely the Iranians would strike Israel and then potentially strike American assets in the Gulf and then potentially strike energy facilities

US government, while not anxious to go to war with Iran, is trying to find a way to contain the behavior of its closest ally Israel. Rather than sit back and wait for BB to do something that we have to clean up that we're implicated in and then sucked into, it's possible that the US government is attempting to steer this in a less destructive direction. It's possible. None of this of course is filtered down to people paying attention because the few who are paying attention

to this because all the noise has been about Iran's nuclear weapons. They're on the verge of building

“a nuclear weapon any day now. Now, if you're semi-a-way, you may remember that it was only about”

eight months ago back in June of last year during the short but hot 12-day war against Iran, that the United States took out nuclear processing facilities deep underground and then announced we have ended the Iranian nuclear threat. And then without you noticing, well, you were on summer vacation or going to your kids graduation or bringing them back to school or watching the Super Bowl half-time show with your jaw slack, well you were not tuned in. All of a sudden that

threat out of nowhere reemerged and there's Benjamin Netanyahu on television at the White House for a seventh time in a single year, making the case that we're right on the verge of a nuclear hall across to any day now, the Iranian government will have a nuclear weapon. And by the way,

“as noted, the President does not want Iran to have a nuclear weapon. That is one thing that”

takes very, very seriously. And he said that to the Iranians. And unfortunately, turns out, whatever side's Iran, the current Iranian government is very hard to deal with. There. So we're going to ask the head guys, 87 years old, there's almost no communication,

directly between the governments. The Supreme Leader in Iran has never had a single phone call

with the President of the United States. It's unclear exactly who's in charge. There are all kinds of factions and it's, it's a nightmare. So the only people who've really been out there speaking in public about Iran's nuclear program basically are Benjamin Netanyahu Prime Minister of Israel and his many accolades and paid shills in the United States. You may have seen this tape before, but in case you haven't as worth watching again, because it reminds us that Benjamin

Netanyahu has been saying exactly the same thing about Iran. There's actually not a nuclear

weapon any minute. Since at least 1996, 30 years. Here it is. Now they're willing to the second stage

and by next spring, at most, by next summer, at current enrichment rates, they will be finished, the medium enrichment and move on to the final stage. From there, it's only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enrichment uranium for the first bomb. You talked about a network of terror. Are there any other nations that you would recommend that the United States launch preemptive attacks upon at this point? No, the issue is not,

the issue is not, first of all, are there other nations that are developing nuclear weapons? Yes. Should we, should we launch any other preemptive attacks? First, let me say what they are.

And then let me make a suggestion how to proceed. Thank you. The answer is categorically yes.

The, the two nations that are vying competing with each other who will be the first to achieve nuclear weapons is Iraq and Iran. And Iran, by the way, is also outpacing Iraq in the developing of ballistic missile systems that they hope will reach the eastern sea board of the United States within 15 years. The most dangerous of these regimes is Iran that is wed a cruel despotism to a fanatic militancy. If this regime or its despotic neighbor Iraq were to acquire nuclear weapons,

this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country and not only for the Middle

“East, but for all of mankind. I believe that only the United States can lead this vital”

international effort to stop the nuclearization of terrorist states. But the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close. You can see why the government of Israel is such content for the United States, while they're totally happy to tank our economy, stretch our military to its limit, degrade us in public. Why? Because our leaders put up with this.

And everyone in there just nods along all 535. Oh, really, Iran's about to get a nuclear weapon. Why ran into a center? Other day it was like, Iran's about to get a nuclear weapon. I mean,

“they believe it. How could you have respect for people who believe something that dumb?”

Well, you couldn't, and they don't. And by the way, it's not just the claim that Iran is seconds away from a nuclear weapon that they're recycling here. Maybe the oldest lie in American foreign policy you heard in those clips too, which is we need to do this because it's a despotic regime that is oppressing its own people. Now, this line is older than you may know. And the reason it's so distressing, it's so cynical, is because it plays upon

Americans' best quality, which is decency. Americans hate despotism. They believe freedom is granted them and all people by God. And so a regime that oppresses its own people is inherently illegitimate.

Americans are born believing that, and God willing they always will believe that because it's true.

So if you're trying to sell an illegitimate war, wage for reasons that had nothing to do with human rights at all, you would use that line. Wouldn't you? Probably, well, American policy makers have used that line. And we pulled some. You want to hear some? This is, I'm going to get my glasses shoved dropped. Excuse me, we pulled this, and this actually made me laugh out loud. So this goes back, well, 61 years. Here's Lyndon Johnson, 1965, and a speech at Johns Hopkins,

explained that the war in Vietnam, which was just getting intense then, there's three or some tech from the height. He said this, "Tonight Americans and Asians are dying for a world where each people may choose its own path to change." So really we're doing this for the Vietnamese people. Okay, now. Then Bush, George W. Bush, son of George H. W. Bush said this, right before the rock war started, we're quoting, "We have no ambition in a rock except to remove a threat and restore

control of that country to its own people." Right. We did that for human rights reasons. We just wanted democracy in Iraq. Did that happen? The Christian population was annihilated. Hundreds of thousands of people died. And political control was turned over to the idols in Iran. Hmm, no. But he said it anyway. And so did Dick Cheney, by the way. My belief he said in the lead up to the Iraq war is that we will be greeted as liberators. The vast majority

of Iraqis would respond favorably to an effort to rid the country of Saddam's regime. Well, something that happened to be in Baghdad in December of 2003, the day we caught Saddam at

“decree. I can attest to what you already know, which is, that's what the insurrection started.”

But Barack Obama even, three years after getting elected president, having been thoroughly briefed and had a lie, in 2011 said this about the bombing of Libya and the murder of our sometime ally in CIA asset, Omar Kadafi, quote, "This is a plea for help from the Libyan people themselves. They're desperate for it." Regime-change in Libya said Barack Obama, would serve America's quote, "Broad or goal of a Libya that belongs not to a dictator,

but to its people." I mean, well, what could he do with a laugh? It's so absurd. It's such an obvious lie. It's like BB-Netanyahu saying, "There are minutes away!" As long as people believe this or are so polite, they pretend to believe it, politicians will keep telling the same lies. You have to make them pick a new lie.

“Now, what's interesting is that the administration, I think, to its credit,”

hasn't done a ton of this. There's been, you know, though, we feel bad for the

billion Iranians murdered in the streets of Tehran or somewhere who knows what the number is.

You can't believe any number connected to any conflict in any country ever, because everyone lies about them all the time. But some number of Iranians protesting the Iranian government apparently were killed by the government, and we feel bad about that, and we legitimately do feel bad about that. He's that a good reason to topple the existing power structure and just let the country devolve into whatever happens next, probably not.

And the administration hasn't really made that case or really any case other than they can't have nuclear weapons, so you can at least feel satisfied that they're not trying very hard to lie to you.

They're basically just saying, "Looks like we could have a war." Because everybody knows the only reason

This presidency is the last presidency, or they're going to have unequivocal bipartisan support.

“Period. You can't primary every Thomas Massey, and there's a whole army of them coming at”

some point, because everyone can see what's going on, and you could shut down X, and you can shut down the internet. You can be like great Britain and arrest people who protest Israel, but attitudes are not going to refer to what they were five years ago. Sorry, and they know this.

So this is their last chance. What's so amazing is that Israel, which at least is acting,

and what it perceives to be its own national interest, is joined by its Shills in the United States, of course. But really, it's only other ally in this is the American News Media, whose job it is to tell you the truth, and inform you is to what's happening, to tell you, hey, wake up, the world could be changing, and it's going to affect you and your family. That's their job. Instead, they've been lowing you to sleep with the same variety of transparent lies and propaganda.

“And so just for fun, we decided we would pick a cross section, and not just from a liberal media,”

a right-way media, but from all media, because it's not a left-right question. Chuck Schumer is

every bit as much in favor of an invasion of Iran, a regime-changed war in Iran,

as I don't know, pick a brain dead Republican Senator, which is almost all of them. They're all for it, and so we're all the Democrats. You don't see Alexandria Cazio Cortez making a real case again. She's like a pro-formic case, because she knows that all of her constituents hate it, but as she really working to stop us, of course not, because they're all for it, because they're paid to be for it. And so we're the media. So here's a quick cross section.

Now, it goes to that saying that the Wall Street Journal, owned by the Murdoch family, has been by far the most egregious, and the most stealthy, because starting new regime-change

wars in behalf of Israel is like the whole reason to have the Wall Street Journal now apparently.

But here's just a few headlines. The diminishing risk of an Iran attack, quote, two years ago, there was a strong possibility that the region would spiral out of control, not anymore. Really? Oh, really? What is the plan? The day after we depose or kill the 87-year-old Supreme Leader, or present Pazeskian? What's the plan? Do you have a plan? No, plan. But don't worry. It will not spiral out of control. The Wall Street Journal ensures you have that.

Here's another. A fractured Iran might not be so bad. Well, yeah, it could spiral out of control and break into different provinces, and you know, it could become Libya, or Syria, or Lebanon. That's not so bad. Because you know why, quote, "its borders are artificial." Oh, they're fake! And a breakup would frustrate the interests of China, Russia, and others. Okay, so our global rivals wouldn't like it therefore. It's good. And quote, "its borders are

artificial." As compared to whose borders? All borders are artificial. God didn't draw them. Sorry, my cuckabee. They're drawn by people. Artificial. What? No, it's a country. Has been for a while. And if you blow it up into constituent parts and incite a civil war, they're going to be downstream effects of that. Again, like refugee crises into Europe and the Gulf States, probably the United States, too.

Since it is the iron law of American foreign policy that once you start bombing people,

“you have to let all their angry kids into your country. And that's how, by the way, we got the”

Boston Marathon bombing and many other acts of terror. Thanks, Neocons. And then there's this. John Bolton still exists, writing for the Wall Street Journal. The Gaza ceasefire has diverted Western attention from the real threat. Tehran and its surrogates. You'd really have to be John Bolton to think that Tehran and its surrogates are even in the top hundred issues Americans are worried about at the moment. They're not. This is noble. It's

pulled all the time by Gallup and others. Tehran and its surrogates are admittedly an issue of concern to Israel and to its shills here. But they're not actually a problem for a condense country separated from the world by two great oceans. I'm not a problem. As long as you don't like start a war with Iran or something. So the new year is here, but that does not mean you've got to overhaul your whole life. Despite claims of the country, you don't have to take drastic measures.

Make a few changes here and there and you'll be a lot better off and you can start with the snacks in your pantry. Now, products from Standard American Chip Brands are, let's be honest, pretty repulsive filled with chemicals that make you feel heavy and bloated. They don't even

masa is the easiest way to eat clean without feeling like you're on a diet. The chips contain

“three ingredients. That's it, organic corn, sea salt, 100% grass fed beef towel and that is it.”

No seed oils to Mr. Chemicals, just food, actual food. And they're amazing and you feel great

after you don't feel way down. Particularly enjoyed the Kobanero flavor lately, but they're all great. You want to give them a try? Visit mosachips.com/tucker for 25% off your first order or you can link the link in the video description or you can scan the QR code to claim this out. So the new year is here, but that does not mean you've got to overhaul your whole life despite claims of the country. You don't have to take drastic measures. Make a few changes here and

there and you'll be a lot better off and you can start with the snacks in your pantry. Now products from standard American chip brands are let's be honest. Pretty repulsive filled with chemicals that make you feel heavy and bloated. They don't even taste that good. They're not good

“for you. We recommend an upgrade with masa chips, masa is the easiest way to eat clean without”

feeling like you're on a diet. The chips contain three ingredients. That's it, organic corn, sea salt, 100% grass fed beef towel and that is it. No seed oils, domestic chemicals, just food, actual food and they're amazing and you feel great after you don't feel weighed down. We particularly enjoyed the Kobanero flavor lately, but they're all great. You want to give me a try? Visit mosachips.com/tucker, use the code tucker for 25% off your first order or you can

click the link link in the video description or you can scan the QR code to claim this outstanding offer. If you don't feel like ordering online, you can buy a nationwide local sprout supermarket. Stop buying, pick up a couple of bags before somebody else does. Standing offer. But here is the greatest defender, maybe of all. And there'll be the New York Post, the scrappy New York tabloid

“famed for its rawlaking crime headlines, headless body and tupless bar. It's a hilarious newspaper.”

Always has been up until two years ago in Lachlan, Murdoch took full control of it. And now,

it's like commentary. It's like any other publication from a neocon Think Tank in Washington, it's just advocating for war and lying to you in order to get you to support it. So here's it a quick selection for the New York Post. Memo to President Trump, don't miss this historic moment to strike Iran and end its terrorism. This historic moment. Iran's rulers plainly fear U.S. strikes. Trump should prove them right. Mr. President, you're so strong and dangerous.

You have a chance to prove that. They fear you. Memo to self never accept flattery uncritically because it is deeply subversive. The tax is straightforward. Flattery is reptilian. Flattery is the true danger. Oh, President Trump, you're so strong. They're afraid of you.

Proof them right by killing them. And then if Trump doesn't strike Iran now, history will never

forgive him. If you don't have a war with Iran, history will never forgive you. It probably depends on who writes that history. But hundreds of millions of Americans will forgive you. It'll be grateful to you for pulling us back from the brink of something we don't need and don't want. And then last, of course, Douglas Murray, the eminent history and everyone respects Douglas Murray, he's got a British accent. He's not being paid to say this. Don't worry.

Trump has a chance to end. Communise rain of terror in Iran. His rain of terror because if there's one thing Douglas has concerned about, it's human rights in Iran. He's being there. And now to the New York Times. And this is interesting if you're a right-winger because the New York Times is, of course, like the most liberal publication in the world, it's NPR on paper, totally different from, say, Fox News, it's like their their their poles apart. If nothing

in common whatsoever, except on a few questions like immigration and war and the basis of our economy, which is finance in real estate, the banks, except on those issues, there's some overlap. Okay, there's there's a vigorous consensus. In other words, except on the issues that actually matter that drive history, that determine whether or not your children thrive in this country or not, on those issues, they're one and the same. And so here's a sexual, put this one up on this

screen because it's so amusing. Here's a Mr. Brett Stevens, three different pieces he's written on this question. And he's obviously a man with a great deal of credibility and authority on a regime change wars, having advocated for all of them, none of which has worked. The case for striking Iran,

The case for overthrowing Maduro, the Syria opportunity, we absolutely need to escalate in Iran

and then my personal favorite from 2023, 20 years later, quote, 20 years on, "I don't regret supporting the Iraq war." Okay, should you be admitting that? 20 years later, I am not ashamed

“to wear women's underwear. Well, actually you should be ashamed. You should be embarrassed.”

If you don't regret supporting the Iraq war, if that support occasioned no soul searching in you, then you, my friend, have a spiritual problem. All this make mistakes. All the support dumb things, as someone who supported the Iraq war, I can attest to that personally. So the asset test is not do you make mistakes? The asset test is do you admit that you did and do you apologize? But if you're refuse to do either one of those things, instead 20 years later, it's still bragging about the greatest disaster

in modern American history, as if it's a badge of honor, hard to know if we have anything

in common as people, because that's contemptible and scary. It's never occurred to you the Iraq

war was a mistake, really? And what basis was it as success? So if that's really your view, maybe we shouldn't trust you when you tell us that we have a moral obligation to attack Iran. Just throw on that out there. So that's where the print media are, but let's be honest, it's not really the print media who are driving this because this is a Republican administration and is everyone knows Republicans have one main news source and that's Fox News. I have some

familiarity with the product and I can say that even as Fox News is reach and power and influence have diminished greatly mostly due to technological changes, people go on the internet, they don't pay for cable. But as it has diminished, it has not broken the stranglehold that Fox has over Republicans in Washington. They watch Fox, they want to go on Fox and so Fox has really driven this war and if it occurs, you can thank Fox more than any other media organization, more than any

“other lobbyist, more honestly than any government, more than the government of Israel. Fox News”

has pushed for this war. It's owners, personally have pushed for it personally and of course, it's employees on the channel have pushed for it with such aggression and unanimity that as if tonight there's not a single on air Fox personality who is going to question going toward Iran. There are some who may have reservations, there was one on a weekend show who very bravely spoke up and said, "Is this a good idea?" That was the last time. This topic was discussed on that weekend show

because the order has gone down to Fox employees, we are in favor of this war and that is very obvious if you watch it. Now one of the main cheerleaders for an invasion of Iraq and every other invasion and every other instance of shedding of human blood, it's just a killing in general, would of course be Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Now if you don't watch Fox, you may have no idea what he actually says when he goes on Fox, which is all the time. So we want

to play you a short montage of Lindsey Graham and watches you watch this his eyes and you can see that he is maybe for the first time that day feeling elevated and light and happy but also tantalized. You can almost watch his mouth, fill with saliva. Some people fill this way in strip bars, others in bakeries. Lindsey Graham is excited by killing and if you think that's cruel, watch this. Change is coming to Iran, it'll be the biggest change in the history of the Middle East to get

rid of this Nazi regime hit Iran. They have all fills out in the open. They have the revolutionary

guard headquarters you can see from space. Blow it off the map. There's an opportunity to hit the Iran nuclear program in a fashion. I haven't seen in decades and I think it would be in the world's interest for us to decimate the Iranian nuclear threat while we can. Be all in President Trump in helping Israel eliminate the nuclear threat. If we need to provide bombs to Israel provide bombs, if we need to fly planes with Israel do join operations. So pray for our troops

in harm's way. They're risk associated with any operation. They join the military to keep their country safe and to make the world a better place and taking on the eye to hold those both. If I were you, Mr. President, I would kill the leadership that are killing the people.

“Can do the eye to hold us? You need to understand. If you keep killing your people,”

who are demanding a better life, Donald J. Trump has got to kill you.

This guy's wrong on the evidence. This guy's clearly a buffoon was some kind of psychosexual problems that were not qualified to diagnose, but that are totally evident.

“But you should also keep in mind as you watch Lindsey Graham. These taken very seriously by”

colleagues in the Senate, not just through Republicans, but also the Democrats, and he's taken very seriously by Republicans in Washington more broadly. Of course he is. He's taken very seriously. This has an effect. And that effect could get us into, you know, certainly the worst war in 23 years. So the idea is to flood the zone, the information zone, to make sure that no Republican in Washington, here's anything but that. And the proponents of this war are very

intent on that. They mean no effort to convince you. It's a good idea. They are staying up night and day convincing the decision makers. It's a good idea. And they're trying, by the way, to shout down and threaten and defame and slander and exclude anybody who has a country review.

Who might pipe up and say, wait a second, we sure this is a good idea. What would happen?

If the energy trade gets shut down in the person's goal, what would happen if Iran lobbed successfully lob some sort of armament into a U.S. aircraft carrier. Americans died. What would happen? What would happen if Israel felt threatened enough to use nuclear weapons against Iran, which is a possibility, despite what they tell you. That's a possibility. What would happen? Once these things get going, you don't know where they wind up. And anyone who says he

does know is lying, obviously. So anyone who raises those questions must be called the Nazi United Anti-Semite and you want to kill Jews. No. Don't want to kill anybody. The game is to make sure that the only noise in the room comes from Graham and people like Graham. Right? Until, of course, someone pushes play and it's too late to stop it. And at that point,

we can all pretend we were never for this or they just did it wrong or whatever. We've seen this

movie so many times. You know, exactly what's going to happen if it goes south.

“And the truth is, it works because people are intimidated. Donald Trump is great credit,”

listens to everybody. Everybody. And by the way, in his speeches, when he starts rolling and ad libbing and all that, the weave, as he calls it, he'll offer to, I talked to the sky and like he actually kind of listens to people. But people around Donald Trump have been intimidated understandably by the level of pure aggression aimed at anybody who raises totally reasonable points about the downsides of a war with Iran. So they haven't said anything. So keep in mind,

and by the way, this is a message that anyone who knows Donald Trump has a good relationship with like some loves the United States. Now it's the time to be called and say, whoa, wait a second, have some concerns here. Now it's the time right now because the decision is not yet been made. But it's not just aggression, it's also lying. So I'm going to play one last clip

“before we go to Clayton Morris, who's spent many years in the U.S. media and has a, I think,”

more tactile sense of what's going on here in an information world. But one last clip, and this is from, I think, two days ago, and this is from a man at Fox a weekend show host called Mark Levin and, and really nobody has elevated his own visibility to a greater extent or worked harder to get the United States into a war with Iran than Mark Levin has. And he's done it, not through brilliant argument in decisive analysis, basically through screaming.

But as we get closer and closer and closer to the time where this work could actually start, Levin has decided to just make stuff up. And the clip you're about to hear is from his podcast, I believe, and you can check it two days ago. And it is grounds for dismissal from Fox News, immediate grounds for dismissal. And it's also at the very least grounds for like questions to him, like, what are you doing? What are you doing? Saying something to this? This is Mark Levin

telling his listeners, such as they are, that Iran has nuclear-tipped ICBMs aimed at the United

States. Watch this. They've slaughtered a million of their own people of Fibment retaining power.

That's not a government of a country. Those are terrorists that control a country. It is a police state that's slaughtering its own people to stay in power so it can slaughter us. It believes as the seventh century primitive barbarians believed that they must destroy civilization.

those nuclear ICBMs aren't aimed for Tel Aviv, or Jerusalem, they're aimed for New York,

and Los Angeles, and Chicago, everywhere in between and around the United States of America. The enemies of civilization. If you wake up in a world where Mark Levin is publicly identified with quote civilization, you were an upside-down world. Civilization begins with the acknowledgement

“that human life is sacred, that God created each person as an individual, that identity politics”

is therefore wrong, and that telling the truth matters because truth is absolute. You may get it wrong, but the idea that nothing is true is a form of nihilism and that attitude is the enemy of civilization. And yet that's exactly what you just saw. Ron does not have nuclear-tipped ICBMs. And they're not aimed at the United States. That is a lie. It is a provable lie. Now why is he saying that? Not because he hopes to win an argument, but because he hopes to whip his listeners into such

a frenzy of fear and rage that they will support something that will hurt them. This will hurt the United States almost without question if it happens. This is not good for you. It's not good for our actual allies. The energy-producing countries in the Middle East, which are our actual allies. Israel is in no sense or ally in this. And yet Mark Levin will not, and none of these people will address that debate. Instead, they're just lying to scare people into supporting something that

will hurt them. Mark Levin actually tweeted this. And if you're old enough to remember the Iraq war, this is going to make you laugh. A Ron producing ballistic missiles with chemical and

“biological warheads, we mustn't delay any longer. They have WMD. What did information come from?”

Well, it came from the free press. No, I beg your pardon. It did not come from the free press. Don't they probably repeated it? It came from another aligned publication in Washington. Is there any evidence that? No, of course, there's no evidence of that. And I'd be willing to bet my house that that like originated in the same place, the original WMD lie originated in 2002 before the Iraq war in Israel. Of course, tell Americans, tell the Congress,

tell the White House that the country we want you to spend your money and your lives to overthrow so we can have a greater degree of control or hegemony in a region that that country is a threat to you because they have weapons and mass destruction. That was a lie then.

“It's a lie now, but they're saying it. And so if you followed Mark Levin's Twitter feed,”

which I didn't until today, but it's an amazing thing, actually. You'll see that he's given up

all argument. Any attempt to win anyone over and instead repeating kill committee, take out committee, take out committee every single day. Now, what is this? What's really a kind of witchcraft actually? It's the idea that if you repeat something enough that you can will it into existence, the words alone will make it real. And by the way, that works. Unfortunately, that works. If you repeat a lie enough, it assumes substance.

God isn't fooled, but people are. And so when you see somebody doing that, saying something is totally untrue that contradicts the observations of your eyes and ears. Like, I know that's not true. And you see that person brush off the fact that it's not true and continue to repeat it, you know that that person is trying to mesmerize you and put you under whatever kind of spell this is and that person is scary. And that right now, ladies and gentlemen,

is most of the American media and most of the U.S. Congress. So keep praying. In the meantime, Clayton Morris, who once had a seat on the fabled Fox News morning show, joins us now for an updated what he thinks going on with the media. Clayton Morris, thank you so much for doing this. It was a dirty seat. It was a-- So are you-- I mean, tell me if you think it's fair to say that most traditional left-right media are aligned, they've disagreements, of course, on the trans issue, but on this issue,

whether or not we go to war and Iran, it seems like there's complete agreement.

And there always has been. There's not-- to me, there's no daylight at all between both of

uniparty. But they are in lockstep on this issue, as far as I see it, very few voices are

speaking out about it. If they do, they get pushed out. I mean, look at Marjorie Taylor Green Matt Gates, you know, questioning why we're in Syria? How dare you? How dare you ask why? Why are we in Syria? Congressman Massey, very few voices, Senator Paul, but there's very few-- there's very little daylight in these parties on this issue at all. They desperately want war. I was sitting here thinking, because you have the ideological push right from Mark Levin. He isn't really care about the money.

“No, it's the-- you know, it's the greater Israel project. That's what his big push is.”

But Lindsey Graham and these others, is it really about Israel? Or is it really about the money? And I think

for most of these people, it's probably about the money. It's the massive military industrial

complex. You know, I got warned when I was on Fox, warned me about much, but that was one of the things tread carefully when I was criticizing the massive buildup, the massive military industrial complex the amount of money that we're spending on this to go to war in Iran or Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan or whatever other boogeyman of the week that you have, whether it's Russia through Ukraine, weapons that wind up in Mexico, shut up. Don't ask those questions. So we're all just supposed to

sit back. And then when you question it, why are we giving so much money to Israel? Why do we give all of our money to these different places? Shut up because these weapons are made in our backyard. And so if you, as you know, it better than anybody, but the military industrial complex sits in the neighborhoods of most members of Congress. Yep, because whether you drive to Colorado Springs or you drive to Wichita, Kansas, inevitably there's going to be some arm of Northrop Grumman or Boeing

or any name, name it, name it. Honeywell, it doesn't really matter who are all receiving trillions of dollars now as part of this massive boom toggle. So heaven forbid that they would ever question the money that's flowing to the military industrial complex. So all of them are bought and paid for

“and they're all part of this big cabal. And I think you bring up a great point about”

they're all in lockstep because they want us to be fighting here. Like in this narrow structure, right, have some culture, war, like, you know, whether it's funny stories and Fox News about HOAs, telling people to remove like Christian symbol, whatever it is, right? You just you fight in these like little, in this little bubble, you know, but the real stories out here and they want us fighting in here. So it looks like that they're really an odds with each other.

That AOC is really against my Johnson, you know, they're, and instead they're all in agreement. They're all in agreement and they're all in lockstep. When I read very little on this because it's also misleading, but when I do read big media outlets on this question and Epstein for that matter. But Iran this week, I really get the feeling that the intel agencies have some hand, I get the strong feeling, the overwhelming sense

that some government intel agency had a hand in shaping this coverage. That's remarkable. That is a remarkable assessment and you're going to be a night track.

“No, I think you'd definitely be on the right track. And of course, up until a few years ago,”

you would have been labeled a conspiracy theorist, right? This idea that way to second,

the intel community has a hand in shaping our narratives, our coverage. We only learned about it through the Church Committee, by the way, one of the great, great Americans. But go back to the JFK assassination, right? And project mockingbird before it ever became Operation mockingbird. And the infiltration of reporters at the Washington Post and that the wire tapping of reporters to find out where information was coming. That was sort of like the

clandestine CIA operations then. Then it morphs into the 1970s or late 1960s and 70s into Operation mockingbird where they were installing members of the intelligence community in newsrooms, particularly CBS news, the New York Times and others. And then once that was exposed, it morphed into, well, now they're just on the payroll of these networks. You have, you know, Mike Pompeo, they're not even hiding in the shadows anymore, like meeting you at the water cooler,

like, hey, maybe you want to not cover that story tonight, or maybe you ought to look at this angle of that story tonight, wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Now you just have like people like Mike Pompeo on the payroll of of of major networks or reporters who are embedded inside the Pentagon, who are just

it's not a matter of if we go to war with Iran. It's a matter of when. That's literally how she

ended her toss back to Israel. Did she really say that? Yeah, it's not a matter of if it's a matter of when. That's not true, by the way. I mean, just in point of fact, that's not true. I do think we're likely to go to war with Iran. I grieve that, but in point of fact, Trump makes the decision and he hasn't made it. So it's just to fact. So if you're reporting that we're going to war

“you're lying and it does feel like they're trying to create this sense of inevitability. I think”

her point was the military buildup is like you can't put that genie back in the bottle at this point that there's so much of a military buildup. We've moved so many expensive pieces of equipment to this region, not unlike the Gulf War. In fact, I've talked to sources in Tel Aviv who told me they haven't seen this type of buildup since the Gulf War. So I think her point is, oh, well, you know what, Mr. President, maybe you just sort of sit back and let other people deal with this.

We're going to build it up to such a degree where you just can't put this genie back in the bottle. And I wonder how much agency he has at this point to be able to tell. We're not going. We're not doing it. Yeah. We're not going to listen to what the Israeli government wants us to do and to launch this war, which would be absolutely brutal and devastating. Hey, Chibrag, but we're pretty

“confident this show is the most vehemently pro dog podcast you're ever going to see. We can take”

or leave some people but dogs are non-negotiable. They are the best. They really are our best friends. And so for that reason, we're thrilled to have a new partner called Dutch Pet is the fastest growing Pet Telehealth service. Dutch.com is on a mission to create what you need, what you actually need, affordable quality veterinary care anytime no matter where you work. They will get your dog or cat, what you need immediately. It's offering an exclusive discount, Dutch is for our listeners.

You get 50 bucks off your vet care per year. Visit Dutch.com/talker to learn more. Use the code Tucker for $50 off. That is an unlimited vet visits. $82 or $82 a year. We actually use this. Dutch has vets who can handle any pet under any circumstance in a 10-minute call. It's pretty

amazing actually. You never have to leave your house. You don't have to throw the dog in the truck.

No wasted time waiting for appointments. No wasted money on clinics or visit fees. Unlimited visits and followups for no extra cost plus free shipping on all products for up to five pets. It sounds amazing. It couldn't be real but it actually is real. Visit Dutch.com/talker to learn more. Use the code Tucker for $50 off your veterinary care per year. Your dogs, your cats, and your wallet will thank you. What's interesting is that, excuse me, that kind of military

build-up is hard to hide. And it wasn't hidden. It was taking place in public and anyone who was interested could read about it. But I don't think most Americans had any day it was happening and they sort of wake up and you have venex waila taking out maduro on January 3rd and then that moves into the Super Bowl and went on Olympics. People are just not really aware that this build-up is taking place and you wake up on morning and holy smokes. The Gerald Ford is there. So we're on

“its way. Isn't the media supposed to be telling us this is building?”

Well, you can, if you talk, you know, members of the military and I do, I'm sure you do as well and they were telling us, you know, in the weeks leading up to this that, wow, the the Abraham

Lincoln is now on its I think third deployment they've been extended so they were supposed to come home.

This is like the longest they've ever been out. Ten months, which is like unheard of. So they're now been extended for like a third time and they're supposed to come home and see their spouses and sorry, yeah, this has been extended because of what's about to happen. So like all of this information is like readily available, but of course there's no journalism actually happening anymore and if there is it's being paraded from whatever the intelligence state wants to be pushed out into the

mainstream media and people like Sean Hannity who sit there literally and wet where a CIA lapel pin. I mean, look at the look at just Google Sean Hannity CIA lapel pin on the news is wearing a CIA lapel pin. I mean, so, you know, this, I just, I feel like sometimes Tucker, I wake up and I'm living in this like weird bizarre world because people are going about their business, they're going about their day and then you and I live in this world where we're seeing all of these things happening

and it doesn't touch the American people necessarily, right? They're going to go about their day. The gas prices may go up depends on what happens in the streets of Hormus, etc. Unless you're

without a doubt they're, you know, they will be, it's not a matter of if it's a matter of when they

“are attacked, so he's expecting fully for them to be cannon fodder. So then these military families”

will have the loss of life, but of course that'll be insulated and bubble wrapped from most of the American people anyway and they won't affect people's day-to-day lives. So we pick these fights where we're doing these regime change wars over there and there's very little effect on the United States populace and the mainstream media tries to bury and cover it or spend an narrative. It's it's incredibly frustrating and to see the mockingbird media like Fox News and

others just pushing for this, it's it is infuriating. But it's not simply that they lie. It's that

they work to exclude and discredit people to tell the truth. People to tell the truth are punished.

I mean, this is like a principle in the gospels. The one guy got tortured to death was the guy was telling the truth, right? So we shouldn't be surprised by it, but I am every single time. I got a text today from and I won't say this person's name. It's an editor at Barry Weiss's gatekeeper publication who writes me this. I'm the features that are the free press. We have a feature coming out about how the podcast business has leaned into conspiracy theories.

We'd love to include your voice. Let me know. I said, pretty funny. I don't think that line of attack works anymore. Does it? Um, and she didn't show you about it. But I love that the only

people who are telling the truth are attacks by the liars and that by the way, your audience,

your Natalie's audience is way bigger than the free press way bigger than CBS News. I mean, I do think that the people I'm accusing of lying have less of a grip on the American public than ever before. So maybe it doesn't matter, but it isn't fury. Right. We even, I think we even sell a t-shirt on our store that says conspiracy nowhere. Exactly. And our pronouns are, our pronouns are I told you so. So I'm, you know, like, I'm fine. You know, I wear it as a badge of honor. It's fine.

Whether it's COVID or what it was going on in Ukraine, the child trafficking operations, whatever it is that we've been covering on our show. I've yet to have anyone come on our show

“and so you need to correct that mistake. Oh, okay. So, you know, conspiracy theories are just six”

months, six months spoiler alerts right from what's to come. So I love leaning into conspiracy theories because no one else is doing the job. I mean, just look at the Epstein story. Where is the mainstream media? They're not covering it at all. And not even not covering it. They're refusing to have voices on their air who could actually provide real value real source material. I'm speaking to sources today, actually, and who just who's recently been to Epstein Island. And on Epstein Island,

there's still papers, Jeffrey Epstein's papers scattered all over his books, materials everywhere, just laying there, not gathered up by the FBI, not gathered up and being investigated, but where is this information in the mainstream media? Where are any of deeper questions about Epstein's murder in all of the inconsistencies that have appeared that day at the prison? Where are these, they're not in the mainstream media at all, and even like Fox News coverage of Pam Bondi's hearing

was mysteriously absent. I don't know if you notice that, but no, Fox News loves to go wall to wall with, you know, whoever, whatever member of the cabinet is going to be there, they love to go wall to wall coverage. Let's check in now with Cash Patel, you know, he's testifying for Congress today about what the FBI is doing. Great. It's been an hour, two hours, senators, members of, you know, have representatives asking questions, how's to you this year, a committee, in other words,

Pam Bondi coverage? Shame on, if you tuned into Fox News to see like deep coverage of Pam Bondi being grilled over the Epstein files. Sorry, you weren't going to see it. MSNBC carried it, found a mistake and seen and carried it, but Fox News, like why? Why did they, why did they not want to show Pam Bondi being questioned about the Epstein files? Normally, they're recovering that wall to wall. So there is a dereliction of duty happening in the mainstream media, and I know from sources

who have sent material to like news nation, the New York Times, and other major publications, and they've ignored it. They've ignored it and won't publish it. So why? Anyway, there's a

“dereliction of duty in the mainstream media. So I think it's a fair question. Why, in fact,”

it's the important question. Obviously, Fox's audience is interested in Epstein, you know, that the guy who parted with Bill Gates and, really, was friends of the Hillary Clinton, like, why wouldn't they be interested? Of course, they're interested, but they're not getting the coverage from their network of choice, but that's also true of New York Times readers. So

I've been wrestling with this a lot, and I, you know, is it because, sort of sources who've told me that it is because how this hits just about everyone, the major power players. I mean, Marjorie Taylor Green admitted that President Trump called her and asked her to not vote for the,

the dispatch, one of my, the dispatch discharge petition. I always get the discharge position,

excuse me. And of course, the Epstein transparency act in her, her words, quoting her,

“she said, President told me that too many my friends would be hurt. And I think that's at the”

heart of it. And I think there's a reason also, I think that we haven't seen any of the financial information yet. So, you know, when you and I spoke a few years ago on the show, I talked about like Operation Gladio and NATO, and there's a strategy that they have, which is, you know, the strategy of tension that Colonel Towner Watkins, she's very eloquent on this point. And it's a strategy to keep us in this chaos, right? And it's also like a drip feed of information.

So, we get sort of disparate pieces of emails, but no financial information, no transactions that connect point A to point B. We get this person said this, Peter Atia said, I can't tell everyone about you, you know, you're my friend, but man, you're kind of dirty. We get Russian, Russian models,

“with Bill Gates emails, we get, we get random pieces of pizza gate and all of these other things,”

but do we get financial connections, financial transactions, which the DOJ is sitting on, by the way, why don't we see any of that information? And, you know, to your point with the New York Times, or these different publications covering this up, I don't know, but they were actively involved in this. When you have land and Thomas, for instance, right, whose name shows up as part of the Epstein investigation, he was writing about the Epstein from the New York Times,

he had financial reporter writing about Epstein back during his first arrest. And then you have

Nelly Bowles, who is, of course, the partner of wife of Barry Weiss, who gets assigned by the New York Times as a tech reporter to go and do a profile piece on Jeffrey Epstein. And it's in the files,

“where she claims, "Oh, my newsroom basically, you know, they told me it was, or it later came out”

in her piece, why she justified it that she could go and be with Epstein that I'd be safe." Like, so wait, the New York Times, put you up to going to a known pedophile sex traffickers house. Like, what kind of newsrooms? Like, yeah, you, you, you, you girl, you just run along to a known sex trafficking in pedophiles house and, and write a profile piece as a tech reporter. Like, look, I covered technology for years. Love it. And I know all those people in the tech world,

if you call it like, there's no way somebody from like the verge or the tech reporter for the Wall Street Journal would be assigned to go do like a criminal profile piece like on financial crimes and sex trafficking or what it just wouldn't make any sense. It's like Bob Woodward being chosen to cover watergate. You know, like, as a, as a CIA asset or a intel a, you know, a Jason asset, it just doesn't make any sense. And then when you learn that she's cozy with Epstein and

then Barry Wise, it's just so bizarre. Has, yeah, and I know Nellie Bulls. America's ranchers help build this country. For over 250 years, ranchers fed America through droughts, wars, pandemics, every other kind of chaos. Our friends in good ranchers built their company on that honorable legacy. Good ranchers is a meat company. It's 100% committed to America. They raise every cut on local American soil, the entire packaging and fulfillment process takes place in this country. Same

with customer support. You know, dark abasements in India. You, when you call you talk to real Americans and they donate a portion of their profit to veterans organizations. We have good ranchers meat for dinner on our table. It is so good and it's easy to order. To few simple clicks. Support a company that honors this nation's past, present, and our future. Go to good ranchers.com today. And if you subscribe to any of their boxes of 100% American meat, you save up to 500 bucks a

year. And if you use the code Tucker, you get an additional 25% rather $25 off. Maybe even better

than 25% dollars off your first order. That's code Tucker for next to 25 bucks off the order

on top of $500. You'll save this year for subscribing. Good ranchers.com, American meat delivered. Has she explained this?

Nelly Bolt is the journalist and the Epstein. She published this on the third of February, actually.

Nelly Bolt is the journalist and the Epstein. I have the chance to profile one of the darkest, most interesting characters of our moment. Why did Nye grab it? Why did Nye grab it? So, she writes this whole piece about regularly using him as a source because he was business adjacent. So I just thought it'd be good to write, you know, we're going to write a profile piece on this. So the media, it's remarkable how incurious they are, or intentionally. I don't believe they're dumb. They're not allowing, for

instance, Congressman Massey to appear on television. I know for a fact that he hasn't, Fox News

“has not had him on and I think about a year. If I'm not mistaken, the guy responsible, along”

with Rokana for the Epstein Transparency Act, but Fox News won't allow Congressman Massey to appear on their airways. Like, is there some sort of gatekeeping going on? And by Susie Wiles inside the White House to keep these people from getting this message out on their favorite network? I don't know. I mean, sorry, I'm going to keep in mind that Fox hates Trump, the owners hate Trump, the Murdoch's hate Trump, to the point where they wouldn't have him on. So it's hard to believe

it's because they support Trump. And can I just say something because I don't want to be attacked if I don't say this. I have no connection whatsoever to Nellie Boles, you know, not an intimate at all. I am just certainly related to her. So I just want to say that. But I'm not part of any conspiracy at all. Okay. But I could just not to be defensive. I could see, oh, you didn't mention that. Anyway, but no, I agree. I didn't know that. I didn't know it. Yeah, I mean, I, yeah, it's

not, it's not relevant to my life in any way, but I just, I just feel like I should say that. And just to be honest about it. Um, so, but Fox, they're pushing so hard for the war.

“If the war goes off, I think it's fair to say, I voted for Trump and can't paint for Trump.”

I just saw Trump. I really like Trump. I think this, you know, it's, it's going to be hard for the, for the administration to continue. And it's present form if this word doesn't go well. So it's a huge risk for Trump. So if you really like Trump, you would not be counseling him to do this. You would not be only if you hated Trump, would you tell him to get involved in a regime change

war in a run? And second, if you, like, they're not protecting Trump by hiding Epstein. So I

feel like Fox is acting on behalf of someone else other than Trump. That's, I mean, my assessment, anyway. Yeah. Is it the money to interest? Is it the globalist cultists who run everything? I mean, this is, I think that's right. Yes, it's whatever the superstructure above government is. And that's very obvious. And the Epstein emails and texts is that, you know, he's part of some informal structure that's, I don't know, shorting the global financial crisis and knows

that Katophe's going to be killed before Hillary Clinton does or whatever, like this guy is so plugged in. He's way more plugged in than any US senator. He's weren't plugged in than any Secretary of State.

“Probably more plugged in than the CIA director. So like, what is this? What are we looking at here?”

I think you're right. And, you know, this is where people say, oh, you're conspiracy theorists on redacted and Tucker, whatever. But it really is true. When you understand that there's this global cultist network, padophiles, Satanists who are, you know, responsible for the COVID Kabul and all of it, this super government, whatever you want to call it at the heart of everything, then you understand that like Trump is just a small piece of this and you understand also

that Epstein is just a small piece of this. Maybe he's the window into it, in my opinion. And they're very scared. It's like circling the wagons to kind of protect this globalist network. However, it operates at many, many different levels. You know, you get glimpses into it, like with a build a bird group and, you know, when you see all these people at Davos telling, telling us how how they're going to control our lives in the next few years with AI, you know, chips inserted into

our brains and moving past information warfare. Now they're just going to have total control of us. You know, all of it. So I think that Rupert Murdoch and these guys, these oligarchs,

these tech oligarchs who are at the top, they're, they're way more powerful than President Trump

and they're really running their show. I mean, when you see that we're going to have, you know, massive bio, you know, biometric scanning and six G network's rolled out and in digital IDs

whistleblower told me 17 years at the CIA and he said, he said, Clayton, you have to understand that when I, when I got to the CIA, the, you know, the number one goal at the CIA is if they can, if they know your thoughts, then they've won. And that's the number one goal of the intelligence state is for them to know your thoughts and to be able to have that control. And we're not there yet, but we're, we're damn close. And I think those are the, those are the dark forces that are really

running all of it. And I think Trump is a small piece of this, but I think those power players that run all of these media networks and, and all of it, you know, the Jeff Bezos is of the world and all of this have far more control than President Trump does. Do you sense that people are afraid as I was thinking about the story today, both about the looming war and about Epstein and how few

people have stood up to say, wait a second, you know, what is this? And I, I grew up in a country where

people would routinely stand up and say, hey, what is this? And I don't see a lot of that at all. And I'm wondering why and Mass hypnosis is part of it. Of course, people seem to be under a kind of spell. Shock is another part of it, but fear does seem to play a role. People seem afraid. I think you're right, maybe I don't, I don't see a lot of this fear. And, and I, you know, maybe I should be standing out there with like a sandwich board, trying to say it. I mean,

I see the people in our chat room who watch our live show who are saying, I'm terrified of what's about to happen. Where are the people who are denouncing this, trying to get this, trying to stop it? But of course, they're all being drowned out. And the media is complicit in this. There are a huge piece of this salesmanship of it. And when you just watch like local news, like I'm in Colorado, you just like flip on the local news for a few minutes to get maybe some some weather updates.

They'll do a little quick update. President Trump says this will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. Play a quick sound bite of, I don't know, Mark Levin or Senator Lindsey Graham or somebody saying that this is a threat. And then, you know, that person goes off to work and thinks, yeah, I guess Iran is a threat. I hope, I hope that doesn't happen. So, you know, we got to stop them. We got to do this. And so I don't see a lot of the fear from just like average people going to the

grocery store. And again, I think it comes back to we are always so far removed from war in the United

“States. And that that's how they've thrived on this. This is how the military industrial complex”

has thrived is by having these wars over there. And we don't have to see it. And it's very sanitized. It's like getting a chicken breast from the grocery store. You know, you don't have to see the the the butcher process. You know, you just get this nice little thing and cellophane and sold to you on the nightly news. And then you go back to your taking your daughters to dance class. I wonder if people who do see it, who are paid to notice this stuff

if you, for example, and and other podcasters, that's that's really where truth is being told right now. I'm grateful to be in this business unexpectedly because I feel like there's so many great people in it. But it really is the only place at this point. It'll change. But as of right now, it's digital media, social media and podcasts. I mean, that's where people are telling the truth.

“And there lots of crazies too and lots of liars. But but that's really where most of the truth is”

being told. Can they continue to do this? I mean, it feels like there has to be some kind of dramatic free speech crackdown because what the government is doing at every level is too far from

what the public wants. The the distance is it's never perfect like the government's always doing

stuff people don't want. But if every big thing the government is doing is, you know, an 80, 20 against issue with the public, that's not sustainable. You have to do something or you're going to have a kind of revolution. So don't you have to shut down for each? I mean, that's exactly why we got rid of TikTok, right? And that's of course we're going to see this consolidation of these independent voices and others will pop up and whether or not they're as successful or not.

I mean, who knows at the end of the day? But of course, you're going to have this consolidation

“in sale and and censorship. And that's why we've seen it on YouTube and you've seen it on these other”

platforms. And so you saw it during COVID and you saw, you know, Elon Musk still hasn't answered the question and I think it's still there, which is that back door access for Twitter and maybe maybe he will answer it. He didn't answer. I followed up with him. He still hasn't answered the question, but there was a back door access from the U.S. government to ex formerly Twitter.

And he said, I'm going to have to follow up on that and I follow him. I never got an answer on that.

“So like to steal your phrase, you know, like, what is that? Really? And still has a back door”

access from the federal government to censor users on X? I mean, you can just see people's voices who criticize a certain topic who then are suddenly throttled or suddenly shadow banned and who's yes, messages suddenly don't appear in your timeline. And so again, I have to be conspiratorial but these things are going to have to be censored at a greater level and they will have more control of it. You're already seeing it, too, with answers you get on AI. And so many people are ditching

Google, just general Google searches. It's absurd, you know, so that they get new new versions of Google searches, thinking that they're getting more honest answers. When really, it's what garbage in garbage out, whatever the programming is for AI, it's the answers they're going to get on that side. So, you know, it's very, very difficult to get honest answers anymore and all of these sources, it's been on the media side, the digital media side. And where is AI

pulling their source material from, like mainstream media, like I did a search either day and it pulled up like six different sources and Reuters. Okay, you know, six or seven sources. All like mainstream media sources. So, I'm not getting any cleaner answers there. No, no, they're just repeating the lies back to you in a less transparent way. So, what are you going to do when the power goes out, not theoretically, but actually in real life. Most Americans used to think

total power failure only happened in unstable countries, places without functioning governments,

places you only went to unification. This is the US people. It could never happen here. Okay.

“Well, then it did. So, the truth is obvious now, the government can't guarantee you”

electricity and when things go wrong, no one's coming to save you. That's why last country supply offers the grid doctor. It's a 3,300 watt battery backup system built to keep your entire household running when everything else stops. It powers full size appliances, medical devices, essential tools. You can use it indoors. It's totally safe. There's no fuel. There're no fumes. There's no noise. We have one at home and it's awesome. It's got 15 output ports. It charges from the wall.

When you have power from your car, when you don't, it's got a solar panel to the sun can charge it. It's built to withstand EMPs, lightning, solar flares. It is durable as hell. So, taking care of yourself and the people you love, the people you're responsible for is your job. Get power you

can trust always. Get the grid doctor today at our very own lastcountrysupply.com. Our business,

this is the power. Thank you, Nikola. You've got a lot of power from the government. You're right here with a bunch of kids to stand up. No, not at all. Like the state is like the state with you. I don't really like the state. Wow, that's it. That's all right. Yeah, exactly. Like the state is the state of the state. Because the state has become a lot of life. No, partner, you can't do the state.

Stim, nice. I feel like I can't trust you on it. Stoy and LED. Safe. With Viso Stoyer, let's costen those tests. I can not be a jerk, which is hard for me. And to, you know, kind of me too. It's hard for me. Press him. Yeah, right. I'm not a great person. Don't pretend to be.

But I did want to get to the root answers on a couple of foundational questions. Like if Israel is right to exist, uniquely in the world, where does that right come from? And to whom

“does it apply? And what are the boundaries of the state? Like those are, I think, basic questions.”

He and why aren't you representing the U.S. government as the U.S. ambassador. After that interview, I mean, I think the guy, something broke inside him. Have you ever been attacked after an interview? That's usually a sign that that something snapped in the person. I mean, you got to tell you I think after your interview with Ted Cruz and then after your interview with Mike Huckabee. So that should tell you something about, you know, your incredible interviewing

skills, where you're just a real basic question. Yeah. Well, I mean, you can only ask the question 30 times and not get an answer. At some point, like, you know, this could be a five-hour interview for just how I'm going to ask the same question over and over again. And you're going to, you're not going to answer the question. Like where does that right come from? And then like under bewilderment, finally, like an admission of truth at one point when he says,

watched it together. We both looked at each other. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. And of course,

“why widely condemned and across all of them at least after that comment that your Israel has”

right to all of this land they should just take up. But Israel won't because they're good. So they're not going to. So we should just rest. We should all sit back because they have no history of doing that at all and just allow them to take the small sliver of land. So, but you can only ask that question so many times before, you know, and you're not going to get an answer and not going to get a strange answer about it. But should this guy be, I mean, I disagree with him on the theology.

It's it's not Christianity from what I can tell at all. He's a violence worshipper. That right there is just qualifying as far as I'm concerned for it for me to give theology lessons, but that does not look like Christianity to me. But leaving that aside, the guy is the U.S. ambassador. It works for the State Department. He represents the President in a foreign country.

“And he's not representing the U.S. government. He's representing the country. He's”

living in a foreign country. He's not helping to get sex criminals in Israel, extradited to the United States. He's meeting with a traitor, Jonathan Pollard. He's basically using his post to work out his weird, cultish views. How is that guy a US diplomat? I just

never seem like that. And I have neither. I lived in Portugal for five years and while I was there,

Trump's ambassador, his original ambassador, before, you know, the Biden era ambassadors. I mean, got in a quite a bit of problems with the Portuguese government for basically telling them to, you know, back off on China. There were a couple of other issues, but it was coming from a place of American interest. Right. We're exactly. And it was quite a big deal, like in the Portuguese press, like how dare this ambassador, how dare

he tell us like what the Americans want, you know, this is Portugal, right? So I, I must would like a little bit of that, right? Like, hey, I'm going to hold a press conference here in Tel Aviv. And while we believe in our partnership with Israel, we also as Americans don't stand for pedophiles, known pedophiles. Like, why is Israel safe haven for pedophiles? And it is. I mean, you could call up Barry Weiss and have her pull up the CBS archives with CBS

did a deep dive on Israel's deep pedophile connections and where American pedophiles can flee and find safe haven. What this right of return doesn't matter if your pedophile doesn't matter if you killed children or not, who cares? So as an American ambassador to stand up there and hold a press conference and say, as Americans, even though we've got a great relationship with Israel, we will not stand for this country harboring, convicted pedophiles or pedophiles under

indictment who are caught in a sting operation back in the United States. Like, we want these people extradited back to the United States to stand trial and to face a jury of their peers. But we don't hear any of that. We got hassled when we were there. My producers got really hassled or camera and we got really hassled by thugs in the Israeli security services. I mean, it unequivocally hassled outrageous. And Huckabee didn't ask what happened. He just immediately took the side of the

foreign government against my producers. So don't we as American taxpayers and American citizens have an expectation that there's someone in our government who will take our side it against a foreign

“government or at least consider our position against their position. I mean, shouldn't we expect that?”

You would think we would expect that. Just reminded it's like, you see, the movie's Hollywood movies where, you know, an American is in another country and he finds safe haven by going to a US embassy, right? Huckabee would turn you over immediately to Shinbet. I mean, you would have no way to live in the US embassy at all. I mean, I would feel safe in a lot of other US embassies around the world. Like, I'm kind of here. I'm here on Sankler territory. This is America, a little slice of

America. Like up on the walls, a picture of President Trump. There's the Secretary of State's picture. There's an American flag. I'm speaking English. Like, I've been to bunch of embassies, you know, in other parts of the world. And I feel like, oh, this is, yeah, this is America a little bit, a little slice of it. You know, I wouldn't feel that way there. No, given his loyalty. I mean,

even just back in the Fox days, you know, I mean, you know, Huckabee's always been gracious to me.

And I, of course, very nice. In fact, but there was many times where he was like, I'm going to Israel again this week. I'm going to Israel again this week. And this was back when before he was,

It's a guy, why the Fox puts Trump on all the air, you know, I can't get, I can't get out of

“word in edge-wise. They won't give me any airtime. He sucks up his words. He's the Trump sucks up”

all the air in the room. I can't get on the TV, you know, and all this stuff. But so he would just like, I'm going to Israel again and come back, Clayton, I brought you a gift, you know, and here's another, here's a Yamaka. Like, oh, thanks. And I'll add it to the Yamaka collection. You, you know, you, my office now. And here's the, here's the jar. This is right, you know, this is right from Tel Aviv. Here's another, so I mean, he was, there was a deep love,

deep love there for many, many years. Yeah, I knew it. I mean, I knew him well and I was aware of that.

And I, I don't care. Go ahead and love Israel. Doesn't bother me at all. I've never been mad at

Israel. And I don't care if you love Israel. But if you're the US ambassador, you're supposed to take your country side against all other countries. I would think that be a prerequisite for citizenship by the way, doesn't seem to be. And it's, the whole thing is so humiliating and shameful that it gives us some insight in what's happening with us around war. So in a, in a normal country, you would just say, to Israel, look, you don't exist except for us. We pay for everything. We make everything possible for you.

You'd be eliminated without us. So we're not going to war with Iran. We're going to negotiate a settlement where they're not going to build nuclear weapons. Let's see, that's fine. They've already said they won't. They have a fought war against it. Maybe you don't believe that that's okay, too. We can discuss this, but what we're not going to do is allow you to start the war unilaterally and then suck us into it. That's actually what's going on. We're afraid that Israel will start

“a war unilaterally against our interests and no one can tell them, no, like, what the hell is going on?”

Is there any other country that has this kind of control over the United States, Congress, and administrations? Because I can't think of any. No, I can't think of any. And, you know, he wouldn't get this position if he was tough on Israel. He wouldn't be in a position of flying in and being the U.S. Ambassador if he was tough on Israel, or he was going to put them in their place. And we're not going to, we're not going to carry out another regime change war on your behalf.

Like, look, we tried it in Libya. Didn't work out so well. De-stabilized the Middle East. We tried it in Iraq. Didn't work out so well. De-stabilized the Middle East. And I know you've been calling for this for decades for us to help you and to carry this out in Iran. Now, we're not going to do it. He'd be out of a job. I just don't see how, when you have literally a White House chief of staff who is, you know, formally worked for Netanyahu. Inside the White House,

you don't choose an ambassador that the gatekeeping does not allow for somebody who's critical of Israel

to be the U.S. Ambassador to Israel. It's just not going to happen.

“I mean, I think this is, we've gotten to this place because nobody wants to hurt anybody's feelings.”

And the BB people have conflated skepticism of Israel's goals with anti-Semitism, which is insane. I mean, there are a lot of Jews who don't like BB and they have every good reason to, they're not anti-Semites. No person is an anti-Semite for disliking the actions of these really government or not buying Zionism, whatever that is. So people have been kind of like they don't want to have that fight, so they've just sort of let this fester. And then there's the other factor,

which is physical fear because Israel is so violent and it's constantly bragging about murdering people and blowing up kids with pages or leveling Gaza. I mean, this is the most violent country in the world by far. It per capita. So there is a feeling that like, if you criticize them too much, they could hurt you. And I get that. I'm not criticizing anyone who's afraid, because there, this is a reason to be afraid. However, we've gotten to a place where we're potentially

going to like wreck our economy and Americans will die because one guy, Benjamin Netanyahu thinks it's a good idea or good for his political career or whatever. Like that is truly bonkers. Like why are we allowing this? It's going to be devastating. Speaking of Vox Media, six years ago, they wrote a piece after Suele Monny was killed. And if we go to war with Iran, it will not be a walk in the park. It will be a brutal bloody war. And it will be their quote, "hell on earth, hell on earth."

And that's just there. Every military expert I've talked to you says, "What? We have no strategy, whatsoever." And we have, as you pointed out in your monologue earlier, what endgame? Like what is the end of this sort of permanent boots without like permanent or some sort of large contingent

What are we looking at here? Targeted strikes. And that's we're just going to wash our hands of it

and hope that that's the end of it and we walk away. It makes zero sense. So this is going to be an absolutely debilitating war. It would be devastating to the American economy. The US dollar, of course, is already purposely being devalued. We talking about like $30 big max in the coming years.

“I mean, that's what we're heading towards. We want to further oil prices in the streets of”

Hormos, like what will this do to the United States economy? But you hear from the mega crowd who we're now in energy independent. So we don't care about the streets of Hormos anymore. That's in consequential because now the United States is fully energy independent. And we've done so brilliantly according to Lindsey Graham. Thanks to the President of the United States that

it doesn't matter if the streets of Hormos are shut down because guess what? Like we're all taking care of

now. We're able to start drilling, Trump's drilling program. So don't worry about it. We'll be fine. Yeah. What's China's response going to be? What's Russia's response going to be? What's the Middle East? What are all of those countries in the Middle East? What is their response going to be? And by the way, what about all the cannon fodder of American soldiers sitting right there right now? Not in fortresses. Many of these like places are like little outposts with very little protection

at all. So what is going to happen to them? I guess we don't care about them. Well, it's also bought. I mean, just to the energy independence thing, I'm very strongly for energy for oil and gas for coal. I mean, I believe that completely. However, energy prices, oil and gas prices are set at the international market. So what does that mean? Would you nationalize the energy producers and force them just to sell domestically? Every refinery has to sell its products in the U.S.

What does that mean? If the Straits of Homuser closed, if there's disruption to energy facilities in the Gulf, the price of oil as set on the international market where everybody in the world bids on it every day all the time? Well, spike. I mean, that's just a fact. It's applying demand. So we're going to exempt ourselves from this how you would have to say again to American refineries, you can't sell the international market. American energy producers cannot sell on the international

market. Like, are we going to say that? Like, what are you even talking about? Who are these people? What are they talking about? Well, they believe that the Petro dollar is a thing of the past, or, you know, the sort of Saudi, the Saudi Petro dollars, the thing of the past and that will now in the United States, it will, it will be the, it'll be backed by our own oil in the United States. So the US dollar as a Petro dollar will now be backed the full faith and credit of the United

States government, which is also $39 trillion in debt, right? So how is that going to play out on the international stage? And will these oil producers, which make bank selling? I mean, just look at, we blow up the Nord Stream pipeline. So what did we do? We sell natural gas to Germany at what three times the price that they were able to get it from Russia? And now you're going to tell the oil and natural gas producers that they can't sell it to Germany. They can't sell it to these other

places because now there's no shipping lane, there's no way to get this oil and natural gas to those regions of the world. And you're only going to sell it to American consumers. So we're going to nationalize it and sort of, well, subsidize it like the ethanol market,

“you know, like, and that's how we'll do it. So it'll be a, a snake eating its own tail.”

And that's, that's a recipe for success. Let me ask you one last question, um, it feels like the rhetoric, I feel like such a liberal saying this because I hate people, though, the rhetoric is overheated on all sides. But I mean, if someone who's been in the rhetoric business this whole life and I've added to ugly rhetoric and said in tempered things, I've said incorrect things. I've been part of the problem for sure at

various points. But I've never seen people talk like they're talking right now, particularly on the

neocon side. Anyone who disagrees is a Nazi, anyone who's not eager to regime change Iran wants a second Holocaust? I mean, it's, it's, it's, it's the kind of language where if not slowed like soon, someone's going to get hurt. For real, do you feel this? For sure. I mean, just look at it on the, you know, whatever you want to call it maga Twitter maga x. But if you disagree or you, you know, call for the release of the Epstein files that

you're somehow, you're somehow a liberal, you're, you know, what you want to hurt the Trump administration,

“you don't want us to go to war with Iran, then you're, you know, shut up and you must be an anti-Semite,”

so you're probably pro-Islam. It's, I've never seen it like this. I mean, I mean, I, you know, even going back to, I mean, even like, even going back to days, early social media, like it was far, far more congenial, I think that it has, that it is today,

I, as much as I love the dialogue, I love the back and forth on real issues, but I think you're going to see massive censorship, because they don't want us, they don't want us fighting over the things that they want to carry out, like war with Iran, or covering up the Epstein files, or when you start to prick too closely, you get followed in people tap your phones when you're digging into

“pedophile networks and these other things. So, I think we're going to see more censorship,”

unfortunately, and I think, and I think that's the intent. I think, at the end of the day, they want us fighting like this to be as loud as possible, so that they can censor us, and that they can have total control of it. See, that's, out of two out of control, too many people call them people Nazis. We've got to control it, you know, YouTube changes as terms of service all the time, adds all sorts of new things you can't talk about on a regular

basis. So, I think that's where we're heading. And toward violence, I mean, first of all, there's there is some kind of nexus between violence outside our borders and violence inside our borders, I believe that. And in times of war, you know, and around wars, chaos and violence increase here. You saw this drink Vietnam, Charlie Kirk was murdered a day after the Israeli's bomb Doha, one of the craziest things that's happened in the last 20 years, et cetera. I'm not saying

there's a direct connection, but these things tend to flower simultaneously. I just have noted,

always notice that. It's a spirit of violence that descends for real. And for another violent

acts, you saw this in Australia, real or not, are used as a pretext to strip people of their civil liberties of their human rights, their God-given human rights. And so, I just fear that there will be some sort of domestic terror incident in which actual Americans will actually die, which is a true tragedy, no matter who they are. But that tragedy will be used to strip the rest of us of our God-given human rights. And I don't think I'm being paranoid. I'm very concerned about that.

Well, you're speaking from historical precedence. We have a long history of false flags being used to strip us of our civil liberties and to carry out these horribly nefarious things.

“We just had, I think, to this afternoon. What's his name from the National Endowment for”

Democracy admitted in front of Congress that they were there inside of Iran,

helping to basically, you know, with their starlink materials, helping to basically work on

this agitation of protestors. And Luis Devon, I think I like shutting down, told him, shut up. And I don't think we should talk about this here. So you literally have an admission that we are involved in actively in these types of stoking of chaos around the world, whether it's people wearing plain clothes things, showing up on January 6, whether it's 9/11 attacks, on purpose to strip us of our civil liberties and get us into perpetual wars in the Middle East,

whether it's, you know, William Randolph Hearst, and remember the main and pushing us into war against Spain and rallying certain purposes there, or whether it's FDR, you know,

basically allowing Pearl Harbor to happen, which he did, which he did. So you're speaking from

historical precedence and, you know, I just, I get so frustrated when people think that these things don't happen, or that false flag attacks be used as a pretext for stripping us of our civil liberties won't happen, or the massive digital ID bio, you know, infrastructure that is coming through the likes of these tech oligarchs. It's coming, it's all coming, and they've been rolling it out and testing it in places like Ukraine with the D-A app and making sure that everything is

targeted and tracked and people can snitch on their neighbors and Ukraine, you know, you can like literally press a button on an app and basically have the SPU show up at your neighbor's house

“to investigate them, like, that's what they want, and they tested out in these places like”

Ukraine, and they want to roll it out here, because as I said earlier, like, would Kevin Ship told me, they want control, and that's the most frightening part of all. We're just giving up control. Every time you did a great piece a few weeks ago on the phones and spying on your phones, it's like, every time we take in these little pieces of advanced technology, it's making our lives easier, it's actually sapping of us, it's sapping us, and it's taking away our liberties.

So, part of me just wants to move out in the, you know, mountains of Wyoming, and, you know, knock down any 6G 5G towers, I see anywhere around me, and, you know, just live off the land and turn butter. Yeah, using for target practices for your 308. Yeah. No, I had that fantasy. Can I see

control grid. I don't, I think that control over other people, over the physical landscape,

over the universe, assuming God like powers, is like the desire of every evil person,

“and I think history is filled with attempts at this from the Tower of Babel till present,”

and I don't think it's possible, and I think that people routinely overstate their own power,

and they think they can do it, but they can't, and I think we laugh at them and retrospect,

like you're going to build a tower to the sky and eliminate all different languages and we like laugh at the Tower of Babel. But we laugh at Mussolini or whatever, we laugh at the Bolsheviks, but, and we will laugh at these people too. That's my guess. Hope I'm right. I hope so. I hope you're right, too. I really do. Then I see these nefarious things, and I see all these people drugged out on marijuana and they're just like drones. Once you roll in some sort of like universal

basic income, you get to be a drone as part of the system, and I don't know. I'm usually a

“glass-half full kind of person, and I'm trying to be, but I think the moves in this AI direction”

is so nefarious, and so terrifying, that I don't know if we can put this genie back in the bottle. I sure hope so. But pretty soon, in the next five years, people are going to have robots in their houses, like folding their laundry. That is coming. Anyway, Tesla just converted one of their factories in Fremont to be the new optimist robot plant. So robots are coming, AI, and a lot much larger capacity

“is coming, and by the way, the United States is losing desperately to China in that race, and so”

you can only imagine these neocons and technocrats that really want to run things are going to be pushing for trillions of dollars in the United States. You know, budget to be able to try to compete with China. I hope you're right. I hope you're right. I'm not letting a robot in my house. Clayton Morris, it is so great to see you as always, and thank you for your relentless search for the truth, your fearlessness and your decency. Great to see you. Great to see you. Thank you so much, sucker.

And incredible, incredible work as always, my friend. Not everyone agrees, but I appreciate it. Thank you.

And thank you. Thank you for watching. We'll see you next Wednesday. Thanks for watching the Wednesday edition of the show. We stream live every week. Wednesday, 6 p.m. Eastern on Tucker Carlson.com. Members can watch the show live, join the members only chat, and take part in the conversation in real time. We're grateful to be doing it, and grateful that you watch it. Thank you.