Tucker Carlson Goes FULL Communist in EMBARRASSING Interview with Stephen A. Smith

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson just went full communist in an insane interview with Stephen A. Smith. He has made his full transformation into Bernie Sanders. Take a look. [00:00:09] Speaker 2: The true crisis in the country, which has nothing to do with race and has to do with economics, and the people benefiting from the private equity scams and the crypto scams and all the other scams underway in the American economy, we don't really produce anything, we just lend money at high interest, sell real estate again and again. Those people are getting richer than everyone else, the billionaire class, and they don't want to deal with questions about how exactly this works. Why are they paying half the taxes that you're paying as a wage earner? Like, I don't really get that. And they don't want to have to defend it. So instead, they're like, the real problem is race. And these whites are just bad. And they've taken all the stuff. Well, actually, if you look at the numbers, that's insane. One of the biggest groups of poor people in this country is white. Are they privileged? I don't think they are. So like, it's not about race. We should treat all American citizens culturally. That's the whole point of the civil rights movement. That's the whole point of the constitution. And we're not. And we should. And then just say, look, it's not about ignoring the crimes of the past, which we should not do. We should never lie about anything. It's just about being honest about what's actually happening. And the real problems stem from the way our tax code is structured. And most people don't even think about it because no one in the media ever talks about it. It's like, really? So if I invest money, I pay half the tax rate as if I go to work. So are we saying that it's twice as virtuous to invest or to get inherited money as it is to have a job? That's what we are saying. Because we tax things we want to discourage. That's why cigarettes are expensive. So like, are you really going to say with a straight face that you're like twice as good [00:01:43] Speaker 1: a person because you inherited money? If I just showed you the transcript of that video, but I didn't show you who said it, 100% you would think that was AOC or Bernie Sanders. They are the same. And it gets even crazier from there. And we're going to show you all of it. But I first want to address these claims by Tucker. He says, like a Democrat, that only the billionaires are benefiting from our economy right now, that they only pay half the taxes that the normal person pays. This is abjectly false. Like, what are you even getting this from? The top 1% pays almost 50% in income taxes. This is a talking point straight from the DSA. And what you're going to see throughout this interview with Stephen A. Smith is that it's just not about the culture for him anymore, which he is more culturally conservative. But it's not about that. This is why I say Tucker Carlson is on the left. It is all about the economy. Like a Marxist, it is about economic class struggle. And in some cases, he uses those exact terms. Like, he's using terms from the Communist Manifesto, where the righteous proletariat must violently overcome the bourgeois. That is what Tucker wants. Which again, he has said things like that in the past as well. He says that our tax code is screwed up. But notice, he doesn't ever speak like a conservative. A conservative sees a high tax code. And they see that the income tax is super high. And they think, we got to get rid of that. You know, some of us even think that that's unconstitutional. They think taxes are burdensome. Tucker doesn't say that. Tucker says, let's also raise the capital gains tax rate. That's what he's upset with, which is crazy because the capital gains tax affects everyone, not just rich people. I know there's this like weird misnomer out there, mostly from young people who haven't decided to invest in anything, that only rich people are invested. The reality is, is well over 50% of Americans are in the stock market in some form or another. Most of them have 401ks or IRAs. Myself, for example, I'm going to be selling off some of my assets in the coming months in order to get a down payment for a home. So the capital gains tax rate matters a lot. Tucker wants me to pay 30% on my gains rather than the 15% that I'm going to end up paying. And I just don't understand what is remotely conservative about that. You can see in the thing too, at no point does he really address, oh, there's people in America that should be doing better. All he talks about is the stupid idea of wealth or income inequality. As if that has anything to do with anything. I've just never understood that. People yell and scream about Elon Musk having a trillion dollars, but they're not actually focused on poor people becoming wealthier. That's what we should focus on. The disparity in wealth does not matter at all. All that matters is the people on the bottom and the middle are working their way upwards. And if the people on top are also working on their way up, that is fine with me. Why do we care? The only reason you would care is because you are envious or in Tucker Carlson's position since he's already rich, he's just trying to be a populist and essentially use grievance politics in order to get a bigger audience. By the way, if you have a traditional IRA and you want to cash it out, in many cases, depending on your income, this would affect you as well. So what Tucker Carlson is calling for even hurts middle-class and lower-class earners, especially for retirement. So Stephen A. Smith then brought up Qatar. We move away from economics for a second and brought up the fact that Tucker is pretty rich himself and has foreign connections. Here's what Tucker had to say for himself. [00:05:00] Speaker 2: I mean, I hate defending myself. I mean, it's just, I mean, these are people who are taking money and direction from a foreign government, accusing me of the same. And the truth is, I don't have a home in Doha. I don't own anything in Doha. I've never taken money from the Qataris or any other government. I don't even have a bank loan. I have no investors. I have no debt. You know, my opinions, you may not like them, but they're mine because I have no control over me at all. And I own my company with my college roommate. So that's the extent of my financial life. It's, you know, whatever. But you know what I would say this Qatar. I love Qatar. I really like Qatar. So let me tell you the truth [00:05:40] Speaker 1: about that. Tucker Carlson raised over $15 million to form the Tucker Carlson network, which is very new by the way. And basically what he did is he recently paid them off, which means he had $15 million, which is a butt ton of money. But to act like he's always been independent, completely ridiculous. He's had financial backing from the very beginning. His entire career, literally, he had other people paying to get him ahead, whether that was at MSNBC or CNN or Fox news or these investors. And by the way, there's nothing wrong with having investors. The problem, and I've said this so many times about Tucker Carlson is like a classic socialist. They actually employ capitalism, but tell you not to do it, which is so dirty to look at you as a successful person and say, don't do the thing that made me successful. As I've said many times before as well, Tucker does not have to directly take money from Qatar in order to benefit from Qatar. They have a whole online apparatus, a massive foreign audience that can help them without giving him directly a dime. He can just get that in advertising dollars because he gets all their views. By the way, you know, I like to share real well-made articles with you guys. Did you know that more than 650 major infrastructure projects are awaiting federal approvals before construction can begin? That is over $1.1 trillion in economic opportunity tied up in federal permitting. This is something that the Senate should actually address. I am partnering with Common Sense Leadership to share a free article about it. I've put it at the top of the description below. Go read it. It is fantastic. So Stephen A then asked Tucker about Nick Fuentes and his interview because we know that Tucker Carlson can give difficult interviews, but of course he didn't do that with Nick Fuentes. He says, and watch what Tucker does here. He does not answer the question directly because he knows [00:07:27] Speaker 3: it's indefensible. Instead, he shifts it onto something else. We appreciate the fact that you're willing to tackle any issue and I'm thankful for that. So thank you for the conversation. Let me ask you this. Just a few more questions before I let you go. I'm thinking about the Nick Fuentes interview, for example, and I wanted to transition a little bit to this because, you know, I'm wondering about where the line is between exposing extremism and normalizing it when you have somebody like him that you had on your show. I remember people were criticizing you. I didn't watch the interview. I saw, you know, clips of it, but I didn't watch the whole interview in its entirety. And I remember people accusing you of being quite soft on him, even though I can't imagine you being that guy, but that's what they were accusing you of. And they were saying stuff like that. But we know some of the things that people have felt he said and some of the positions that he has taken from a generic perspective, extremism compared to normalization. Where does Tucker Carlson draw that line in the sand, particularly considering the position that you're in now and the kind of influence you wield? I think it's really important not to [00:08:37] Speaker 2: normalize extremism and to call it out by name and to say to just frame this correctly. Like what you're saying is crazy and extreme. I think it's super important to say that because otherwise it's like, oh, no, this is normal. And I think one of the most extreme human beings I've ever met in my entire life was Lindsey Graham. And I would say maybe the second most extreme I've ever met is Ted Cruz, both U.S. senators. Lindsey Graham, unfortunately, passed away recently. Ted Cruz still represents Texas. These are people who have called for murdering innocents at scale, bombing people who did nothing wrong, killing kids, and have done that for like decades, who have openly called for the U.S. government and American citizens to be more loyal to a foreign country than to their own, who have called for banning Americans' right to criticize a foreign country, eliminating free speech speech on behalf of a foreign nation. You can criticize your own country. Totally fine. You're not going to criticize a foreign country. That's so crazy that I can hardly believe it's happening. And nobody says it. So you'll go and you'll interview Lindsey Graham or I interviewed Ted Cruz last year. And people are like, oh, no one is like, I can't believe you're sitting with that wacko extremist Ted Cruz, who's literally called for murdering people. And by the way, has helped murder people. He's a United States senator. He's not a podcaster. He votes for things. He appropriates money. That guy has blood on his hands, the blood of countless innocents, but it's totally cool to sit with him. How does that work? I don't understand. Not one person has ever said, I can't believe you sat across from Ted Cruz. Somehow we went from Nick Fuentes to Ted Cruz [00:10:07] Speaker 1: and Lindsey Graham in about 15 seconds. Nick Fuentes was never spoken about again. At no point did Tucker address the question. And it is because it is indefensible how antagonistic he was with Ted Cruz only to laugh and agree with Nick Fuentes when he said that Stalin was one of his greatest exemplars. He was someone that he looked up to. It's all a distraction, you guys. Look, if Ted, if Tucker Carlson was just the guy who was very antagonistic in interviews, he did it with Ted Cruz, he did it with Nick Fuentes, whatever, fine. You know, if that's who you are, you like to really hold people to the fire no matter what they believe. Fair enough. But that's not what he did. Don't focus on the Democrat funded guy who's teaching young men to womanize and never get married and never have kids. Focus on the senator who voted for something. Therefore, he's a murderer. That's the logic of Tucker Carlson. And this is where we get into the real Democrat behavior. I want you guys to tell me. I'm just curious. Tell me in these clips, do you see any difference between Tucker Carlson and mainstream Democrats anymore? [00:11:10] Speaker 2: If you're committing genocide, which Israel currently is in Gaza and genocide is, you know, we have an international definition of it, which everyone signed on to up until about 20 minutes until Israel started committing it. And it is the systematic effort by government to eliminate a people. And I don't have to guess about this because Israeli cabinet ministers and the prime minister of Israel repeatedly have said that's their goal. They describe the Palestinians as Amalek. I'll refer you to the Old Testament or Hebrew scriptures, whatever you want to call it, our Bible and theirs, in which Amalek is the Amalekites. And that's the group that God tells the ancient Hebrews to kill all of them, including their children, their babies, and their livestock. And the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has used his phrase multiple times, not just randomly, once, again and again and again in speeches. And so have his cabinet ministers, the finance minister. [00:11:59] Speaker 1: In lockstep with Ilhan Omar, AOC, and every single blue-haired liberal on the street. And that's not an ad hominem attack on Tucker Carlson. It's not me trying to sling mud on him. It's a reality of where he is at politically. He is aligned with those people. He isn't right-wing anymore other than his opposition to the pro-choice movement, I guess. That's like the only thing that ties him to the right-wing. And this apparent flip-flop that we've seen from Tucker Carlson, again, I say apparent because I don't think it's as prominent and real as people really think. But this apparent flip-flop was called out by Stephen A. Smith. And credit to him for doing that. He recognizes this. Here he is asking Tucker why anyone should trust him since he's changed his opinion so many times. [00:12:40] Speaker 3: Tucker Carlson, in 2021, you probably wrote that you hated Trump passionately. You later supported him in 2024. So here's the question. Why should listeners see this latest break as principle rather than another pivot on your side, on your part? How do you, or how do you answer [00:12:56] Speaker 2: that? Well, I've had many, many pivots and I've already explained two of them. You know, I was wrong. Yes, you have. Because I'm wrong a lot, you know, I guess. I mean, I, I flatter myself and say I'm not wrong a lot, but I certainly am wrong sometimes and wrong on big things. I was wrong on Trump and I was wrong on the Iraq war. And I'm sure a million other things. But anyway, I mean, I don't know what to say. People can judge whether I'm sincere or not. I don't really know what I'm getting out of [00:13:21] Speaker 1: this. Actually, I've got, it's one thing to evolve your opinions. If you want to admit that you're wrong, that's actually a very good thing. But when you say you hate someone and then you fully support and campaign for them only to call them the antichrist a few years later, that is a pivot. That is a strategic decision, not a change of heart. He he's gone back and forth multiple times. We've seen this with Megyn Kelly as well. We've also seen this with Candace Owens. Again, I've said it so many times now, but all of these people are just reverting back to their before Trump opinions. All these people are just going back to 2015. They got on the bandwagon when they saw that Trump made history by winning the GOP nomination against all odds. They realized, wow, this is a real movement behind Trump and we've got to get on board. Otherwise, our audience is going to ditch us. They were right. They made a smart strategic decision, but it was a morally corrupted one. And now it is very clear all of it was a farce. This is frankly, one of my problems with JD Vance as well. You guys, I know some of you don't agree with me on this, but I have some pretty crazy things to show you. I know many Republican politicians hated Trump and now like him. JD Vance isn't the only one, but I have a really hard time when someone wasn't already in politics like JD and says that they hated him. And then magically they like him now, right when they get an endorsement from him and become his VP. Like the way that JD was able to play his switch from Trump. I just don't think it's ever been done by anyone else in politics. JD is on the politician side of the commentary side of Tucker Carlson. That's how I see it. Tucker Carlson is not a politician. JD Vance is not a political commentator. So they share the same underlying ideologies, but in different professions. And I want to give you an example of this. Many people say JD Vance and Trump are one in the same, that they are unified in opinion on foreign policy. For example, this is not true. And we have exclusive content that I want to show you. This is an exclusive compilation that proves that point. This video has never been shown before. And it really shows how on the Iran deal, specifically JD Vance is too much like Tucker and not enough like Donald Trump. [00:15:28] Speaker 4: But I definitely think you have seen this very discreet, extremely well-funded campaign to try to derail the negotiation and try to derail the deal paid by certain elements within the Israeli government. And those people are attacking me viciously or quite literally trying to accomplish the negotiation objective that the president set for the country. [00:15:51] Speaker 5: Mr. President, are there any points of disagreement between yourself and your vice president when it comes to U.S. action in Iran? [00:15:58] Speaker 6: He was, I would say, philosophically a little bit different, maybe less enthusiastic. [00:16:04] Speaker 4: Our interest, I think, very much is in not going to war with Iran. Right. It would be a huge distraction of resources. It would be massively expensive to our country. [00:16:13] Speaker 7: Why can't they see? Why can't we all see the MOU right now? [00:16:16] Speaker 4: The Iranians, and not just the Iranians, but some of our mediators, the Pakistanis and the Qataris, have asked us to sequence this in the right way. I don't, frankly, fully understand it. Diplomatic protocols. I got to be honest with you, I don't really understand these things. [00:16:29] Speaker 8: Sir, very quickly, there was a moment yesterday when Orochi came into the room and did not, for you guys, not shake hands when he walked out of the room. Did you feel stumped by that? [00:16:40] Speaker 9: I've spent a lot of time dealing with the Iranians over the last few months. Sometimes I find them extremely confusing as negotiators. Mr. Vice President, you're speaking to the American people right now. I want to understand this in the simplest terms. We want them to behave like a normal country. [00:16:55] Speaker 6: Monday, we were told the MOU will be published within 48 hours. [00:16:59] Speaker 7: Well, we have inspections of whatever they are or aren't doing when it comes to nuclear slash enrichment. [00:17:05] Speaker 4: Is it fair to say that it's not spelled out, that they have to end their ballistic missile program? [00:17:11] Speaker 6: The president then said after Friday. You, I think, then said by Friday. [00:17:16] Speaker 7: You know, I mean, and is enrichment even on the table? Because I haven't been able to totally understand. I'm just trying to understand how the deal is. [00:17:22] Speaker 4: But, and then it ended up being let out on a briefing call yesterday. On a number of issues, we are going to have to figure this stuff out. What's stopping them from down the road, to your point, rebuilding and restarting from where we were pre-war? Well, number one, they would have to get a lot of money. [00:17:39] Speaker 2: They say they're going to get $24 billion in frozen funds if they hit certain benchmarks. Is that true? [00:17:47] Speaker 4: Well, again, Ed, we're open to a lot of things that are on the table. So it is a very general document. [00:17:53] Speaker 6: We were told the MOU have been signed electronically on Sunday. There was an access report that it hadn't been. There's going to be a signing ceremony on Friday. [00:18:01] Speaker 7: But that means we'd let them do it a little? Like, what else are we inspecting? [00:18:05] Speaker 4: No, look, our plan is, well, what we would be inspecting is what this ultimately looks like. [00:18:11] Speaker 6: What if they promise not to use it? Here's what's going on behind the scenes as chaotic as your public messaging. [00:18:19] Speaker 4: Why not stick around for the signing ceremony? [00:18:23] Speaker 6: It's very important, but it might not be the kind of a document that I should be sending. [00:18:29] Speaker 1: Caroline Levitt said you played a key role in these talks. [00:18:33] Speaker 4: Well, I appreciate Caroline saying that. I mean, you know, my key role was I sat on the phone a lot. I answered a lot of phone calls. I made a lot of phone calls. And again, I'm happy about where we are. The United States launched another wave of strikes on Iran. [00:18:46] Speaker 10: The reason for the recent strikes over the course of the last several days is because Iran violated the memorandum of understanding that we struck with them. [00:18:55] Speaker 6: This way, if it works out, I'm going to take the credit. If it doesn't work out, I'm blaming JD. You better be careful, JD. [00:19:02] Speaker 1: I know I already said this on my episode last week, but we just don't need a second Democrat party. One is enough. We already have a party that trusts third world dictators, that says billionaires are the problem, that wants taxes on capital gains for everyday Americans to go up, that says Israel is committing a genocide. We don't need more of that. One is enough. And that goes for both Tucker and JD Vance and AOC and Gavin Newsom. Guys, one more thing I wanted to say before the episode ends today. Today is Pioneer Day. A lot of people don't know this. This is a massive holiday here in Utah, the 24th of July. On this day, my ancestors entered the Salt Lake Valley and settled and conquered Utah, essentially. That's how Utah became what it is today. And so I just wanted to say something and kind of give a little, you could say an homage to my ancestors, which is that these are people and you could apply this to any pioneer, by the way, there are a lot of pioneers, the people who went on the Oregon Trail, the people who settled California and Washington and Idaho and Nevada. But these people were amazing. They, against all odds, hiked for thousands of miles for the pursuit of a better world. That is the American story. It happened all the way with the pilgrims. They continued it with the pioneers. And on Pioneer Day, the message I want to share with everyone is that can still be us. I just think it's so incredible how weak and how angry and blackpilled we've become when our ancestors had to go hundreds of miles just to end up in the Salt Lake Valley. If you guys have been to the Salt Lake Valley, which is close to where I live, I live in Utah Valley, which is also settled by my ancestors. It's pretty beautiful. Like it's an amazing place, but it was not always that way. If you go back to the stories of the early pioneers, it was pretty rough. Like this is not showing up in San Diego. For those who settled San Diego, like they showed up in paradise, right? Salt Lake Valley is rough. It's rough in the winter. It's rough in the summer. There were a lot of dangerous Indians. There were a lot of horrible species of bugs. And the ground is not very fertile, but they made it beautiful. And I think that's just an amazing analogy for who Americans can be. I think it's the complete opposite of what Tucker Carlson is. Tucker Carlson wants to tell you that you are entitled to everything, that the U.S. government is where you should get your value, that they should be working for you because you cannot work for yourself. I reject that. And I think the pioneers rejected that as well. Their whole thing was, no, we are going to go forage our own path with a God-given right of manifest destiny. We are going to go conquer the plains. We're going to go conquer the Rocky Mountains, the Wasatch Mountains in our case here in Utah. And they just made it happen. And they made a desert flourish. That's what Utah is today. So an homage to my ancestors. Happy Pioneer Day. I fully believe we can be pioneers today. I know a lot of you are. God bless you. God bless the pioneers.