they live a different life in private, and then publicly and through social media and through whatever their media jobs are, they try to act like they are the most militant malcolm x descendant that you can possibly be. what he has written is insincere, it s infantile, it s what he said, psychiatric, you have to wonder about his sanity and his own identity. he is confused. tucker: if one of my employees wrote a piece like this about any group and said there s some racial group that hates me and each one of them is looking at me weird on the street, first of all i would pull the piece because i think it s an attack on entire group which is not allowed. but second i would say you need to go talk to somebody. why didn t his editors do that? because it s the new york times. they ve devolved into an organization i had a lot of respect for them, but now it s just a lot of race baiting. it s the using of confused
feel like it is a psychiatric statement when you start thinking that one class of people s hates you, who don t en know you on the sidewalk. what did you make of this piece? i want to be completely transparent. i know w the writer a little bi. he s written about me. i ve interviewed him for a job. also to be transparent with what i say, tucker,. i don t have a problem with interracial dating. i want to put that on the record. i ve done it. i don t have a problem with it. black men like greg howard, who in his piece he spells out that he s had this great affinity towards white women, they ve been sisters, his mother, they ve been lovers, they ve been his best friend. he has an obsession with white women. and black men who have an obsession with white women, and sometimes to date outside their race, they find as a defense mechanism for the chrism they take in the black community is to try to be publicly antiwhite.
investigation under that language. that s what he was given by rosenstein. r: tucker: i don t believe that any person who does business in russia, no matter how well-meaning, could survive a forensic look into those business deals. i honestly think if i had dinner in russia last year i could be arrested. this seems like a real threat. it is a real threat. we ve never had i a president wh this extensive portfolio that s transnational in character. these are transactions all around the world. they are very large. tithey tend to be messy. these are special counsel investigates, but they are federal investigators. if they see a crime, they will refer to the fbi or take it themselves. but that creates a very high risk for this administration. tucker: i i think it s fair to say that voters, who are the point of this whole exercise, knew that trump did business in russia. he did not release his tax returns. they were very aware of that. they elected him anyway.
so from the trump administration s point of view, this is all a disingenuous effort to nullify the election. that s how they feel about it. and i think they have a point. what can i doct about it? anything? there s not much that they can do about it. i can understand the frustration from the white house. it s like having a cop behind your car on the freeway just moving with you as you watch the speedometer to make sure you don t go over 60. it sort of unnerving. and that is going to be the reality for a while for the trump administration. it s like complaining about the weather. l i think they need to get a strategy.. they have to stop acting tactically.. that s what they veac been doin. they ve been a few steps behind and they ve been reacting. they need and overarching strategy, and they need to keep a single coherent and cut, consistent narrative. that s the most important thing. you re going to have three major players going in front of committees next week. that s the most dange
classified information is a 10-year prison sentence. you get six or seven of those i think you will see these leaks start to fade away. tucker:ve i wonder why this isn t being covered. i ran into an elected member of one of the intel committees. i won t say whatt house it is from. but this guy told me, and overseeing, providing oversight of the intel agencies that he would not speak on his cell phone because he was afraid that hise conversation was being recorded by our intelu agencies to be used against impaired one of the few people who would know! he is on the s intel committee! we have lost control. we c have lost control. in a strange way this is where the freedom caucus and the aclu are on the same page because at to actually used care about domestic spying and civil liberties and all these things. i think trump has an opportunity to say we are going to have this conversation, we are going to pull back the curtain and we are first of all going to say it s the duly elected pre