Plot

Tulsi Gabbard, introduced by Tucker, critiques the neoconservative alignment between figures like Dick Cheney and Kamala Harris, warning about the dangers of their pro-war policies and the broader existential threat of nuclear conflict

Tucker Carlson introduces Tulsi Gabbard by highlighting her shift from a rising Democratic congresswoman to a political outsider due to her opposition to wars like the Syrian conflict. This opposition cost her favor within the Democratic Party, reflecting a broader alignment between neoconservatives such as Dick Cheney and Kamala Harris. Gabbard criticizes this alliance, warning of the dangers of supporting figures like Harris, who endorse policies that have caused significant harm, particularly in the Middle East. Gabbard addresses veterans, reminding them of the personal toll these wars have taken, and expresses her deep distrust of Harris as a potential commander-in-chief, given her alignment with Cheney's war-driven strategies. Throughout her speech, Gabbard emphasizes her broader concern about nuclear conflict, especially in light of how cavalierly it is discussed in Washington. Despite her frustrations, she remains hopeful, pointing to the importance of the upcoming election in determining the future of the nation, urging voters to focus on the critical issues at hand: peace, freedom, and the survival of the country itself.—J. Spurlin

Tucker Carlson begins by introducing Tulsi Gabbard, emphasizing her journey from a promising Democratic congresswoman to someone ostracized by her own party. He reflects on how Gabbard's opposition to certain wars, particularly in Syria, caused her to fall out of favor with the Democratic establishment. He further explains that this shift in her political career reflects broader issues, including the neoconservative alignment between figures like Dick Cheney and Kamala Harris. Carlson stresses that these individuals, despite their outward differences, share the same motivations: pursuing wars that benefit them financially, even at the expense of human lives.

Tulsi Gabbard takes the stage and shares her insights on the troubling nature of Cheney's endorsement of Harris. She points out that this political alignment demonstrates the true priorities of those in power. Gabbard emphasizes the importance of recognizing this connection, explaining that Cheney's policies have led to disastrous outcomes in the Middle East, and now, Harris aligns with those same ideals. This, she says, reveals the dangers of trusting Harris in a position of military command, particularly given the bloodshed and loss caused by Cheney's strategies. Gabbard addresses veterans in the audience, reminding them of the friends and comrades lost in wars initiated by leaders like Cheney, and expresses her distrust in Harris to lead with the lives of American soldiers in mind.

Carlson and Gabbard discuss how figures like Hillary Clinton and others within the Democratic Party have treated Gabbard with animosity, even to the point of calling for her imprisonment. Gabbard recounts the irony of how the Democratic Party, which once championed peace and minimal military intervention, has now become comfortable with endorsing neoconservative war policies for financial gain. She highlights the stark contrast between leaders like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who seek a different approach, and those who have embraced the military-industrial complex without hesitation.

Gabbard continues by discussing her support for Donald Trump, clarifying that while she does not agree with him on every issue, they are aligned on the most critical matter: the preservation of freedom and prosperity in the United States. She emphasizes that peace is fundamental to both, and without it, the country cannot thrive. Reflecting on the start of the war in Ukraine in 2022, she recalls the widespread support for the conflict but underscores her concern about the possibility of nuclear war. Gabbard stresses that the prospect of nuclear war should be alarming to everyone, regardless of political stance, yet those in power seem indifferent to this existential threat.

She highlights that her warnings about nuclear conflict date back to her 2019-2020 presidential campaign, where she spoke repeatedly about the dangers of escalating tensions with other nuclear-armed nations. Despite her efforts to bring attention to the issue, she faced resistance from the media and other candidates, who dismissed the urgency of the situation. Gabbard recalls an incident in 2017 when a false missile alert was issued in Hawaii, which starkly reminded everyone in the state of the real and present threat of nuclear annihilation. The experience underscored the fragility of life in the face of nuclear danger and the complete lack of preparation for such an event.

Gabbard expresses frustration over how cavalierly nuclear war is discussed in Washington today, with some pundits and defense experts talking about the use of smaller nuclear weapons as though they could be deployed without significant consequences. She calls out the dishonesty in this narrative, pointing to how it misleads the public about the true nature of nuclear conflict. She references Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev's 1985 statement that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought, warning that current leaders are disregarding this wisdom.

Her critique of both Democrats and Republicans is sharp, as she accuses them of recklessly pushing the country toward World War III, which she believes could only end in nuclear devastation. This concern underscores the larger issue at hand - how disconnected political leaders are from the real dangers of their actions, putting the entire world at risk.

Gabbard delves into the troubling reality of how political and economic interests intertwine with decisions that push the country toward war. She highlights how there are individuals and institutions that profit from perpetuating conflict, particularly through the development and sale of more advanced and powerful weapons. With the U.S. and Russia both possessing thousands of nuclear weapons, Gabbard underscores the terrifying reality that it only takes one to cause unfathomable destruction. The weapons today are exponentially more powerful than those used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, yet some leaders continue to treat the prospect of nuclear war casually.

She expresses hope, however, in the upcoming election, emphasizing that it does not have to be this way. Gabbard points to Donald Trump's repeated public and private remarks about the dangers of nuclear war and his commitment to steering the country away from that threat. She urges voters to focus on the most important issue - survival - rather than getting caught up in the superficial aspects of a candidate's personality, such as Trump's tweets. For Gabbard, the key issue is whether the country can avoid a war that would endanger all life.

Carlson reiterates his disbelief at the ruthlessness of those currently in power, suggesting that foreign policy is increasingly shaping domestic affairs. He points to how political opponents are delegitimized and even criminalized by being falsely accused of colluding with foreign governments. He mentions the recent indictments brought by the Biden administration against critics, which were framed as efforts to protect the country from foreign influence. Carlson fears that if Kamala Harris were to win, many more Americans would be imprisoned under similar false pretenses, accused of being aligned with foreign enemies.

Gabbard agrees, stating that Harris and Biden have already demonstrated their willingness to weaponize the Department of Justice and law enforcement to punish political opponents. She recalls Attorney General Merrick Garland's press conference, in which he announced the latest Russia-related indictments. To her, the announcement seemed more like a political maneuver designed to protect Harris's prospects in the upcoming election rather than a genuine concern about national security.

Gabbard then turns to a personal anecdote, explaining how she herself has been affected by government surveillance. She describes how, while traveling with her husband, she received an unusual designation on her boarding pass that subjected her to additional security screening. Although she was initially told it was a random occurrence, the experience marked the beginning of her awareness that she might have been placed on a secret domestic terror watchlist.

Gabbard recounts her experience of being targeted by the government's secret watchlist, known as "Quiet Skies." After receiving additional security screenings multiple times during her travels, she began to realize something was amiss. A TSA supervisor, noticing her military ID, expressed confusion over why she was being subjected to such treatment. His offhand remark about Trump supporters facing similar scrutiny suggested that political bias could be at play. Gabbard later learned from whistleblowers, including air marshals, that she had been placed on a secret domestic terror watchlist. This list, designed for tracking potential threats, had been weaponized against her due to her political dissent.

For several weeks, Gabbard was followed by air marshals, subjected to extra screenings, and treated as if she were a potential terrorist, despite her position as a sitting congresswoman and military officer. She describes how this situation reflects a larger abuse of power, one that mirrors the tactics of authoritarian regimes. Gabbard believes that this is political retaliation for her criticisms of Kamala Harris and the Biden administration. She emphasizes that this type of action, where critics of the government are followed, surveilled, and harassed, is no different from the practices of secret police forces in dictatorial countries.

Gabbard criticizes Attorney General Merrick Garland and the FBI for failing to uphold civil liberties and protect the constitutional rights of citizens. She argues that the current administration has turned the FBI into a political weapon, using it to silence dissenters and intimidate critics. She highlights examples of peaceful pro-life protesters being targeted with SWAT teams, suggesting that the government is selectively enforcing the law based on political ideology. This, she says, contradicts claims from figures like Dick Cheney that Trump is the greatest threat to democracy. In her view, it is the current administration that is undermining democratic values by using secret police tactics to stifle opposition.

Gabbard continues to reflect on how deeply politicized the FBI has become, clarifying that while not every field agent is corrupt, the leadership has been co-opted to serve as an enforcement arm for the Democratic Party. She critiques the Republican Party for its failure to challenge this, pointing out how Speaker Mike Johnson recently helped fund the FBI and provide it with a new building, despite its problematic actions. This, she says, suggests that the Republican leadership might be complicit in allowing the FBI's unchecked power to grow, highlighting a broader issue of corruption in Washington.

Gabbard also explains that the "Quiet Skies" watchlist she's been placed on remains shrouded in secrecy, with Congress itself unable to access the list or understand the criteria for being added to it. She notes that senators and members of Congress, like Rand Paul, have repeatedly requested documentation to justify why she is on a terror watchlist, but no evidence has been provided. Gabbard uses this example to underscore how broken the system is, where unelected officials wield significant power without accountability. She believes that real reform is possible, but only if courageous leaders are willing to take on the deeply entrenched corruption in Washington.

Carlson then pivots to discuss how dissent in the United States has increasingly been treated as a crime, particularly in matters of foreign policy. He shares how a Newsweek editor recently accused him of being funded by Russia, a claim he initially dismissed. However, Carlson's friends warned him that these accusations, though seemingly absurd, are often used as pretexts to criminally charge individuals or place them on terror watchlists. He sees this as a dangerous trend, where media outlets collaborate with the government to silence and intimidate critics, leading to greater risks of political persecution.

Gabbard continues by addressing how accusations and charges against political dissenters are often manufactured, drawing parallels to tactics used by Stalin. She expresses her concern that these actions are happening in plain sight, with the perpetrators confident in their ability to get away with it. Despite the seriousness of the situation, Carlson lightens the mood by asking Gabbard about her experiences with Hillary Clinton. Gabbard recalls how she resigned as Vice Chair of the DNC in 2016 to campaign against Clinton, a decision that instantly put her on the wrong side of the Democratic establishment.

During an interview at one of the early Democratic primary debates, a journalist from MSNBC asked Gabbard if she feared what Clinton might do to her in retaliation. Gabbard laughed at the question, stating she was not afraid. However, the reaction she received upon returning to Congress was telling. Her Democratic colleagues treated her like she was politically finished, warning her that by opposing Clinton, her constituents in Hawaii would suffer, and she would no longer have a future in politics. One colleague even informed her that she was now on "the list," a reference to a supposed blacklist of Clinton's political enemies. This colleague, who had once been on the list himself, said it took him 15 years of groveling to get off it.

Carlson expresses disbelief at the level of conformity and moral compromise that takes place in Washington, wondering why so many politicians abandon their principles. Gabbard responds by describing how individuals who enter politics with good intentions are quickly seduced by the allure of power and status. She recounts a personal anecdote from her early days in Washington, when she was told by a fellow politician that she would never have to stand in line again because of her status as a member of Congress. This moment highlighted for her the pervasive entitlement and culture of self-importance that dominates Washington, a mentality that often corrupts even those who begin their careers with a desire to serve.

Gabbard continues to describe how power and status in Washington can transform people, leading them to prioritize their own ambitions and social standing over their duties to serve the American people. She explains that many politicians become consumed by the desire for approval within the political elite, focusing on attending prestigious events and maintaining their position within the Washington establishment. This focus on status leads them to forget why they were elected in the first place, causing them to serve their own interests or the interests of powerful lobbyists instead of the people.

Carlson comments on how rare it is to find members of Congress who have balanced lives and remain connected to their families and communities. Gabbard agrees, emphasizing the importance of having a higher purpose to stay grounded. Whether that purpose comes from a sense of duty to the public or a relationship with God, she believes it is essential for politicians to remain focused on serving others rather than themselves. Without this grounding, she explains, they become driven by fear of losing power, and their decisions end up harming the very people they were elected to represent.

She highlights how Washington's culture fosters a mindset where politicians believe their value comes solely from their position and title, making them desperate to hold onto power at any cost. This mindset is dangerous, as it causes politicians to lose touch with reality and prioritize their personal gain over the wellbeing of the country.

Carlson then notes Gabbard's spiritual grounding as something that sets her apart from many of her colleagues, asking if she senses a religious revival in the country. Gabbard responds that she does feel a spiritual resurgence, noting that more people are openly talking about God and expressing their faith. She shares a story about her husband, who is not involved in politics, attending an event and being struck by how kind and genuine the attendees were, particularly in their sincere expressions of faith.

Gabbard continues by contrasting the atmosphere at events held by Democrats with those at more faith-centered gatherings. She explains that at some Democratic events, the mere mention of God or a call to prayer can provoke discomfort or even cause people to leave the room. This reaction, she argues, reflects a broader cultural shift within certain political circles, where objective truths and even basic constitutional principles are being rejected. She sees this as a dangerous trend, particularly when it comes to issues like gender identity, where science and truth are often disregarded in favor of ideology.

Gabbard and Carlson discuss how this erosion of spiritual values and truth in public life is contributing to widespread societal harm. Gabbard points to the Biden administration's decision to announce Trans Visibility Day on Easter as an example of how the government is increasingly pushing policies that contradict traditional beliefs. Carlson questions why there wasn't more public outcry against this, but Gabbard notes that fear and self-censorship have become pervasive. People are afraid to speak out, worried they'll lose their jobs or be ostracized by friends and family.

This culture of fear, Gabbard argues, is designed to silence dissent. Her placement on a secret terror watchlist, she believes, is not only political retaliation but also a warning to others. It sends the message that anyone who challenges the system or exposes the truth risks facing similar consequences. Carlson agrees, calling Gabbard "dangerous" in the best sense, because she is unafraid to speak the truth.

Carlson ends by expressing hope, largely due to the presence of people like Gabbard, who maintain a spiritual center and a commitment to truth. He suggests that while it may feel like the country is falling apart, there are many Americans who still hold firm to these values, even if they aren't always vocal about it.

Gabbard shares his optimism, explaining that her hope ultimately comes from knowing that God's love is eternal and unconditional. While she is deeply concerned about the upcoming election and the powerful forces working to ensure a Kamala Harris victory, she remains hopeful because of the vision the Founders had for the country. She believes that, despite the challenges, the American people still have the power to shape the future.

Gabbard concludes her speech by reinforcing the importance of civic engagement, emphasizing that the future of the country is in the hands of the people. She acknowledges the overwhelming power of "forces of darkness," but urges the audience not to underestimate the power of their own voices. Each person, she explains, has the ability to influence their family, friends, and coworkers by sharing their concerns and the reasons for their vote in the upcoming election. She emphasizes that this election is not simply about Democrats versus Republicans, but about a larger choice between freedom and tyranny, peace and war, prosperity and poverty.

Gabbard encourages her audience to engage in meaningful conversations, even with those who may disagree with them, as these discussions are essential in a free country. She warns that if the election does not go in favor of freedom, the ability to have such conversations could be lost. Gabbard contrasts the records of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, asserting that the facts speak for themselves and that it is the responsibility of the people to save the country and defend freedom. She stresses that this is a "no-fail mission," urging everyone to do their part to ensure a free and prosperous future for the nation.

Carlson wraps up by thanking Gabbard for her powerful words and the hope she brings to those who feel disheartened by the current state of the country. He closes the event by announcing his upcoming fall tour, encouraging attendees to join him at various live events across the United States, where they can continue to discuss and fight for the issues that matter most to them.