I’ve seen a lot of hate floating around for Tucker Carlson calling him an “ANTI-SEMITE!” and saying all sorts of ridiculous things…

But I’ve noticed mostly that the people who are saying that are usually the people who have never actually listened to one of his speeches.

Very similar to back in 2015 when people HATED Trump and you would ask them “Have you ever attended a Rally or even listened to one online?  Not the media summaries of it, but listened to a full one yourself?”

And of course the answer would always be “no”.

Also very similar to people who HATE Tesla and you ask them “Have you ever actually driven one?”

And of course the answer is almost always “no”.

So I wanted to do the same thing with Tucker Carlson right now — I want to play you his full speech at AmFest today and if you think Tucker is anti-semitic or wrong in his beliefs that’s great, more power to you, everyone should have their own opinion — but I want to ask you specifically tell me what in this speech you disagree with.

Because I listened to all of it and it seems like the most basic America-First beliefs you can have, and I thought that was the core of this movement?

Oh, and before I give you the video, let me show you what Google keeps doing to the Closed Captioning of any Tucker Carlson video I watch recently.

This does not happen on ANY other video and I’m certainly not changing the settings myself, but check out how the change the Closed Captioning language to “Arabic” on his video:

Of course the implication is that Tucker is some secret Muslim or something, which is absurd.

People like Laura Loomer even call him Tucker Qatarlson, making the same slur.

But again I challenge you to listen to this speech (or read the transcript I’ve provided below) and then give me specifics if there is something in here you disagree with or think is not “America-First”.

I am genuinely eager to read your comments, maybe I will learn something I missed.

Watch here:

FULL TRANSCRIPT:

Thank you. Oh, what a trip.

Thank you very much. Oh, yeah.

Thank you. Oh, thank you.

Walking out is always such a trip at these things. I just—I just got here, and I feel like I missed the first part of the program.

I hope I didn’t miss anything meaningful.

Um, but I just want to say… I don’t think I did.

Um, no, I’m just kidding. I watched it.

I laughed. I laughed that kind of bitter, sardonic laugh that emerges from you when, like, upside-down world arrives—when your dog starts doing your taxes and you’re like, “Wait… it’s not supposed to work this way.”

To hear calls for, like, deplatforming and denouncing people at a Charlie Kirk event—I’m like, what?

ADVERTISEMENT

This is hilarious.

Yeah, this is hilarious.

Actually, one of the clips I was listening to myself, thinking—as I often do when I hear myself speak, which is never, because I never watch myself—but at these events I always play, like, the role of you.

And I’m like, “That guy is pompous.” Woo.

Sorry about that. We don’t see ourselves clearly.

Um, but the prediction that, you know, at some point when Republicans took power again—which I did everything I could, uh, you know, to help, and really felt that was important—I still think, you know, I was right.

But I really thought that the impulse to deplatform people, or even to use the word “platform” as a verb—which it’s not. It’s a noun. Don’t steal my nouns.

Deplatform and denounce. “Why haven’t you denounced somebody else?” The whole, like, Red Guard Cultural Revolution thing that we so hated and feared on the left, that we did everything we could to usher in a new time where you could have an actual debate…

I mean, this kind of was the whole point of Charlie Kirk’s public life.

And I think that—um—I think that he died for it. I really believe that.

And I know a lot about it because the last several months of Charlie’s life were devoted, in part, to arguing about this event.

ADVERTISEMENT

In fact, this speech—in fact, my speech here—which he asked me to do earlier this year, this summer—was immediately put under just immense pressure from people, uh, who give money to Turning Point… I would assume good people, but who wanted him to take me off the roster.

And this has all become public, and I—it’s…the whole thing is so sad that I never talk about it, except to say Charlie stood firm in his often-stated and deeply held belief that people should be able to debate.

And that if you have something valid to say, if you’re telling the truth, you ought to be able to explain it calmly and in detail to people who don’t agree with you.

And that you shouldn’t immediately resort to “Shut up, racist.” You shouldn’t immediately go to motive.

By the way, “Shut up, racist” is the number one reason I voted for Donald Trump, because I’m just sick of it.

I mean, first of all, if I was a racist—if I was a bigot—I would just say so. Okay?

It’s America. You’re allowed to be whatever kind of person you want. I’m not. I’m sincerely opposed. Have always been and will always be.

But the style of debate where you prevent the other side from talking or being heard because you immediately go to motive…

“Well, I wonder why you’re asking that question. I wonder why. Why are you asking that question? I detect in the question a certain evil in your soul.”

And everyone listening should know that listening to you implicates them, and that they someday may be asked to denounce you.

And that friendship is not a reason to defend someone. Love is no defense.

I kind of thought we’d reached the end of that.

And as far as I’m concerned, we have.

And I’m not going to play by those rules. I’m not going to engage in that.

If someone doesn’t like what I think, fine with me—as long as I get to express it. That’s my view.

But since we’re on the topic, I think I should take the opportunity to explain why Charlie was under all this pressure.

And I—and I think Erica, who I just saw backstage, and whom I love—and who I can tell you is totally committed to continuing the core principle of Charlie’s public life, which is the right of every person to express what he believes—that is rooted in Christian faith.

We believe people should be able to say what they think because they have souls.

They’re human beings created by God. They are not slaves. They are not animals. They are not objects.

You cannot tell another human being to shut up—even “shut up, racist”—because you don’t own him.

He is an independent, autonomous person created by God as an individual, okay?

So that’s where that belief comes from. That’s where free speech comes from.

And there’s no accident this is the only country in the world that protects it, because our founding documents were informed—as you just heard so nicely expressed by Michael Knowles, my friend—by people who self-consciously incorporated Christian precepts into their structure of government.

So Charlie was committed to that, but the people around him were like, “You can’t,” because it’s not that Carlson’s wrong—my only point was I don’t want a land war with Iran.

I got over my skis and said I didn’t want another regime-change war with Iran, rather than explain why we should have a regime-change war with Iran, which I’d be happy to listen to.

“He’s an anti-Semite. He is an anti-Semite.”

To which I said, “Well, obviously that’s not true.”

And Charlie said, “I know.”

And then it just didn’t stop.

So I continued to say, “I’m not an anti-Semite.”

“We don’t care what you say. You’re lying. You are.”

So, let me just affirm one final time: not only am I not an anti-Semite—and would say so if I was—I’m not an anti-Semite for a very specific reason.

Not because it’s unpopular or my donors don’t like it. I don’t have any donors.

I’m not an anti-Semite because anti-Semitism is immoral in my religion.

It is immoral to hate people for how they were born.

Period.

But that is not a limited principle. That is a universal principle.

It applies to every human being on planet Earth.

You may not—you are prohibited by my religion, which is Christianity—from hating people for how they were born, because God created them with His spark, in His image, because they have souls.

You can disagree with them. You can hate their ideas.

You may even find yourself—and I do, I’ll confess it—hating them for a moment.

But you can’t hate everyone who’s like them.

You can’t punish people for crimes they didn’t commit. That’s the basis of our justice system. That’s the basis of Christian ethics. That’s why we have what are called human rights.

They apply to every human. Not just your group, not just my group, but every group—every human—because we don’t consider people in terms of the groups to which they belong. We consider them as individuals, the way that God created them.

So anti-Semitism is not just naughty—it’s immoral.

And it is precisely as immoral as hating any other group.

And that would include other groups in the United States that are hated and have been under attack for decades.

And that would include white men who did nothing to become white men. They were born that way.

And just because you have a beef with a white man—let’s just say Donald Trump—doesn’t mean you get to punish all the rest of the white men in the country.

And yet our leaders—not just of our Congress, the executive branch under Biden, but of every major U.S. corporation, of every college in the country—probably except Hillsdale and two others—every single one for more than 10 years has engaged in a systematic effort to hurt white men because they are white men.

That is racism.

That is precisely as bad as anti-Semitism, but it is much more widespread and has been so far much more damaging.

And my point is: if you said nothing about that, or if you encouraged it by, say, cheering on BLM—which was an anti-white hate group, and said so—then you have no moral standing to lecture me about bias.

Period.

Because all bias is the same.

You are not allowed to hate people based on their bloodline.

We do not believe in blood guilt. We reject blood guilt.

That’s why our justice system is just. That’s why our religion is just.

Every person has the possibility of transformation.

Paul is wandering around—Saul of Tarsus is wandering around—murdering Christians.

Then he decides, “Well, I’ll walk to Syria,” and he’s met on the road by Jesus, who changes him, and in one day he becomes the most energetic church planter and apostle of Christianity.

In one day he went from enemy to leader.

In one day.

And that possibility exists for every human being.

Every human being.

That’s what our Christian faith tells us. That’s also what our eyes tell us.

There are no permanent enemies. There cannot be.

And I would—I would extend this to even people who attack me from this stage.

They say, if we agree on something, I’m happy to be friends with you.

You may have been mean to me one day. Well, I was mean to you too. That’s all right.

There is always the possibility that we can recognize we have more in common than divides us and come back together.

There are no permanent enemies.

There is no such thing as blood guilt.

And collective punishment in this country, in the Middle East, anywhere on the planet, is totally immoral.

And if you want to know what makes America exceptional, it’s that idea.

And it’s our job to defend it.

So, I guess I would just say to the many organizations now—and particularly this applies to the Anti-Defamation League—which has cheered on anti-white hatred for decades, has attacked anyone who said anything about it, which has been one of the most aggressive cheerleaders for hate against white men in the United States—now trying to lecture the rest of us about hate…

I would say it’s enough to point out the irony of that.

Come to our side, which is the side of humanity, and oppose all hate against all people.

Say out loud, “Hate against whites is every bit as bad as hate against Jews.”

It’s a universal principle, or it’s not a principle—it’s just a preference.

If it’s not a universal principle, it’s not a principle. It’s just a preference.

It’s just identity politics, and we’ve had enough of that.

And that’s the one thing that will destroy this country, certainly.

The only thing that will save it is the understanding that principles upon which America was founded apply to every single human being always.

So I just want to say that by way of saying that I’m not just situationally opposed to anti-Semitism.

I’m actually opposed to anti-Semitism.

And I hope that the ADL will join me. I’ll send the money, by the way, if they come out against hate aimed at anyone and everyone.

I hope they will.

But let me just say something more broadly about where the conservative movement—whatever that is—the people who voted for Trump, the Trump coalition, and the supposed civil war going on within that group…

I don’t think it’s real.

I think it’s fake. I think it’s totally fake.

I don’t think—and I’ve had cause to think a lot about this because I’ve been unwittingly involved in the proxy war—there are two things going on here, and I’m not guessing.

One is jockeying for position post-Trump.

So Trump created this amazing coalition bringing in people who had never voted Republican before but were very enthusiastic about him.

And that coalition took over the most powerful government in the history of the world.

So there’s a lot—a lot—at stake here.

And so the question becomes: who gets to run it after?

Who gets the machinery when the president exits the scene?

And there are a lot of people in Washington—maybe even in this room—who aren’t quite sure what they want, but they know they don’t want J.D. Vance.

Okay?

And so the attack—and you heard it from the stage tonight—there’s someone here who’s a very bad man, and he’s friends with J.D. Vance.

Could be me.

I am sad about being used in a proxy war over politics in which I’m not involved on any level. I’m not an adviser to anybody.

But I just think I should say that out loud.

Okay.

There are people who are mad at J.D. Vance, and they’re stirring up a lot of this in order to make sure he doesn’t get the nomination.

That this is true.

So this raises the obvious question, which is: why are they mad at J.D. Vance?

Such a nice guy, which he is.

They’re mad at J.D. Vance because he is the one person—and things could change, of course—but right now, who really kind of buys the core idea of the Trump coalition.

Now what is that idea, ladies and gentlemen? Anyone know? Anyone know?

America First.

It’s America First.

It’s really simple.

Which I notice some people are pretty anxious to retire that phrase.

Remember when they told us that’s a bigoted phrase? Really it is.

And then they just decided to ignore it in favor of MAGA: Make America Great Again, which I’m obviously for.

But how do you make America great again?

By putting America first.

Now, what does that mean?

I’ll be more precise.

It’s not a complicated concept. It’s a really simple concept.

The U.S. government, the largest organization in human history with the most well-funded military in history, ought to—in all the decisions it makes—put the interests of American citizens first.

That’s it.

Oh, that’s creepy. Sounds kind of fascist.

You’re going to invade Poland now?

No, just the opposite.

In fact, the original America Firsters were kind of against wars, and the current ones are too.

Actually, it just means what it sounds like.

The government ought to serve the people who pay for it, who elected them, in whose name the business of government is conducted.

That’s all it means.

Now, there are two things to know about this idea.

The first is almost everyone’s for that.

Like what percentage—if you polled that idea in the supposedly fractious Trump coalition that’s in the middle of a civil war—what percentage of people disagree with that?

Well, a few—you know, people whose names you know.

“Well, that sounds like America only.”

No, it’s not. Just America First. Simple.

But, like, probably 95% of Trump voters would be for that.

And I bet you, like, probably 70% of people who didn’t vote for Trump would be for that.

And if you calmed down and explained it to them, probably like 90%.

Why? Because it’s self-evident, like most true things.

And moreover—and think this through for a second—there is no other legitimate rationale for running our government.

We have self-government. This is a democratic republic. It exists for our benefit.

The documents were written that way.

The point of the American Revolution was to make that point.

And so, if you’re not operating the federal government on behalf of U.S. citizens, you’re illegitimate. You actually have no right to rule.

Period.

And if you disagree, tell me what the other legitimate justification is.

Oh, ’cause my friends, or people I agree with, or in my, you know, interest group…

I mean, no.

The government must—must—this is non-negotiable—operate on behalf of American citizens.

So once you realize that that’s the statement at the center of the debate, it all becomes pretty clear.

Really clear, actually.

It’s not an ideological debate. There’s nothing ideological about that.

I’ve got all kinds of kooky ideological views.

I love Knowles’s list of all the views. I probably had most of them in my long and varied life.

I have fewer now.

I just kind of want to see a good-faith effort to improve the country. That’s it.

And I’m ever aware that I’m not exactly sure the right way, a lot of times.

Are tariffs the best way to help the country?

I don’t know. I hope so. Not an expert.

All I really care about is that the people in charge care—that they love the people they lead.

That is the first and most important requirement of leadership.

A father who loves his children may make mistakes.

Probably will. Inevitably will. I did.

But if he loves his kids, he’ll do a pretty good job, and they’ll be fine.

An officer who loves his men—you know, he can’t control the battle—but they’ll do better than the officer who doesn’t.

The president who truly loves his people will over time tend to make wiser decisions on their behalf.

But the leaders who don’t care at all—they’ll destroy your country.

And that is absolutely what we’ve had.

That’s, by the way, not noted as an effort to blackpill you, or an effort to discourage you, or convince you you have no agency or control.

You have a lot of control. You just change the government. Good.

But if you want to know what the debate is going forward and what your job is going forward, it’s holding your leaders to that very simple standard.

Not on tariffs or any of these specific policy questions necessarily, but on their motive.

Can you look me in the face and explain to me why the thing that you are doing—the money you’re appropriating—can you tell me why that helps our country and our people?

Tell me how.

And if you’re doing the whole “shut up racist” thing, then I have a right to question your motives.

Actually, why can’t you answer the question?

Why can’t you answer that question?

Why do you have to imply that some college kid is like some kind of Hitlerite or something because he’s asking about an event?

Like, what?

By the way, it is okay to ask questions.

And I thought that was like the whole reason we were against the left.

They’re not going to force you to get up there and make ritual denunciations because this isn’t my religion. It’s politics.

By the way, your politics do not trump my love for other people.

I remember my brother once said—I have one brother who’s my best friend—and he once said something lunatic, as brothers do.

And I remember all these reporters, one from the Washington Post—which used to be a newspaper in Washington—calling me and being like, “Will you denounce your brother?”

I said, “Son, if my brother went on a drug-related murder spree, I would not denounce him.”

What are you for? Drug-related murder sprees?

No, I’m for my brother.

And nothing will ever make me not for my brother.

Now, I’d probably tell him, “No more drug-related murder sprees for you.”

I’m not for that.

I’m not for a lot of things, actually.

But I will never, ever denounce people I love to satisfy the mob, right?

I mean, it’s crazy.

So, as you think through, like, what should this movement be, and where’s—what side should you take on the conservative civil war…

You already know the answer.

You’re on the side of America First.

And if they can’t tell you why it’s America First, you just won the argument, because they don’t have one.

“Shut up Nazi” is no different from “shut up racist.”

It’s a little more annoying, actually.

And I would just say this too, because the passion is real, the anger is real.

I feel it sometimes.

I try not to get involved, but somehow I keep involving myself.

Um, and I try not to read the internet because I don’t feel like it’s good for my soul.

But, you know—more addictive than cigarettes. I quit cigarettes, not Twitter.

I think I’m going back to cigarettes and giving up Twitter.

Whatever.

I don’t want to burden you.

Not kidding, actually.

But anyway, the point is you need to remember, if you’re a Christian—and I think there are a lot of them in this room—that Jesus makes demands on you and holds standards for you that are very different from those, as my friend, close friend Russell Brand so beautifully explained, they’re very different from those of the world, which really is controlled by Satan.

I—it’s hard even to say that because it’s so dark, but it’s also so true.

So don’t be surprised when Jesus sends out the disciples—like, one of my favorite passages in the whole New Testament—when Jesus in Matthew 10 sends the disciples out.

He’s just picked them, like, 10 minutes before, and He’s like, “All right, I want you guys—road trip. No money, no clothes, no staff.

And by the way, you’re going to get flogged. You’re going to get beaten with whips and arrested.”

I’m sure they’re all thinking like, “What? I—you know—I thought we were the winners here.”

And when that happens, like, don’t worry about what you’re going to say. The Holy Spirit will speak for you.

And I’m like, I just can’t get over the blasé way in which He just tells them the world is going to try and kill you.

Which, by the way, it did. I think all of them end up getting killed.

And that’s just the baseline.

We’re promised that. It’s a fact.

You get up and give a speech about Jesus. You talk about Jesus. You try to live out His commands—you’re going to get attacked.

Okay, we know that.

Don’t whine.

Here’s the pitfall. Here’s the trap—is becoming hateful yourself.

And I sincerely believe that this—this is a spiritual battle.

And I’m not saying everyone who disagrees with me is on the side of evil. I don’t think that.

I think I’m often wrong. I know that I am.

But I do think that fundamentally this is light versus darkness. I do.

And darkness is characterized by rage and division and chaos and confusion.

And light is—God is—characterized by the opposite of those things.

And I’ve noticed this: there are attempts to make people hateful.

One of the reasons people scream insults in your face is to provoke a reaction from you and make you hate them.

They want you to hate them.

They want you to become what they call you.

Why?

Because evil feeds on hate. That’s why.

So don’t participate in that.

And the way that I try to keep myself from becoming what they say I am is by remembering that I am, on the most basic level, no better than my persecutors.

I am no better than my persecutors.

And that’s why I’m commanded to pray for them, because we have all fallen short of Jesus.

Period.

And I’m reminded of that every day in the structure of the Lord’s Prayer, where we first are told by Jesus to ask for forgiveness for our sins before we start diagnosing the plank in our neighbor—or the speck in our neighbor’s side.

The whole thing begins with: I’m a pompous douchebag. I’ll admit it.

That’s essential. It’s essential.

We are called to be righteous, but not self-righteous.

And we’re also called—and I have to say this before opening it up to your hostile questions—we should also be very on guard against people who try to leverage the word of God, the words of Jesus, for political ends.

That is one—that is a dangerous thing to do.

I don’t want to do that.

And I attempt every time.

This is all sort of new to me.

I’m so obviously not a great Christian that it’s—it’s not like a lot of people are going to be like, “Oh, I want to be like him.”

But there are people, particularly Christian ministers, I have noticed, who are preaching a political message and pretending that it’s the gospel.

So, let me just say—and I think my theology is right. I’m hardly a theologian.

God is not on any country’s side.

Certain countries can decide to be on God’s side.

And that is true for people too.

Okay?

God doesn’t have a partisan affiliation.

He doesn’t have a nationality.

And if someone is telling you otherwise, that is just not true.

It is not true.

Load More This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.