tucker: are you allowed to say should you be allowed to say, and get away with it, that we are going to give preferencep to people based children based purely on their skin color and discriminate others purely based on their skin color? isn t that what we didn t like about the jim crow south, that attitude? we developed an orwellian situation where we tried to escape this sort of bias in favor of one race versus another. now it s being done in the name of racial equity. so inequality equals equality if you follow that. this is really it makes no logical sense. as i say, i think it s truly orwellian. tucker: last question. maybe should have been my first question. is there any evidence thatt any of this helps kids learn, that it produces better outcomes, that it helps children? i don t think so. i think it all it does s engage in racial obsession, racial bean count, and it r creates a situation of implicit bias, we assume you are a racist, you have racial bias,
policy, anonymous letter to see if the hearings derailed kavanaugh. if they didn t, she would whip it around. that would destroy kavanaugh. it didn t work. so she was left with an orwellian situation, i don t know if this is true. i will put it out there. we live in a world of jurisprudence where any of us are subject to a charge anonymous 36 years from our past we don t know the location or the time of the incident. but the accuser will tell thehe government agency thee conditions under which the accused shall be investigated. and i don t know how this is all going to react, tucker, but they think they are creating a blue wave. it may be that people where i am in central valley or western pennsylvania said you know what? that is why i voted for trump. i didn t see alternative to thes madness. or they don t want to live in that could happen. a world we live the anonymous
policy, anonymous letter to see if the hearings derailed kavanaugh. if they didn t, she would whip it around. that would destroy kavanaugh. it didn t work. so she was left with an orwellian situation, i don t know if this is true. i will put it out there. we live in a world of jurisprudence where any of us are subject to a charge anonymous 36 years from our past we don t know the location or the time of the incident. but the accuser will tell the government agency the conditions under which the accused shall be investigated. and i don t know how this is all going to react, tucker, but they think they are creating a blue wave. it may be that people where i am in central valley or western pennsylvania said you know what? that is why i voted for trump. i didn t see alternative to the madness. or they don t want to live in a world we live the anonymous charge rules over the lo
president who really doesn t seem to like america very much, certainly doesn t respect it. and he s a president who appears to be enthralled to a foreign power, a hostile foreign power. this is unbelievable to me. i could never have foreseen this. i was a pretty good analyst, made a lot more good calls than bad calls. i never could have foreseen this, to use a cliched word, this orwellian situation. when you sound the alarm the way you re doing right now, do you worry that it has the opposite effect of your intent, that you actually scare people off or make them tune out by saying such harsh things about the president? no, i don t worry about it. because i refuse to calculate what i say based on who it might please or who it might displease. we ve got plenty of that in washington. what we need is people who will speak honestly and say what they believe and not worry about who it offends. i m just sick and tired of people hedging and hemming and