00:01:10.900If you love football and want to understand what's really happening on the field, check out our show, NFL Pro.
00:01:16.500Every week, we break down the biggest plays, trends, and matchups using exclusive next-gen stats insights and NFL content you will not find anywhere else.
00:01:24.520Whether you're new to football, a fantasy football fanatic, or a diehard fan,
00:01:28.860NFL Pro will help you analyze the game like a pro.
00:01:32.800Listen to NFL Pro on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
00:01:40.060The World Cup is over, but if you caught the soccer bug and aren't sure what to do now,
00:01:44.180check out our podcast, Big Kick Energy.
00:01:46.220I'm Cameron Dicker, the kicker from the Los Angeles Chargers,
00:01:49.020and I'm here with Timmy Tillman, current LAFC star player.
00:01:52.500So, we know a little something about kicking balls.
00:01:55.380Each week, we'll tackle things like, who's winning the Premier League this year?
00:01:59.100What do you think is harder, scoring a penalty kick or scoring a field goal?
00:02:02.900Join us each week for a quick chat with your soccer-loving bros about the best sport in the world.
00:02:07.380Soccer. Just don't tell my coaches I said that.
00:02:10.040Listen to Big Kick Energy on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.
00:02:16.400Welcome. It is Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you.
00:02:19.760It's so nice to have you with us wherever you are around the country, and this episode
00:02:24.080is going to be a really fun one, so if you're listening on audio, you might want to check
00:02:35.320We had a few of those moments with a sit-down with Tucker Carlson, and you had the brilliant
00:02:41.040idea of, you know what, that individual we should probably ask to come on Verdict and
00:02:44.960talk about the insanity of that conversation and what was said in Europe about Germany, about
00:02:51.120the Nazis. It was truly incredible. And so I want you to go ahead and introduce our guest.0.87
00:02:56.380Well, we're very pleased to welcome to verdict Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg. Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg
00:03:01.740was previously Minister of State and Minister for Brexit Opportunities and Government Efficiency
00:03:07.660in the cabinet office between February 8th, 2022, and September 6th of 2022.
00:03:14.680He was the Lord President of the Council and the Leader of the Commons from July 24th, 2019
00:03:21.100to February 8th, 2022. And I got to say right now, just at the outset, the British titles are so
00:03:29.260much cooler than our time. I mean, there's just, we don't have a Lord President. Like,
00:03:35.400I'm not even exactly sure what that means. But with those high accolades, we are honored
00:03:47.260to welcome Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg to Verdict. Sir Jacob, we are very glad to have you.
00:03:54.300Well, Senator, thank you so much for inviting me. And though I may have had grand titles, I've always thought that being a senator of the United States is a wonderful thing to be, a very, not just a grand title, but a powerful position that determines the future of the world. So I'm very flattered that you should invite me on to your program.
00:04:13.000Well, you are very gracious. You are officially the first knight to be on this show. And I did have a discussion of what is the proper appellation. And I was told, Sir Jacob, you Philistine cretin, which I recognize is probably fair.
00:04:34.260But in my defense, for years, Ben has been trying to convince me to call him Sir Ben.1.00
00:04:54.960But I'm sure you know that being from Texas, you must like eating beef.
00:04:59.440The sirloin of beef was knighted by King James I, said this meat is so good it must be knighted, and the loin of beef became the sirloin of beef.
00:07:54.840That's not a reason not to talk to him, because if you talk to him, you may be able to get your message across to his supporters and followers.
00:08:01.500So I thought it was a risk worth taking, and he happened to be in London the following week.
00:08:08.380And I also thought he fundamentally misunderstood what I'd said about being prepared for war, suggesting this was warmongering, which it obviously isn't.
00:08:16.960Being prepared for war is not warmongering. It's trying to avoid war.
00:08:21.240Well, that is exactly right. And the argument that the isolationists make is that withdrawing
00:08:28.640from the world and weakness somehow avoids the risk of military conflict. And we have only
00:08:35.820millennia of human history to the contrary, that when a nation is weak, when they are unprepared
00:08:41.220to defend themselves, that's when they become attractive to bullies and tyrants and invading
00:08:46.400armies. And history has shown that the strongest, the easiest way, the best way to avoid war is to
00:08:54.380be so strong that your enemies don't want to mess with you. It is what Ronald Reagan referred to as
00:09:00.260peace through strength. And that's a concept that the isolationist, it simply eludes them.
00:09:08.500I want to say at the outset, Sir Jacob, your performance in that interview was simply masterful, and it was as if you took Tucker as an ill-behaved and petulant second grader, and you very calmly put him over your knee and showed him the discipline which I am now convinced in his upbringing was sorely lacking, that I think nobody properly spanked Tucker.
00:09:38.500And he has continued down this road as a consequence. I have to say, when you sat down,
00:09:45.360you may have had some curiosity. What questions is this American going to ask me? Where are they
00:09:51.920going to come from? Did you envision that it would start with the question of, are we glad
00:10:00.660with who won World War II? And wouldn't it be better if the Nazis had won World War II?0.89
00:10:08.340Yes, it seemed to me a completely extraordinary question.
00:10:11.280It didn't seem to me a question a serious person would ask.
00:10:14.200There are debates about many wars as to whether they were right to fight or not.
00:10:19.860But the one which seems to me to be the most obvious that had to be fought is the one against Nazi Germany,0.66
00:10:27.040that Hitler wanted to dominate the whole of Europe, ideally the world,0.79
00:10:32.880and he was never going to stop and he had to be stopped because what he wanted to do0.58
00:10:38.980was evil and i think there is a fight between good and evil and that politicians statesmen have to
00:10:47.320take their position on this commentators as well so no i was very surprised that that was the line
00:10:53.560of questioning and it didn't seem to me to be a very difficult answer to say that that war was
00:10:59.560fundamental. And that, yes, it cost the UK a great deal of money and a great number of lives,
00:11:06.920but it was nonetheless not only the right thing to do, but led to a better world afterwards for
00:11:12.840every country that came through it. Well, and I think you saw in that interview,
00:11:17.700Tucker Carlson is, I have said many times, I think he is the most dangerous demagogue in America.
00:11:23.040and he uses a host of tools. He uses sophistry. And I was very glad just a minute ago in your
00:11:30.860answer, you made reference to the fact that Hitler was evil and what he was doing was evil.0.97
00:11:36.600And I very much believe that good and evil exists, that there is objective truth. Not everything0.54
00:11:42.380is black and white, but many things are black and white. And what the Nazis did,
00:11:47.680standing up concentration camps, exterminating more than six million Jews, also exterminating
00:11:55.120gypsies and homosexuals and people with disabilities, systematically putting human
00:12:00.340beings in gas chambers and ovens to engage in genocide, to engage in mass murder, not to mention0.99
00:12:08.540to engage in horrific torture and rape and all kinds of human abuse. There is no gray about that.
00:12:16.240There is no ambiguity. That is not just one country ordinarily fighting. That is the very
00:12:22.560embodiment of evil. And part of what Tucker does frequently is a lied over evil. When he looks to
00:12:30.460the Middle East, when he sees Hamas on October 7th coming into Israel and murdering more than0.95
00:12:37.7001,200 Israelis, raping little girls, raping women, kidnapping over 200 Israelis, murdering0.98
00:12:44.700dozens of Americans raping Americans, kidnapping Americans. For him, that does not rise to the0.99
00:12:53.300level of evil. And instead he engages in a moral equivalence where he has said in another one of
00:12:59.280his shows that he doesn't know if Hamas is a terrorist organization. He thinks they may just
00:13:06.440be a political movement. And that's the same process of alighting over the facts and erasing
00:13:13.820evil, and it's not a new trick for a demagogue, but it is one of Tucker's favorites, and it is,
00:13:21.300I believe, thoroughly dishonest. Well, I'm not a moral relativist. I think there are
00:13:26.540absolutes in morality, and I agree with you entirely on Hamas and the point that you make.0.97
00:13:33.060And I think that it is in all our interests, America's interests, Britain's interests,0.97
00:13:38.980to try and maintain as much order in the world as is possible. We can't put every wrong right.
00:13:46.780We can't do anything effectively to help the Uyghurs in China, but that there are many things
00:13:52.860we can do. And supporting Israel against a threat to its very existence is important,0.98
00:13:59.120not least because the stable order that we want is built upon the nation state.
00:14:05.460And I think this is absolutely fundamental. The rights of countries are based on nation states and that terrorists and foreign powers that wish to destroy individual nation states have to be opposed because if they're not, the risk ends up coming to the bigger nation states who find by having sat back and done nothing that they are ultimately under threat.
00:14:27.400It's the old line from Kipling, if you keep paying Dane geld, the Dane doesn't go away.
00:14:32.340If you don't project strength, you're not able to defend yourself, then you will find
00:14:36.360that ultimately people are coming after you.
00:14:39.180Well, I think that's right, and I think it is also incumbent on leaders, particularly
00:14:44.940leaders in Western democracies, to call out evil where they see it.
00:14:51.760One question is whether you speak the truth about what is happening.
00:14:55.380A second question, which doesn't necessarily follow, is what steps do you take in response to that evil?
00:15:03.160And in particular, does that necessarily entail military conflict?
00:15:07.340That is an altogether different question.
00:15:09.580So as you noted, the Uyghurs, the Chinese communist government, has over one million Uyghurs, an ethnic minority, Muslim Chinese, who are in concentration camps.
00:15:20.660It is the largest instance of human slavery on planet Earth right now.
00:15:25.380And it is a grotesque human rights violation. Now, I think any leader of decency and morality
00:15:34.540has an obligation to call it out, to call it out for what it is, which is torture and murder
00:15:40.040and slavery. Likewise, when the Chinese communist government engages in forced organ harvesting
00:15:48.200from the Falun Gong, a religious minority where they forcibly remove organs,0.81
00:15:53.580in many instances killing the person in the process and take the organs to give them to0.99
00:15:58.520some other citizen whom they deem more valuable, I think all of us have an obligation to call it
00:16:04.040out and say that is wrong. Now there's a distinct question. Neither the United States nor the
00:16:09.060United Kingdom have sent tanks into China to invade to shut down those concentration camps.1.00
00:16:15.920You could make an argument that we should. You could make an argument that we should not. But0.87
00:16:20.920either way, the threshold for military action is substantially higher. And the bare minimum is,
00:16:27.460can you speak with moral clarity and call it out? And I believe doing so has enormous power. For me,
00:16:35.800the formative and transformational foreign policy and national security event of our lifetimes
00:16:44.600was the fall of the Soviet Union, was winning the Cold War. And that did not happen by accident.
00:16:50.980That did not happen just with the winds of time. It happened because of clear and strong
00:16:58.120leadership. And it happened because of clear and strong leadership from President Ronald Reagan in
00:17:03.140the United States and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom and Pope John
00:17:08.200Paul II. And the world was blessed to have those three leaders converge with the moral clarity and
00:17:16.320the moral strength to stand up to the Soviet Union. And in my view, we are in a similar time
00:17:23.000where we need similar clarity and strength. Well, I agree with absolutely everything that
00:17:28.420you have said. I think the clear moral leadership of Pope John Paul II, the military might of Ron
00:17:36.800Reagan that he spent an enormous amount of your taxpayers' money to ensure that America's
00:17:43.640defense was the best in the world and Russia simply couldn't keep up.
00:17:47.980And then the sheer backbone of Margaret Thatcher was a combination that meant the Cold War
00:20:15.660If things like that happen where the U.K. and the U.S. have to unite on a front to say, hey, we're going to stand with Taiwan, for example, how do you feel like the relationship is from your perspective with parliament and with the leadership in your country in the U.S. right now?
00:20:31.660Well, I think that Sir Keir Starmer made a mistake in not supporting the United States in what it's been doing in Iran, even though I wish your president had not done what he's done in Iran.
00:20:46.080I think that our relationship with America means that we should support you, even if we have questions about the policy you're following, because your contribution to global security is fundamental.
00:20:58.680And to make that contribution, you need allies.
00:21:01.500So I think it is really very important that the UK supports the US, works alongside the US,
00:21:09.960recognising that you are the power, that it is your decision, not ours,
00:21:14.780but that our security actually is very dependent on a good relationship with you, as is global security.
00:21:20.480And I think that in relation to Taiwan, yes, there would be people in England who say it hasn't got a lot to do with us,
00:21:27.900a faraway country of which we know very little.
00:21:30.060But I would certainly be arguing that the defense of a place that has an active democracy, operates like a country, ought to be defended against an aggressor as a matter of principle, even if that means you're having to protect them against mainland China, against communist China.
00:21:50.660Well, and Sir Jacob, I'd say a couple of things on that. Number one, let me underscore the special relationship between your nation and our nation, that we have a long and shared history right from the very founding of our nation.
00:22:04.580And it is a valuable, it is unique, it is a special relationship. I have joked that in my marriage that we have a mixed marriage because I'm an Anglophile and Heidi is a Francophile.
00:22:19.120And as you know well, that is a fundamentally different orientation on life. And I got to say, I have a deep respect for British society, for the courage of a not terribly large island nation through which developed the principles of the Magna Carta and rule of law and fundamental rights and democratic representation and became an empire that bestrode the world.
00:22:48.820but did so in a way that brought values, those same values of human rights, of equality, of democratic representation,
00:22:57.200and the principles upon which we based America, we got very directly from the United Kingdom and our shared values.
00:23:07.060So that relationship, I think, is and should be incredibly valuable.
00:23:12.780On the second point on Taiwan, I would suggest a slightly different way of looking at it,
00:23:17.460which is you mentioned an obligation to protect a democracy in the face of hostility and aggression.
00:23:26.380And I understand that argument. I would have a different take on it in that I believe American
00:23:32.140foreign policy should focus like a laser on the vital national security interest of the United
00:23:38.380States. I think a mistake American foreign policy made in previous decades is getting away
00:23:44.520from that central focus. And indeed, if you look during the George W. Bush presidency,
00:23:51.960I think you saw interventionists who argued, we must protect democracy wherever it occurs.
00:23:59.160And then, look, the Iraq war, for example, I believe the Iraq war was a mistake because
00:24:05.300we got away from the objective of protecting U.S. national security, instead came in and tried to
00:24:12.520transform Iraq into Switzerland, into a democratic utopia. And I don't think it is the job0.92
00:24:19.860of the American military to try to transfer other countries into democratic utopias. It's
00:24:26.880certainly not our job to risk our sons and daughters to do so. The reason Taiwan is so1.00
00:24:33.020incredibly important, and it is incredibly important to the United States, it's incredibly
00:24:36.960important to the United Kingdom, is Taiwan produces a vast percentage of the advanced
00:24:44.300semiconductors that are used in just about everything in the world, whether from our
00:24:48.940fighter jets and our destroyers and our satellites to our cell phones, to our cars and trucks.
00:24:56.560And were China to invade Taiwan and seize that advanced semiconductor production,
00:25:02.180it would give China a massive economic stranglehold and military stranglehold.
00:25:08.420And so from my view, that's what makes it compelling, is Taiwan remaining free significantly advances American national security and economic security,
00:25:19.740and it also significantly advances British economic and national security.
00:25:24.160Yes, I certainly agree with that. I'm not a liberal interventionist.
00:25:27.380I don't think it is the job of America or Britain to go into countries, foreign countries, to enforce a particular constitutional settlement.
00:25:37.420I suppose with Taiwan, when I was saying a democracy, I was dancing around the point of it being a sovereign state.
00:25:45.180It is a de facto sovereign state, though not one either of our countries recognize.
00:31:18.240Every week, we use exclusive next-gen stats insights and NFL content to break down the biggest stories, matchups, and moments from around the league.
00:31:27.620We go beyond the box score to uncover the numbers, the tendencies, and details that help explain what actually happened on the field.
00:31:35.360Fires it out in the flat to Barkley, who beats one man, spins past another, leaps over a third.
00:31:42.580And don't worry, this isn't just a show for stats experts.
00:31:45.840We use advanced analytics to help tell the story behind the game,
00:31:49.920turning the numbers into insights that every fan can understand and enjoy.
00:31:54.320So whether you're a casual fan learning more about football
00:31:56.940or a hardcore fan who can't get enough analysis,
00:32:00.480our goal is to help you see the game in a whole new way.
00:32:04.460If you've ever wanted to know why a play worked, how a matchup was won,
00:35:30.720And it's almost impossible to comprehend that somebody of such intelligence and capability as Tucker Carlson,0.50
00:35:37.340he's clearly not a fool, would even want to postulate that we would have been better off if we just allowed the Germans to take over.
00:35:44.360Well, and I will say that that clip was a particular illustration of one of the tricks of sophistry that Tucker regularly employs, which is he says, well, gosh, do you think things are better now?0.52
00:35:58.400And I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I suspect you would agree that in certain aspects and maybe even many aspects, life in Britain today has gotten worse than, say, life in Britain in the 50s and 60s.
00:36:13.760I would agree with that proposition in the United States, that there are many aspects of our society from the 50s and 60s that we have seen deteriorate in a way that is deeply harmful.
00:36:24.740Would you agree with that statement that life has gotten worse in some respects?
00:36:30.120Well, you mentioned life, and life seems to me to be at the heart of this.
00:36:33.240We have this great tragedy in this country that 250,000 babies are killed every year.
00:36:38.900That is something that did not happen in the 1950s.
00:36:42.720say there are elements of our society that are deemed to be progressive that I think
00:36:48.820have been extraordinarily damaging to society, but they don't really correlate with the Second
00:36:54.700World War and whether or not it was right to fight the Second World War.
00:36:58.080Well, and it slides forward. When I look at Britain and when I look at Europe as a whole,0.61
00:37:05.060our country came in a very real sense from Britain and from Europe. My ancestors, our
00:37:11.360Irish and Italian and Cuban. And our nation really has been a melting pot from nations all
00:37:19.100over the world, but Europe especially, and critically in terms of culture, in terms of
00:37:23.900the first immigrants who came to America. And when one is looking at the threats facing Europe,
00:37:31.160I see no threat greater than the massive illegal immigration, which the leaders of Europe have0.99
00:37:37.660welcomed with open arms, and the Islamification of Europe, where you now see Islamists engaged0.99
00:37:45.380in, engaged in crime. I think the pattern of rapes that we have seen, rapes of young0.99
00:37:52.700women carried out by Islamist violent criminals in the UK is deeply, deeply disturbing, and
00:37:59.740the politicians who look the other way and are complicit, that is deeply, deeply disturbing,
00:38:04.880but the sophistry that Tucker is playing is many of his viewers are aware of that slippery slide
00:38:14.920down and they say, well, I don't like what's happened in the UK. And then he comes up with
00:38:20.840this weird non sequitur, which is, well, it would have been better if Nazis were in charge.0.85
00:38:27.660There's nothing about the Nazis that would have been better than the status quo. If it is right0.96
00:38:31.900that the Nazis are evil, if it is right that the Nazis engaged in systematic murder and torture
00:38:37.840and oppression and utter violation of human rights, subjecting yourself to evil and totalitarianism
00:38:45.840is never, ever, ever better. And here's the final kicker irony on all this. What Tucker is putting
00:38:52.960up as the specter of what's bad in Europe, you know, he smarmily said, well, at least German
00:38:59.400is a European language. Ha ha ha ha ha. The irony is Tucker also spends a great deal of time
00:39:07.160defending Islamists and defending Sharia law and saying we would be better off
00:39:12.720with more Islamists and more Sharia law. In fact, just two weeks ago in the United States,
00:39:19.240Tucker formally endorsed Abdul al-Sayed, an open Islamist, a man who I believe supports
00:39:26.920the Muslim Brotherhood, who is running for Senate as a Democrat in Michigan. And so the specter that
00:39:34.420Tucker points to as bad, the rise of Islamism, is in fact a specter he defends. And so he raises0.95
00:39:41.400that as a threat and then said, wouldn't we be better if we had Nazis instead? That is not what
00:39:47.380I would call tight or rational or even good faith argumentation. No, I completely agree with you.
00:39:54.360So mass migration has been a disaster.0.75
00:39:57.760It's done terrible things to countries, and you have shown the way, actually, in succeeding in stopping illegal immigration in the United States since Donald Trump became your president, and we should learn from that.0.97
00:40:12.100And it's caused great dislocations within society and cultural problems of which the rape gangs that you refer to are a part.0.89
00:40:22.080but that has absolutely nothing to do with the defeat of Hitler as you quite rightly say. It's0.86
00:40:27.600bizarre to try to connect the two that these were decisions that were taken long after the war
00:40:33.960that they were taken for economic reasons that turned out to be mistaken but also a hyper-liberalism
00:40:41.780that is unwilling to say that our culture is better than other people's. Now the reason we
00:40:48.160right to defeat Hitler, among other things, was that the Anglo-Saxon culture was better than the0.94
00:40:56.000Nazi culture. And we are entitled to say that one culture is better than another, and therefore to0.92
00:41:02.840defend it, and therefore to reject the premise of multiculturalism that assumes all cultures are
00:41:08.420basically equal. They're not. Some are more civilized than others, and I think the highest
00:41:13.400form of Western civilization has been achieved in what perhaps I would, with a degree of
00:41:18.800vanity, call the Anglosphere, but that's the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia,
00:41:26.060Well, and the multicultural lie is every cultural is equally valuable, and you can't make an0.59
00:41:32.640assessment. And if you go back to how we started this discussion, with the recognition that0.54
00:41:37.940truth exists, good and evil exists, then you can make relative judgments. And you look
00:41:43.660at our societies. American society was predicated 250 years ago on very simple but very powerful
00:41:51.800principles. As Thomas Jefferson penned in the Declaration of Independence, we hold these
00:41:57.360truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their
00:42:05.920creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit
00:42:14.640of happiness. Now, that was in the document that initially began the war between my nation
00:42:21.440and your nation. We were declaring our independence. The 56 signers who put their name on the bottom
00:42:27.000of that document, they pledged their names, their fortunes, and their sacred honors.
00:42:30.720and that was not an idle pledge because at the time the United Kingdom had the mightiest military
00:42:36.580in the world and they were in a very real sense risking their lives and their fortunes and many
00:42:42.160of them lost their lives and their fortunes but the principles that were reflected in the
00:42:48.020declaration that later were embodied in the constitution are the principles of governance
00:42:53.260that the Americans had learned from the British, had learned from the Magna Carta, had learned
00:42:59.400from the British Bill of Rights, and those same principles to protect human rights, to treat
00:43:06.040all men as equal, to protect free speech and religious liberty, that is right. And to violate
00:43:14.520those rights, to murder and torture and engage in slavery, that is wrong. And for those moral
00:43:23.260relativists that want to blur the two, well, it leads to things like the exchange where Tucker
00:43:29.440upbraided you for the United Kingdom not apologizing to Oswald Mosley. And I want us
00:43:37.940to listen to that exchange as well. Now, the British government did that in the Second World
00:43:42.260War immediately. It did in the Second World War. I knew a wonderful man, amazing man. I'd gathered0.51
00:43:48.320to his father's uh who was rounded up in uh 1939 when water was declared was put in an enemy aliens
00:43:56.320camp um and in shropshire um and he was german jewish and all germans were rounded up he was a
00:44:05.040fighting age the day he left the camp he joined the bridge army and he ended the war as a brigadier
00:44:10.640amazing yeah he sounds like a very forgiving man he was a wonderful wonderful man he sounds it um0.64
00:44:15.840But I'm not talking about people who are rounded up as potential foreign nationals.
00:44:19.320We can't round up people for their expression of opinions, and people must be free to oppose.
00:44:24.540But the British government has never apologized for violating its own ancient principles by rounding up not simply members of the opposition party, but their families.
00:49:37.220And almost every syllable of every word that came out of his mouth, he has since repudiated.
00:49:41.780He keeps the pom-poms, but now they are reserved for Hitler and Putin.
00:49:45.720And he also engages, that shows another one of Tucker's methods, which is simply lying.
00:49:53.940He engages in debates in a fact-free environment where he makes assertions that are just wildly wrong on the assumption that he won't get called out.
00:50:03.280So he says in that discussion, well, Russia's economy is much, much larger than the UK's, to which your response was to laughingly say, well, no, that happens not to be true.
00:50:15.720And by the way, I just pulled out my phone and typed in really quickly, compare the GDPs of
00:50:22.000the UK and Russia. And here's what Google comes up with. The United Kingdom's GDP
00:50:29.060is $4.26 trillion. That is ranked fifth globally. Russia's GDP is $2.65 trillion,
00:50:39.120dollars, ranked ninth globally. So that means the British economy is nearly twice the size
00:50:45.780of Russia's economy. But more importantly, and this is a point, Sir Jacob, you emphasized,
00:50:51.800is GDP per capita. Because you rightly observed, Russia's a much bigger country geographically,
00:50:58.200but has a much bigger population than the United Kingdom. GDP per capita,
00:51:02.760the United Kingdom is $61,000 per person. That is a robust GDP per capita among the highest in
00:51:10.740the world. Russian GDP per capita is $18,500 per person. So less than a third British GDP per
00:51:23.500capita. And the reason that Tucker so desperately wants to lie about this is he's not just trying
00:51:31.740to rehabilitate Putin. He's trying to rehabilitate communism. He's trying to rehabilitate the
00:51:38.540economic system that justifies the totalitarianism of Russia and before that, the Soviet Union.
00:51:45.100And you quite rightly pointed out, the Russian economy is an absolute disaster. It is a failure.
00:51:53.220And Ben made reference to the fact Tucker did a year or two ago, a TV show where he went to Russia,
00:52:01.460he interviewed Putin and he went to a grocery store and he oohed and aahed that they had some
00:52:06.200bread on the grocery store shelves. And in his telling, the Russian grocery store was far nicer
00:52:13.320than any grocery store these uncivilized oafs in the United States might have. And I don't know1.00
00:52:21.300that Tucker fully realized that he was at that point, he should have pulled on a clown suit
00:52:27.840because he was clowning reality, and ironically, he was mimicking what had happened decades before
00:52:35.680when Boris Yeltsin came to my hometown of Houston and went to a local grocery store and walked
00:52:43.460through, and this was not a grocery store we had singled out as like, oh, this is the grocery store
00:52:48.060to show the Soviets and prove that. This is just a standard grocery store that's sitting there,
00:52:52.580People went shopping and he walked in and was utterly flabbergasted at the 30 different kinds
00:53:00.400of bread and the fresh fruit and, and, you know, 40 different kinds of ice cream and, and everything.
00:53:06.340And, and, and he marveled at the time that there's no way we can compete with an economy
00:53:11.840that can produce this kind of abundance, this kind of variety. And going back to truth,
00:53:17.860Free enterprise works. Communism doesn't. Socialism doesn't. Tucker is also engaged in an endeavor to defend socialism, to defend Zoran Mandami, to defend Abdul al-Sayed, to defend Marxists and government control.
00:53:34.140And so we should wrap up, Sir Jacob, but I want to ask a question, a general question.
00:54:07.740Well, first of all, as an Englishman who's visited America from time to time, American supermarkets are a level above from British supermarkets.