Peter Brimelow on the Invasion of America, Who’s Behind It, and How Long Until Total Collapse

Summary

The Tucker Carlson Show
Episode: Peter Brimelow on the Invasion of America, Who’s Behind It, and How Long Until Total Collapse
Date: January 19, 2026

---

Overview

In this episode, Tucker Carlson interviews Peter Brimelow, financial journalist, founder of vdare.com, and one of the earliest voices on restricting U.S. immigration. The discussion centers on America’s demographic future, the suppression of immigration debates, Brimelow’s personal and professional ostracism, and governmental and legal mechanisms targeting dissidents. The conversation traces the history of the conservative movement’s response to immigration, accusations of anti-Semitism and racism, donor and establishment influence, and the weaponization of legal systems against ideological opponents. The tone is candid, personal, and combative toward mainstream conservatism, government actors, and much of the media.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Shift in Public Discourse on Demographics and Immigration

• Carlson opens by citing a tweet suggesting “white solidarity is the only way to survive” and Elon Musk’s agreement, asking Brimelow how it feels to see powerful figures echo themes Brimelow long championed.
  “Here’s the world’s richest man who owns this platform and a lot of other things saying this.” — Tucker Carlson [00:40]

• Brimelow reflects that debates he was persecuted for 25 years ago are now mainstream, but at severe personal cost:
  “On the other hand, we've been ruined... we're facing personal ruin... no middle class family can stand up to this.” — Peter Brimelow [01:37]

---

2. National Review, Conservative Civil War, and Donor Class Influence

• Brimelow recounts his 1992 National Review cover story on immigration reform and subsequent magazine “purge.”
  “Bill Buckley... abruptly, without any warning at all, fired O'Sullivan and purged the magazine of Immigration Patriots and basically told us to shut up about it...” — Peter Brimelow [04:19]

• Discusses pressure from GOP leadership and neoconservatives, suggesting the latter’s discomfort with “white self-consciousness”:
  “At that point, the neoconservatives were predominantly Jewish faction… extremely frightened of the white majority in America becoming self-conscious...” — Peter Brimelow [07:08]

• Donor-driven editorial decisions:
  “Looking at National Review now, it's obviously donor driven. We thought that people just got up and argued... but you simply didn't realize how important the donors are.” — Peter Brimelow [12:03]

---

3. Allegations of Racism, Anti-Semitism, and Social Exclusion

• Brimelow describes being labeled a “white supremacist” for advocating immigration limits, and ostracism even from former friends and colleagues.
  “Mud sticks, Tucker... by this constant whispering campaign... it sticks and it has stuck...” — Peter Brimelow [19:45]

• Talks of personal slights, e.g., Matthew Continetti refusing to inscribe a book, and Norman Podhoretz breaking off contact over “thought crime.”
  “He wouldn't sign it... he said, I have nothing to say to you.” — Peter Brimelow [21:09]

---

4. Israel, Ethnostates, and Double Standards

• Critique of Yoram Hazony’s unwillingness to reconcile support for Israel’s ethnostate status and rejection of similar arguments for the U.S.
  “He doesn’t want to admit that Israel is an ethnostate because he doesn’t want the Americans to have [one]. But it is an ethnostate by definition.” — Tucker Carlson [25:08]

• Both agree open discussion of American "white self-awareness" is stigmatized compared to other groups.
  “White self awareness is effectively illegal in the United States. Whereas ethnic self awareness in every other group is encouraged.” — Tucker Carlson [48:17]

---

5. Legal Weaponization and The Demise of vdare.com

• Brimelow recounts Letitia James, New York AG, targeting vdare.com with subpoenas, legal harassment, and lawsuits, allegedly instigated by the ADL:
  “She just basically subpoenaed us to death and has in fact now sued us personally… demanded all our email... the names of our donors and our anonymous writers.” — Peter Brimelow [02:28, 38:27]

• Carlson underscores how legal, not just criminal, processes are used for ideological purging:
  “When the Attorney General of a state you don't live or operate in can destroy you because she doesn't like your opinions, then we don't have a functioning legal system, period.” — Tucker Carlson [41:48]

• Brimelow maintains the courts have proven uninterested in First Amendment implications, and a broader pattern of suppressing “white nationalist” groups even when legal precedent would protect “less controversial” speech (e.g., NRA). [43:52–48:17]

---

6. GOP Response to Demographic Change

• The “Sailer Strategy” of consolidating white votes is discussed; Brimelow argues Republicans consciously avoid this for fear of being called racist—even at the cost of electoral loss.
  “Appealing to the white vote is not allowed. And look, it's just a question of arithmetic.” — Peter Brimelow [63:21]

• Cites Virginia’s election and the choice of black immigrant candidate Winsome Sears as emblematic:
  “This is how he's going to appeal to the white vote. They're going to get people ... to vote for this black immigrant. It's ridiculous. And of course they got a terrible share of the white vote.” — Peter Brimelow [64:39]

• Both agree Trump won working-class whites through implicit, not explicit, appeals.
  “There’s a concept in sociology called the implicit community...” — Peter Brimelow [66:38]

---

7. Media, the Murdoch Empire, and Outsourcing of Ideology

• Brimelow and Carlson praise Rupert Murdoch’s personal decency but lament his organizations’ policies (“the Wall Street Journal editorial page to become a force of destruction”) due to neoconservative influence.
  “He’s outsourced a lot of the thinking to others. It’s transactional. He’s not tightly wedded to ideological details at all.” — Tucker Carlson [58:26]

---

8. Immigration Policy and Future Directions

• Brimelow advocates for a legal immigration moratorium and codifying reforms, but expresses pessimism about Congressional or executive will.
  “What we really need is an immigration moratorium... I would really rather than focus on ending this immigration disaster.” — Peter Brimelow [69:53]

• He notes the sharp reduction in foreign-born numbers under Trump and the need for permanent statutory change to prevent reversals by Democrats. [69:53–72:31]

---

9. Personal Fallout and Resilience

• Brimelow reflects on the toll his activism has taken: loss of career, ostracism, legal peril, but expresses gratitude for his personal life and some allies (Tucker, Laura Loomer).
  “I think things could have worked out differently for me professionally. But in my personal life, I’m very blessed.” — Peter Brimelow [73:15]

---

10. American Legal and Political Crisis

• Both predict that polarization and lawfare are leading the U.S. toward “slow motion civil war,” requiring radical remedies (Insurrection Act, purging judicial appointments, mass impeachments).
  “Many respects. You know, we're looking to slow motion civil war here. I mean, New York essentially secedia and Minnesota, but essentially it's a city from the union.” — Peter Brimelow [75:31]

• Carlson expresses concern that necessary action to “restore” the legal order will be denounced as tyranny, but insists institutions have already been thoroughly corrupted. [77:04]

---

11. Hope, Miracles, and Political Unpredictability

• Brimelow closes on a paradoxically hopeful note, citing the sudden collapse of the USSR and Trump’s surprise victory as evidence that “miracles happen quite often in politics.”
  “Nobody expected the Soviet Union collapse… nobody expected Trump. And he has been a miracle.” — Peter Brimelow [77:40]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the criminalization of dissent:
  “Hate speech is protected by the First Amendment. But there are ways around that. All you have to do, if it's a charity and you have jurisdiction, is to start issuing subpoenas... They just destroy you through the process of the punishment.” — Peter Brimelow [42:06]

• On America’s former openness:
  “This is more extreme than what the South did at Fort Sumter. I mean, this is, this is insurrection, actual insurrection.” — Tucker Carlson [78:47]

• On miracles in politics:
  “I have a saying... miracles happen quite often in politics.” — Peter Brimelow [77:40]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [00:00–01:36] — Radical demographic shift and Elon Musk’s tweet
• [03:26–05:52] — The National Review purge of anti-immigration voices
• [12:03–13:35] — The role of donors and money in conservative media
• [18:18–21:09] — Social shunning and inner-conservative vendettas
• [23:36–25:40] — Israel, hypocrisy, and American ethnostate debate
• [36:37–38:27] — The rise and destruction of vdare.com
• [42:06–43:52] — Legal lawfare and ADL’s involvement
• [48:17–49:10] — The attempted criminalization of white identity
• [63:21–64:42] — The ‘Sailer strategy’ and GOP reluctance
• [66:14–68:24] — Trump’s implicit appeal to working-class whites
• [69:53–72:35] — Policy proposals: immigration moratorium, legal reform
• [75:31–77:04] — Legal/political breakdown and talk of insurrection
• [77:40–78:47] — Wonder at miracles in politics, note of hope

---

Conclusion

This episode is a candid, often bleak discussion of immigration, race, the conservative movement, and legal warfare in today’s America, inflected by the personal travails of Peter Brimelow. The conversation encompasses establishment betrayal, ideological suppression, strategic incompetence within the Republican party, and the increasing use of state power to silence dissent. Despite the somber tenor, Brimelow ends on the possibility of political “miracles,” insisting that radical, unforeseen change is possible—even likely—in times of deep crisis.

Transcript

[Peter Brimelow]

Foreign.

[Tucker Carlson]

Thank you so much for doing this. I thought of you last week when I read this. I don't know how much you follow X, but there were a couple exchanges that suggested to me that things were changing very, very fast. Okay, so here's. Here's one. This is a. This is a tweet from last week, less than a week ago, from a guy, from basically an anonymous account. And I'm quoting, if white men become a minority, we will be slaughtered. Remember, if non whites openly hate white men while white men hold a collective majority, then they will be a thousand times more hostile and cruel when they're a majority over whites. White solidarity is the only way to survive. Okay, that's on the Internet. Elon Musk retweets it and says, 100%. And then Elon Musk writes this. If current trends continue, whites will go from being a small minority of the world population today to virtually extinct, exclamation point. All of that, in my opinion, is obviously true, and I think most people know it. But I read that, and I thought, here's the world's richest man who owns this platform and a lot of other things saying this. And Peter Brimlow, who I know, who's a thoroughly decent person, has had his life turned upside down and basically been destroyed in some ways, professionally anyway, for saying things that are way more restrained for that than that. So I have to ask you what it feels like to see that.

[Peter Brimelow]

It feels kind of tingly on the one hand.

[Tucker Carlson]

Tingly.

[Peter Brimelow]

I'm happy that the debate has moved in that direction. And the things that we were talking about 25 years ago on vdare.com, which was my website, my birthright citizenship, and so on are now in the public debate. On the other hand, we've been ruined. And we're facing personal ruin, of course, because of this attack on us by the New York Attorney General, Letitia James. As nobody knows who I am, Tucker, I should say that, you know, I'm a longtime spite of my accent. I've been here for 55 years, and I'm a longtime financial journalist. I work for Forbes and Fortune and the Barons and so on. And I work for National Review. I wrote for National Review a lot. And I wrote a piece on immigration in 1992 saying, Time to rethink immigration. That sometimes credits with kicking off the modern debate. And there was a brief civil war within the conserv movement at that point, which we lost. And Buckley stabbed us in the back and purged the magazine of immigration patriots and for the next while, the Water Journal editorial page was absolutely dominant and they were going on about the need for amnesty and there was no way to combat it. So I set up a website which I named vdare.com after Virginia Dare, the first English child, not white Shad, as they always say, born in the new World. And over a period of about 25 years we built up into quite a force until about two years ago it was destroyed by the New York Attorney General Letitia James, who just basically subpoenaed, subpoenaed us to death and has in fact now sued us personally. And as in the foundation and through the foundation. So we're a bit like General Flynn. You know, no middle class family can stand up to this. General Flynn had to sell his house and we're going to face be driven into personal bankruptcy, I guess.

[Tucker Carlson]

Look, it's a horrifying story. I've kept abreast of it through your wife who texts me as a wonderful person. And I know that you're a man of great personal decency and restraint and basically a great citizen and the kind of immigrant we need and I'm grateful to have so. The whole thing is shocking and so revealing. But I'd like, if you don't mind, to start closer to the beginning of this story with your experience at National Review. 1992 you said you wrote this piece saying time to rethink immigration, which I remember well at the time, National Review really was a forum for conservatives to think through what it meant to be conservative. So that was a significant piece at the time. And then you said Bill Buckley, the then editor, William F. Buckley Jr. Stabbed you in the back. Can you tell a story what happened exactly?

[Peter Brimelow]

Oh, sure. I was never on staff at national, but I was what they called a senior editor and I roll for it a lot. And in 992 I wrote this very long cover story. It's about 14,000 words. Bill had retired as the editor then. He was just circling around in the background. But the then editor, John Sullivan ran with, went with this story. And for about five years we basically directly challenged the, the, the official conservative line, which was that immigration is good, more immigration is better, illegal immigration is very good. That's what the Water Journal said and still saying as far as I. And then at the end of five years, in 97, Bill just abruptly, without any warning at all, fired O' Sullivan and purged the magazine of Immigration Patriots and basically told us to shut up about it. Told them all to shut up about immigration, which of Course they all eagerly did. He put the Washington bureau in charge, Rich Lowry and Panuru and so on. And so for them for two or three years you couldn't get even the basic facts about immigration out to the public. But then the Internet came along, you know, rescued us and I started vda.com.

[Tucker Carlson]

May I ask you to pause and explain why that happened? Why do you think Bill Buckley, who was retired and letting John o' Sullivan run it, another Brit I think yes indeed, who now lives in Budapest. Why do you think that he stepped back in from retirement to shut down that conversation specifically?

[Peter Brimelow]

Well of course I've had 20 odd years to think about that. And the answer is over time my answer has evolved. At the time he was, he was just jealous. This is actually a thing you see, I was a financial journalist for a long time. It's a thing you see often in the corporate world entrepreneurs will come back and purge the fire the managers that they put into replace themselves.

[Tucker Carlson]

Exactly.

[Peter Brimelow]

Sheer jealousy. I think the congressional Republicans hated us talking about immigration because it upsets the donors. And I think that was influential with Bill. He liked being lionized by the than, than Republican majority in the House and I think.

[Tucker Carlson]

So the Republican leadership didn't like it. Newt Gingrich, etc who was ascendant, came in in 94 to much, much fanfare achieved, not a lot. But they're the ones who pressured Bill Buckley, you believe?

[Peter Brimelow]

I, I think that was true but I also think that the, the, the, the neocons in New York hated it, hated the line. And Bill was very, very leery of offending the neoconservative people like Norman Potorus and so on. And I think they pressured him to, I mean I know they pressed him to get rid of John.

[Tucker Carlson]

Now why would they care?

[Peter Brimelow]

Oh, because at that point the neoconservatives were predominantly Jewish faction. They had this sort of Ellis island view of America. They wanted to that extremely frightened of the white majority in America becoming self conscious because they feel as Jews that it will leave them out in the cold.

[Tucker Carlson]

Despite the fact there's never been any real anti Semitic movement in the United States. There's no evidence that white people becoming aware of the fact that they're white is a threat to Jews. I don't know where that comes from.

[Peter Brimelow]

Right. And I actually think there's a certain sort of jealousy there. You know, they didn't like. I mean if you, if you look at ideas on the right in the recent years and a lot of them originated out of neoconservatism, but here was a non neoconservative fact. We would have then described ourselves as paleo conservatives coming up with the whole idea and the whole issue. Because the immigration issue was completely dormant from 1968 when the Hart Cellar act kicked in until the early 90s. But there was no discussion of it at all. I actually went through National Reviews archives and I found out they hadn't discussed immigration at all between the passage of the 65 act until the early 90s. People simply didn't realize what going on.

[Tucker Carlson]

What? Why?

[Peter Brimelow]

I think there are a couple of reasons. One is that there was a pause in immigration from 1924 to about 1968. So a whole generation grew up when there was essentially no immigration at all into the US and so it just wasn't an issue to them. And you know what happens with it's like an academic life. We have an academic theory. It's not that it conquers the other theories by being better and better arguments. It's just that the people who hold the earlier theories die off and they're replaced by younger. And that's true for politicians too. A whole generation of politicians had never thought about this issue. And I include Ronald Reagan in that. To me it simply wasn't an issue when he was growing up. And that's why he was haunts while go by this the urka amnesty in 1986. He actually genuinely thought that the ruling of the permanent government would exchange amnesty for serious enforcement. Whereas in fact he just took the amnesty and didn't enforce the law against illegal immigration at all.

[Tucker Carlson]

Christmas feels like just yesterday, but in fact it's already time to think about Lent. Lent. Lent is a great chance to step back, examine our lives and decide whether or not we're headed somewhere worth going this Lent. We strongly recommend the world's top number one prayer app. It's called Hallow. Its Lent prayer challenge starts February 18th. It's called Pray 40 the Return. Transformation does not start with improvement. No transformation starts with repentance. The courage to admit that you are lost and change direction. Pray 40 forces you to confront that responsibility, forgiveness, and what it means to truly repent and live a life of meaning by following Jesus every day. Enjoy simple, deliberate prayer. No spectacle, no performance. Just silence, honesty, and one small step toward renewal. This is not about fixing your life overnight. It's about beginning the journey home. Pray 40 the return starts Wednesday, February 18th and runs right through Easter. Download Hallow for [e-mail] so the new year is here, but that does not mean you've gotta overhaul your whole life. Despite claims to the contrary, you don't have to take drastic measures. Make a few changes here and there and you'll be a lot better off. And you can start with the snacks in your pantry. Now. Products from standard American chip brands are, let's be honest, pretty repulsive. Filled with chemicals that make you feel heavy and bloated. They don't even taste that good. They're not good for you. We recommend an upgrade with Masa Chips. Masa is the easiest way to eat clean without feeling like you're on a diet. The chips contain three ingredients. That's it. Organic corn, sea salt, 100% grass fed beef, towel, and that is it. No seed oils, no mystery chemicals, just food, actual food. And they're amazing. And you feel great after. You don't feel weighed down. We particularly enjoyed the cobanero flavor lately. But they're all great. You want to give them a try? Visit masachhips.com M A S A chips.com Tucker use the code Tucker for 25% off your first order. Or you can click the link in the video description or. Or you can scan the QR code to claim this outstanding offer. And if you don't feel like ordering online, you can buy them nationwide at your local Sprout supermarket. Stop by and pick up a couple of bags before somebody else does. Flash Tucker. But I'm a little bit fixated on William F. Buckley because he was such a dominant force.

[Peter Brimelow]

Let me just back up again. What I think now is, I think looking at National Review now, it's obviously donor driven.

[Tucker Carlson]

Oh, of course.

[Peter Brimelow]

And we weren't aware of that in the 90s. I wasn't even aware. I didn't think about the donors enroll in politics really until some years later than that. We thought that people just got up and argued and you just simply didn't realize how dominant, how important the donors are. I think now looking back at him, particularly given Bill was not as wealthy as he wanted people to think. And he depended on National Review financially to a considerable extent. It financed his lifestyle to a considerable extent.

[Tucker Carlson]

And I think he depended on the magazine.

[Peter Brimelow]

Yeah, yeah, I think that's true.

[Tucker Carlson]

I think the rest of us thought the magazine depended on him.

[Peter Brimelow]

Yeah, that's what he wanted you to think. But in fact it did finance his lifestyle to a considerable extent.

[Tucker Carlson]

The winters in Strad and the sailing across the Bermuda Race.

[Peter Brimelow]

And I don't know how much, but there was certainly quite a lot that was deducted or expense to the magazine in any case. He just didn't want to disrupt the donor floor. And the more I think about that, the more I think that probably was the reason.

[Tucker Carlson]

Interesting. So that's basically a species of fraud. I don't mean against the tax code, I mean it's intellectual fraud. It's your making the case that you believe these things because they are true, when in fact you're taking money to say them.

[Peter Brimelow]

I think Bill, actually, my experience with Bill is that he actually was not very interested in politics. When he went to his dinners, he used to put on 73 73rd Street. It was very hard to get him to talk about politics. He was always wandering off in odd directions. And you can see that in the way he lived his life latterly. I mean, writing these books and so on. He just basically didn't do any serious thinking about politics initially. He was very. I have a letter from him actually saying how wonderful my immigration story was.

[Tucker Carlson]

Really?

[Peter Brimelow]

Yes. And it was, you know, I forget what he said, but he said it was beautifully organized and beautifull argued and the tone was perfect and that sort of stuff. He never admitted that he changed his mind on immigration. He just told them not to stop covering it. But the official line of the magazine was that immigration was questionable. They just didn't do any journalism on it or just how he was about drug legalization. He was officially in favor of drug legalization, but he very rarely let the magazine write about him.

[Tucker Carlson]

Huh. Why?

[Peter Brimelow]

I guess he was balancing a number of, a number of issues. In the case of immigration, he, you know, I, I think he's done as immigration was a very unfashionable subject in the other. I remember, and, and I think as we were talking earlier, I, I was watching Ben Shapiro on, on.

[Tucker Carlson]

Megyn Kelly.

[Peter Brimelow]

Megyn Kelly, yes. And he was attacking you for some reason or other, I forget what. And he was saying that. Then he suddenly says, but Tucker's good on some things, he's good on immigration. Well, as I understand that you're interested in the idea of immigration moratorium and so on. Of course, this news, to me, that's what Ben Shapiro thinks is good about immigration. I mean, just about five or six years ago in National Review, he called me a white supremacist, basically for no other reason than advocating immigration reduction. And those days, back in the early days, if you advocated immigration control, you immediately suspect that. You immediately suspect of being an anti Semite, even though there's no direct connection at all. And now they've changed their mind on this. They've fallen back I mean, Norman, before he died. I was very friendly with Norman. He didn't talk to me for the last 10 years of his life. But he died just a few weeks ago at the age of 95. But just before he died, he gave an interview in which he said he changed his mind on immigration. He thought there was a limit to how much immigration could be absorbed. And he credited John o' Sullivan, the Edge of National Review for helping change his mind. He didn't mention me.

[Tucker Carlson]

Why didn't he speak to you for the last 10 years of his life?

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, I think he just decided that I was a suspicious character and I deviated on the immigration issue. And he suspected I had the habit of calling the National Review the Goldberg Review, because at that stage, briefly, it was dominated by John Jonah Goldberg, who I think is a complete fraud and lightweight and of course, was absolutely bonehead on the immigration issue.

[Tucker Carlson]

Well, he's certainly a lightweight. It's hard to know what he believes or doesn't. But he certainly. I mean, if Jonah Goldberg is like, your intellectual force, then you've been degraded.

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, Norman actually emailed me and said, you've got to stop calling National View the Goldberg Review because it sounds anti Semitic. Actually, my understanding is that Goldberg is not technically Jewish. His mother was a gentile.

[Tucker Carlson]

So I. I knew her. She was a great person.

[Peter Brimelow]

Actually. I replied. I replied and said that. And he didn't get back. But he just gradually suspected more. He suspected more and more of thought crime. Norman was an extremely passionate man.

[Tucker Carlson]

He didn't so famously.

[Peter Brimelow]

He didn't. He didn't. He didn't socialize with opponents. I miss him. I really liked him. I was sorry that.

[Tucker Carlson]

No, there was a lot about him that was appealing. He was a man of great energy, and I admired him in a lot of ways. It was kind of repulsive in others, but certainly he was not standing still. He was constantly in motion.

[Peter Brimelow]

And we actually owe his wife, Midge Dexter, a lot because she was the chair thing of the Philadelphia Society. And she, in fact, which is the conservative affinity group. And she invited me to speak on immigration in, I guess, 2005. And that's where I met my first wife, had just died. And that's where I met my current wife, Lydia, who, of course, was running the Videf foundation with me. She was the publisher, r dot com. And you've had her on, of course.

[Tucker Carlson]

Oh, of course. And I'm. And I'm a fan. She's a brave woman and a smart one. May I ask what happened to your relationship with Bill Buckley.

[Peter Brimelow]

I. When he fired John o', Sullivan, I was the only one of the entire staff who went in and asked, why did you fire him? Because.

[Tucker Carlson]

Wait, what?

[Peter Brimelow]

Yeah, well, the official line was John had resigned to write a book. That was because John was very popular with the National Review base and the immigration issue was very popular. And so he didn't want to admit that he was dumping them both. So he got really ruffled because he wasn't used to being challenged and said, I write a book. And we basically never really spoke to each other after that. I was constructively dismissed from National Review. I got a letter telling me I was no longer a senior editor, which was actually very, very important in the National Review world because it was run like a fraternity and if you were seniority, you were automatically invited to all kinds of events and so on, and to his dinners and all that kind of thing. And I never wrote for it again.

[Tucker Carlson]

Why did they dismiss you, do you think?

[Peter Brimelow]

Oh, well, I'm sure that the Washington bureau was always upset with the immigration issue because it embarrassed them. It embarrassed them in Washington cocktail parties. And he put the Washington bureau in charge of the magazine. So I'm sure they were happy, would be happy to do it and they didn't want to write about immigration. And I think also, you know, mud sticks, Tucker.

[Tucker Carlson]

Mud sticks. Yeah.

[Peter Brimelow]

And by this constant whispering campaign of how I was a racist and anti Semite for raising these issues, it sticks and it has stuck so that, you know, even though Ben Shapiro is now in favor of just talking about immigration, I don't see him apologizing to me.

[Tucker Carlson]

No, well, of course not. He doesn't care about you at all, or other people at all.

[Peter Brimelow]

I had a really interesting experience recently. Lydia and I were at ISI book event and I bought Matthew Cartanetti's book. I mean, I actually bought it. I put down my. It's a rotten awful book about the conservative movement. Says that I was born in Canada, which obviously wasn't.

[Tucker Carlson]

He's a silly. I mean, it's. This is Bill Crystal, son in law.

[Peter Brimelow]

Bill Crystal, son in law. That's the point. I took it up to him when I like to collect inscribed books. In fact, I forgot to bring your book. I'm sorry. And he wouldn't sign it. He wouldn't inscribe it. He said, I have nothing to say to you. And the really weird thing about this.

[Tucker Carlson]

Is that on what ground? I mean, I don't think you've ever said that I'm aware of an anti Semitic thing in your life. I don't think you're an anti Semite.

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, Carnet is a convert, of course, so he's probably very, you know, particularly ardent. But the weird thing about this was that Cardinality had actually written some quite sensible things on immigration, which is odd when you think of his father in law.

[Tucker Carlson]

But he said, to your face, I won't inscribe your book because I have nothing to say to you, essentially.

[Peter Brimelow]

Yes, that's right. He signed it, but he wouldn't inscribe it. And then he said nothing to say to you. Wow. Yeah, I mean, it's kind of surprising. And we live out there in eastern Panhandle of West Virginia and we don't have to face this stuff, but I guess when you're in dc, you faced it all the time.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yeah, well, I left. But I also believe in forgiveness, and that's kind of the difference, I think. I mean, we're commanded to believe in forgiveness and to treat people as human beings.

[Peter Brimelow]

Norman didn't believe that them.

[Tucker Carlson]

No, I'm very aware of that. I'm very aware of that.

[Peter Brimelow]

It was a principal position with him.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yeah, it's a principle, but it's a satanic principle that you can't forgive other people. That is, you're not forgiven if you don't. So that's my view. But, wow, what a. That's amazing. So you were just cast out?

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, the thing is, he'd already signed the book, so I couldn't give it. He signed it behind his grind. I couldn't give it back. Get my money back. Whereas conversely, Yoram Hazoni was also there and, you know, Zoni, as you know, banned us from his National Conservative Conference because he said he didn't think we were appropriate. And so we had a series of bitter exchanges in Vidya. But Ozoni was perfectly friendly and he signed the book and inscribed it, and we chatted about children and grandchildren and so on.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yor Mazzoni is a very courtly man, a very charming and warm person. I'll say. I had lunch with him once and I don't agree with him on a lot, but I liked him. It's hard not to like him.

[Peter Brimelow]

I think he's very good. A lot of the stuff he says about conservatism isn't exactly accurate to me.

[Tucker Carlson]

I think that's right.

[Peter Brimelow]

Moving it away from being classical liberalism. The problem, of course, is that he's caught in this bind because he doesn't want to admit that Israel is an ethnostate because he doesn't want the Americans to have ethnostate. He wants them to be a civic nationalist state.

[Tucker Carlson]

What do you mean, won't admit? I mean, Israel is by its own description an ethnostate.

[Peter Brimelow]

Yeah, but he keeps arguing that that's.

[Tucker Carlson]

Not an attack, by the way, at all.

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, you know, I've never been able to get him to explain how. You cannot say that there's a racial component to Israel when the whole. When, of course, the Jewish religion is racially based. I mean, that's why they have the matrilineal principle where you've got to have a Jewish mother. And I've never seen him respond to the that, and I don't think he can because he doesn't want to encourage straight up white nationalism in America.

[Tucker Carlson]

For years you've been told this is not happening and you're a bigot for thinking it is. But it is happening. Mass migration is reshaping the west completely. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a fact. Different people live here now. You're not a racist for noticing that. You're just using your senses. The again, it's not a theory. It's the biggest fact of this or any generation in a thousand years. The replacement is real. European governments aren't just tolerating mass migration, they're encouraging it. They're funding it. They hate their populations and they want new populations. We've got a new documentary on this called Replacing. Following the world's deadliest migration route. Our filmmakers follow what nobody wants you to see. They spoke directly with migrants, locals, officials who admit what the public has never told. It's not ideological, it's reality. This is happening. It's destroying the west. And our cameras caught it. Replacing Europe. That's the doc only on TCN now.

[Advertisement/Announcer]

This is the new Weight Watchers. It works for members like JoJo, who's learning simple, healthy habits. Sharia, who's making progress with meds, and Kim, who still gets to eat what she loves. For over 60 years, we've helped millions of members find what works for them. Now it's your turn. Watch your life open up. Watch your story shift. Watch what you're capable of. Watch it work. Get started today@weight watchers.com.

[Tucker Carlson]

I just want to be clear about my own views. Not that it matters, but just because I hold them sincerely, I have no problem with the fact that Israel is an ethno state. It's their country. Have whatever state you want as far as I'm concerned. But it is an ethnostate by definition. The people who founded it were not religious. A lot of them were atheists, and they identified as Jewish racially. Again, I have no problem with that at all. That's their country. But to say it's not an ethnostate is not only a lie, but it's a ludicrous lie. And he won't admit that.

[Peter Brimelow]

That's my reading of what it was as only it's saying. But it's one of the situations where his civic nationalism is so intense that it might just well be ethnic nationalism for the US But a lot of things he says about immigration to the US are excellent.

[Tucker Carlson]

Right, I agree. And I'm not attacking yor Mazzoni at all, whom I like. But that's dishonest because Israel is an ethnostate and you should just tell the truth about. Especially about obvious things. Right.

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, it's what Orwell calls doublethink, isn't it? Doublethink. You got to believe two contradictory things at once. And it's necessary to operate in large parts of the political world.

[Tucker Carlson]

Interesting. But why wouldn't people who support an ethnostate in Israel want one here? I mean, why would they object to that so strongly?

[Peter Brimelow]

I mean, of course, this is the profound question about the American Jewish role in the American immigration debate. They're overwhelmingly pro immigration. However, having said that, typically, if you know anything about Jewish intellectual life, you know they're gonna people on the other side, and some people very hardly on the other side.

[Tucker Carlson]

Oh. And I know a lot of them why I would never be anti Semitic, because you can't generalize.

[Peter Brimelow]

I mean, I have a hunch that Stephen Miller, who of course is an aide to Trump, I think he's the deputy chief of staff or something. He's going to be the first Jewish president. I say this because the prospect horrifies people so much, but he's like Disraeli in Britain. Benjamin Disraeli, of course, was Jewish, but converted to Episcopalianism. He was converted by his father to very early age. His father took the whole family over to Episcopalians. He basically invented the Conservative Party, reinvented the Conservative party in the 19th century, came up with in Britain, he came up with a complete grand strategy for it based on the empire and imperial patriotism and so on. And that really carried the party through for the next 80, 90 years. A couple of generations in Britain with a Nationalist party and because of being a Nationalist party, got a very substantial working, working class vote because it is the blue collar Workers who are the patriots, and the conservative party is able to tap into that. Miller's done the same thing. He's invented a grand strategy for the Republican Party, which he desperately doesn't want to take up because it's run by cowards and fools, but he thinks they should move towards restabilizing America's ethnic balance and basically eliminating this immigrant inflow, which is causing all kinds of problems with fellow skilled workers, and, and ultimately change changing the racial balance. And he's not afraid to admit that. And, and, and not only that, but.

[Tucker Carlson]

I don't think anyone should be afraid.

[Peter Brimelow]

Cunning to survive the Kushner White House.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yes.

[Peter Brimelow]

I mean, that was really extraordinary because Jared Kushner, of course, played exactly the opposite. He's basically a liberal New York Jew. But for some reason, Miller was able to survive with. Survive with him. I couldn't have done that, that I wouldn't have abandoned Jeff Sessions in the way that he did. Sessions was his close aide and was his mentor. And then Miller abandons him when Trump turns against him. I couldn't have done that either. But then he's in the White House and I'm not.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yeah, no, I think those are all fair and true observations. It's interesting, though, the degree to which the immigration project is a demographic project. I mean, it has almost explicitly been an effort to make America less white. They'll say that it's not controversial. I mean, you could prove it on video. Didn't even bother to. Because I think most people watching this already know that its architects, starting with Teddy Kennedy in 1965, basically just said, ultimately admitted. The whole point is to make America less white and not non majority white country. Why is it so hard for conservatives to say the same? If Democrats are saying we want America to be non white, why can't conservatives say that? That's what their motive is.

[Peter Brimelow]

I have to say that Kennedy didn't say that when he was at first. Yes. When he was the floor manager of the Hart Cell act, he gave a very explicit assurance. He loved to, quote, saying that this will not alter the racial balance of America and it will not mean a million people. You will be, in fact, a million people a year are coming in.

[Tucker Carlson]

Of course.

[Peter Brimelow]

And that's one of the reasons I bitterly regret not having VDA, even though I have my own. Peterbrimo.com substack that's not the same kind of voice, because we've got to get legal immigration into the debate here. I think what Trump has done on illegal immigration is remarkable and more and more remarkable than people realize. But they're not doing anything on legal immigration. But I'm sorry, that means I've not answered your question. What was your question?

[Tucker Carlson]

Well, my question was the whole point of the project was not to feed a desperate need for low skilled labor that definitely no longer exists now with AI. And it wasn't to improve America. It's completely destroyed America, destroyed the state of California.

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, when I was writing the book I wrote on immigration alienation that flowed out of my cover story, the 95 book which HarperCollins refused to reprint. I quoted a man called Earl Raab who is a Jewish activist and so on and he explicitly said that Jews were in favor of. Of mass non white immigration because it makes the rise of a. I didn't use the term neo Nazi, but that's what he meant, you know, party in America. Impossible. In fact it does the exact opposite. It makes it more like.

[Tucker Carlson]

Well, exactly.

[Peter Brimelow]

But he did say that, he quite calmly said that this is why most Jews favor.

[Tucker Carlson]

Well, it's also made the rise of hard edged anti Israel politics. And I'm not pro Israel especially, but I don't hate Israel. A lot of people who hate Israel are immigrants.

[Peter Brimelow]

So look at the New York's New York Marathi race.

[Tucker Carlson]

Well, exactly.

[Peter Brimelow]

Van Damme won because the immigrant vote.

[Tucker Carlson]

Exactly, exactly.

[Peter Brimelow]

The native born American New Yorkers and God knows, look at who they are for God's sake. I mean, but they voted for. Against Mandami.

[Tucker Carlson]

Exactly.

[Peter Brimelow]

So they've really screwed themselves up.

[Tucker Carlson]

This hasn't worked.

[Peter Brimelow]

That's right.

[Tucker Carlson]

I mean if your interest was to keep anti Semitism and really kind of crazy anti Israel sentiment to a minimum, and I agree with that, I'm against anti Semitism, I'm against. Basing your life on hating Israel. That seems kind of lunatic if that was your goal. I mean you literally achieved the opposite result. Is that fair to say?

[Peter Brimelow]

Not for the first time. Yeah, that's fair.

[Tucker Carlson]

Fair. So you may think maybe that wasn't the goal. I don't know, I'm just guessing here. Maybe there was another goal that we don't understand. But.

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, I think a lot of it is deeply emotional and can't be analyzed intellectually. There's just a whole series of reflexes or spiritual. But you know, one of the reasons we know that the New York Attorney General's attack on us was basically instigated by the Anti Defamation List League because a journalist we know actually got the ADL to admit this, that they had gone to Letitia James and told her to take P. Dare out. And we say to ourselves, why us Jews? What have we ever done to you? You know, we have the Berkeley Springs Castle in West Virginia, which we bought as a conference venue because we're not allowed to have conference anywhere else. The donor was Jewish. We had all kinds of Jewish donors and all kinds of Jewish writers. Blood doesn't make any difference to the ideal apparently.

[Tucker Carlson]

So what are you going to do when the power goes out? Not theoretically, but actually in real life. Most Americans used to think total power failure only happened in unstable countries, places without functioning governments, places you only went to on vacation. This is the US People would say that could never happen here. Okay, well then it remember Texas? During the deep freeze, the grid collapsed. People were left without heat. Some froze to death in their own homes. So the truth is obvious now. The government can't guarantee you electricity. And when things go wrong, no one's coming to save you. That's why Last Country Supply offers the grid Dr. It's a 3300 watt battery backup system built to keep your entire household running when everything else stops. It powers full size appliances, medical devices, essential tools. You can use it indoors. It's totally safe. There's no fuel, there are no fumes, there's no noise. We have one at home and it's awesome. It's got 15 output ports. It charges from the wall when you have power, from your car when you don't. It's got a solar panel so the sun can charge it. It's built to withstand EMPs, lightning, solar flares. It is durable as hell. So taking care of yourself and the people you love, the people you're responsible for, is your job.

[Peter Brimelow]

Job.

[Tucker Carlson]

Get power you can trust. Always get the grid doctor today at our very own lastcountrysupply.com our business this is the power supply that we use. Lastcountrysupply.com taxact knows filing taxes can be confusing. So we have live experts on hand who can help answer any questions you may have. Questions like can I claim my SUV is my home office? If I answer work emails in my car? If I adopted 12 dogs this year, can I list them as dependents? And am I doing this right or am I doing this very, very wrong? Our experts have the answers to those questions and many others. Taxact, let's get them over with.

[Advertisement/Announcer]

Whether you're walking barefoot in the snow, escaping for a walk on your lunch break, or trekking halfway across the world for a lush view, it feels good when we unplug and connect to Our simpler stuff. If only our everyday nutrition were that simple. It's time to simplify your wellness routine with Cachava. Getting the nutrition we need from that graveyard of supplements in our cupboards is often overcomplicated. Just two scoops of Kachava's all in one nutrition shake and you've got 25 grams of protein, 6 grams of fiber, greens, adaptogens and so much more. Plus it actually tastes delicious. No fillers, no nonsense, just the good stuff your body craves leaves. So instead of adding to your backstock of supplements that over promise and under deliver, keep it simple with just two scoops that have the highest quality ingredients. Simplify your [e-mail] and use code news. New customers get $20 off an order of two bags or more. Now through January 31st. That's Kachava. K-A C-H-A-V-A.com code news.

[Tucker Carlson]

Now to what happened to you and to Vider. So you're expelled both from National Review and you leave your old life as a financial journalist behind. I think it's a fair summary. And then you create this organization called vdare, named after Virginia Dare, the first British child born in the Americas. And it becomes successful, it becomes big. And it's not anti semitic, it's not racist, it's against changing America's population through immigration. Is that a fair summary?

[Peter Brimelow]

Yeah. I stayed in financial journalism for a long time. VDARE was kind of a moonlighting project.

[Tucker Carlson]

But you pull that off, it was.

[Peter Brimelow]

Very difficult and of course eventually became impossible. And I was fired both from Forbes and from cbs. Was used to be CBS market, which became Dow Jones Market Watch in both cases. It was in. It was during turndowns in the markets. But I happened to be the one, you know, they chose to find me rather than people who are frankly less valuable to them. So it did in the end terminate my career in the mainstream media. But on the other hand, you know, we were developing video very rapidly and it became quite a big deal. And 2019, we raised nearly $4 million, which enabled us to buy the castle and do all kinds of other things. Of course, you know, it's been utterly destroyed now. I've been out of it, you know, it was suspended two years ago and I resigned. So, you know, I'm supporting the family now on pens and savings and so on. And I do have a family. I have minor children. So it's kind of irritating.

[Tucker Carlson]

Irritating doesn't begin to describe it. So tell the story if you would. You're running vdare. And somehow Leticia James, who's the.

[Peter Brimelow]

She's the Attorney General of New York, is a 501c3 charity and is registered in New York in 1999 entirely because I then pro bono lawyer happened to be barred in New York and therefore that it was convenient for him. And this was when, you know, there was Republican governor in New York and nobody ever heard of Law Fair. Nobody heard this idea of lawfare, this kind of exploitation of regulatory power. Never occurred to anybody at that point. Well, because we registered in New York, even though we don't operate in New York, she was able to demand we one day walk up and found we got these massive subpoenas demanding all kinds of documents, including all our email going back to 2016. And of course that was a huge problem because if she got that, she would have the names of our donors and our anonymous pseudonymous writers. And I had people writing for me whose career would have been ruined if they would have been fired.

[Tucker Carlson]

Let me ask him what, okay, so you're not domiciled New York, you're not operating in New York, nothing.

[Peter Brimelow]

We registered New York, that's the key point.

[Tucker Carlson]

But the 501 CT is registered in New York, but you're not.

[Peter Brimelow]

And you can't get out. You've got to have her permission to get out. And you know, you can't change states. No, you can only with her permission. And in some circumstances, if we were to set up another 501C3 and start operating out of that, she would claim that we were transferring assets and she could claim jurisdiction over that. It's a huge mess and we had very expensive lawyers looking at it for a long time, even before she came along and hit us with this.

[Tucker Carlson]

But may I ask on what grounds she issued subpoenas to you?

[Peter Brimelow]

She doesn't have to give grounds, but what she said was she wanted to investigate the Castle purchase, which we did in 2000. Or more accurate, I should say Lydia did in 2000, because as you know, we had maybe a dozen, depends how you count, But a dozen, 15 conferences cancelled, hotels would accept a booking, then they would cancel as soon as they came under pressure from the left. And we realized we were never going to be able to have a conference, so we bought our own venue. And she wants to investigate that. Well, of course, all that purchase was very carefully lawyed precisely because we knew she would want to investigate it. But it doesn't make any difference. She demands that. She demanded that and she demanded all kinds of other Things the really Killian thing froze, was demanding all the email we had to turn over more than a million documents. The real killing thing was demanded the email because we know if she got the writers names and the donor's name, she would release them. She did that with Nikki Haley. They leaked her the donors to her pack. And the papers that you saw that gave the names of Nikki Haley's donors were actually. The letter was New York Attorney General's office.

[Tucker Carlson]

Can I.

[Peter Brimelow]

But of course, nobody ever came after for her.

[Tucker Carlson]

I'm just confused. Did she have evidence she committed a crime?

[Peter Brimelow]

No, she was looking for evidence and she's not found it. But she's charged us anyway. Well, she hasn't charged us. It's not a criminal thing. But she's suing us anyway over it.

[Tucker Carlson]

My impression, my guess is that the Trump administration will begin to ignore the courts in some cases and people will say that this is the beginning of fascism and a takeover of the destruction of our legal system. And that's a fair point.

[Peter Brimelow]

No, it's not a fair point.

[Tucker Carlson]

Well, exactly. That's exactly what I'm about to say. Exactly. It has already been destroyed. And when the Attorney General of a state you don't live or operate in can destroy you because she doesn't like your opinions, then we don't have a functioning legal system, period. And this happened before Trump. So I just want to say that.

[Peter Brimelow]

The wonderful, I mean, one of the wonderful things. Let me back up a second. One wonderful thing that has happened within the last year is that a very enterprising journalist actually dug up a speech made to the adl. They had a conference called Taking Hate to Court by Rick Sawyer, who is one of Letitia James operatives and he is the one who's leading the charge against us. And he said to this conference that hate speech, that's us. Hate speech is protected by the First Amendment. But there are ways around that. All you have to do, if it's a charity and you have jurisdiction, is to start issuing subpoenas. He said it sucks to be sued, just subpoenaed them to death. And of course, that's exactly what he's done to us. They inflicted over a million, nearly a million and a half dollars in out of pocket costs for lawyers and so on, let alone the hundreds of hours that lady had to spend digging through documents and so on meant that she couldn't fundraise or do any other work. They just destroy you through the process of the punishment. They just destroy you that way. So he's actually Openly admitting this. So when we saw this, we thought, oh, it's all over. They've obviously admitted that what they're doing is not. Is political. It's not because of some regulatory concern. But we've been totally unable to get the federal court to pay attention to this. We're trying again now. We have what they call 983 action against Letitia James and the operatives personally. And we're trying to raise the. This First Amendment question there, but the courts have been extremely resistant to looking at it.

[Tucker Carlson]

I mean, if the attorney general or staff are admitting they're destroying you because they disagree with your opinions, it seems to me that any federal court would take that up because that's a foundational question.

[Peter Brimelow]

That's what we thought. But in fact, the first time we did it, they'd caught simply dotsch on a technical issue. They have a. They came up with a technical excuse to dodge in and we have ill trying again now. But, you know, we just have to hope for the best. I think one of the things that is clear to me, I mean, is from looking at our litigation experience, which is now considerable, it goes far beyond this situation and all the cases I'm aware of is that there seems to been some message gone out from Judge Central natural that anything that's quote unquote in a white nationalist has got to be suppressed by any means necessary. In our case, the classic example is we had an hotel cancel on us in Colorado Springs and Quarrel was not with them because they paid up the liquidated damages like men and it was a lot of money. But they canceled because the mayor of Colorado Springs, who was a rhino, John Sullivan, had said he wouldn't extend police protection to the comp conference when, you know, in other words, antifa would go.

[Tucker Carlson]

In and he wouldn't extend police protection.

[Peter Brimelow]

Yes, that's right. Now this is an issue that's.

[Tucker Carlson]

He's threatening to kill you.

[Peter Brimelow]

That's right.

[Tucker Carlson]

And who is this?

[Peter Brimelow]

His name was John Southers. He was the mayor of.

[Tucker Carlson]

He was the Republican John Southers. The mayor of Colorado Springs basically threatened to allow mortal violence against you if you went to his.

[Peter Brimelow]

That's right. Now this is an issue which has been extensively litigated in the civil rights era. And the point was made very clear that by the courts that the local authority, local governments have to extend protection to people's First Amendment rights. In other words, in those days, the black demonstrates would go into it would have meetings in the city and the local whites would be angry about it. But those whites had to be kept away. The blacks had to be allowed to have their meetings. Well, we litigated this right up to the Supreme Court, which refused to take the issue up. And there was. The appeals court in Colorado rejected us. And I believe it had at least one. We had one good judge there who. Who said this is obviously attack on First Amendment rights. And. But the other two, who I think were Republican appointees to vote against us. So we lost and we weren't. Weren't able to. Our initial lawyer, you know, civil rights litigation is extremely damaging if you're on the wrong side of it. I mean, there's enormous damages involved. So it was. It would. We would have. It would have been a huge sort of victory and we would have. We would have actually been made whole in a very dramatic way. An initial lawyer in Cardinal Springs was so keen on this. It was so obvious open and shut case that he took it on contingency, you know. But as soon as you realized that the city was going to resist, he ran away and we had to start paying our paying lawyers to litigate him. Well, anyway, subsequently there was a case before the Supreme Court, New York, I guess, versus Volo. It was called the Volo case v. U L L O. And this was a case where the communists in New York were putting pressure on insurance companies not to insure the nra. And the NRA fought it and it won. And in the decision, Catendi Jackson says the NRA's case is strong, but essentially, I'm paraphrasing, it's not as strong as Vida's case where they were denied police, where the state agency would basically discriminate against them on political grounds. What's this? We never heard about this. Well, it turns out that 16 attorneys general had signed an amicus brief saying that the appeals court in Colorado had been wrong to reject our attempt to sue Colorado Springs on a civil rights theory and that it was wrong for the following reasons. And for that reason, the Supreme Court should take up the NRA's case against NRA versus Volo, I guess it was called. And the Supreme Court did take it up and ruled against the state of New York 9,00, which of course does us absolutely no good whatever, because we're out all that money and, you know, our first to memorize they're not protected. I mean, in other words, there's a real determination on the part. The NRA is apparently more palatable than we are.

[Tucker Carlson]

I'm a little bit confused just conceptually with the idea that white self awareness is effectively illegal in the United States. Whereas as ethnic self awareness in every other group is encouraged. Doesn't make any sense. Speak for myself, I'd rather live in a deracialized world where people think about it less because it does cause problems. But as long as you're encouraging identity politics, why do whites not get to have it? What is the answer?

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, it's completely hypocritical. It's because the people running the society are anti white and they've been able to persuade or intimidate the entire legal system to operate in anti white white wing. Anti white in this case really means anti American. I mean, because the whites are Americans. That's who Americans are, the people who sign it. Like Declaration of Independence.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yeah, I did know that. And the purpose of the project, like big picture again, I keep going back to this, but I'm just, I am a little bit confused because this is the defining fact of our lives is that whites around the world are being eliminated. And I would like to know why.

[Peter Brimelow]

Why?

[Tucker Carlson]

Do you have any guesses?

[Peter Brimelow]

As I say, I think, Tucker, I think it derives from emotion rather than a kind of rational calculation. I mean if you look at what's happened in South Africa or for that many ata in every big American black city that's majority black, I mean, they can't want it to be, to get into a situation where the water is putrid and nothing works and all that kind of thing, but they do that. What you know, the purpose of a system is, is what it does. And that's right. And the purpose of, of you know, non white government is to produce non white government and non white results. Unless of course you're Chinese. I mean, because Singapore's run Japanese, Singapore, they're on very efficiently.

[Tucker Carlson]

They are. It's just interesting that people move here because it's a white country and we.

[Peter Brimelow]

See to run it into the ground.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yeah, well, all of us benefit, white and non white benefit alike from systems created by whites because. Because they're more humane, they're more just, they're more fair and they're much more efficient and cleaner. Obviously.

[Peter Brimelow]

You know, I was looking at an interview, if I can interrupt you. I was looking at an interview. Somebody sent me an interview I did for Forbes magazine with Milton Friedman and I asked him, are there cultural prerequisites for capitalism? And he said yes. I think as you know, he's a very, a fire breathing libertarian, but he actually thought about this culture question and he said that, you know, he said capitalism has really only ever worked In English speaking countries. I don't know why this is so, but the fact has to be admitted that there's some kind of a cultural underpinning for capitalism. What I sometimes what economists call a meta market framework operates. So the question is why are these capitalists bringing, why is the Chamber of Commerce suing to keep the H1B flow coming when they know it's going to, when it's obviously going to produce people who don't do it, like Mandami, who don't support capitalism, in fact hate it. What are the capitalists doing? Well, they're doing what Lenin said. They will sell us the rope with which we hang them.

[Tucker Carlson]

And I mean that's demonstrable. It was true in 1917, it's true in 2026. Do you think it's the product of short term thinking?

[Peter Brimelow]

Oh, in the case of business people called course it is. The malign influence of the Wall Street Journal editorial page. A whole generation of business people actually believe all this nonsense. It's very hard to get out of their heads because they're never allowed, I mean they're never allowed criticism of immigration on the editorial page.

[Tucker Carlson]

So you've referred repeatedly the Wall Street Journal and also to HarperCollins. Both of them are owned by the Murdoch family. What's been your experience with the Murdochs?

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, you know, I, I spent well over a year working for Rupert in I think that's 1990 on ghosting his autobiography which was never published for verse, really changed his mind about it. But I have to say he was extraordinarily generous to me personally and he continued to be extraordinarily generous until very recently when I guess I had been on the payroll quietly for a very long time and they dropped me when you came under attack because somebody, somebody looked into people on the payroll and they found that there's thought criminals on the payroll. So, so at that point, at that point I was dropped. But, but he was been, he's always person been extraordinary generous to me.

[Tucker Carlson]

So that is my experience with Rupert Murdoch in my life.

[Peter Brimelow]

And that's not the case with a lot of these characters.

[Tucker Carlson]

It's not lots of these people, Robert.

[Peter Brimelow]

Maxwell and so on. I remember Rupert tell me once that he thought that Maxwell, Maxwell as you know, fell off his yacht off the Canary Islands and was found dead. Rupert's theory was, was this guy is such a jerk that the crew probably couldn't stand him anymore.

[Tucker Carlson]

That is one theory. That is one theory. His lawyer told me that he was murdered by the Israelis for whom he worked. I don't know the truth of that, but he certainly had a lot of enemies and a lot of suspects in that crime.

[Peter Brimelow]

But, I mean, he was personal in place, and that's not the case with Rupert. He's not cruel, he's not vindictive.

[Tucker Carlson]

Rupert is one of the most personally gracious people I've ever met in my life. I mean, he has perfect manners. He's truly Anglo in that way. And I never had a bad time with him, always. Even when he fired me, I talked to him after. He couldn't have been nicer. So I strongly agree with your assessment. But he kept you on the payroll for decades.

[Peter Brimelow]

Yeah, so I had five children born on his health care.

[Tucker Carlson]

I had some born on his healthcare, too. God bless you, Rupert Murdoch.

[Peter Brimelow]

It was very good.

[Tucker Carlson]

I mean, no, it's a. I mean, I don't know. The truth should be told, good and bad.

[Peter Brimelow]

So essentially, I was a consultant for him, and he didn't consult me at all because, of course, I would have told him to do the exact opposite of what he was asking. But I have no complaints about Rupert Murdoch.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yes. No, I just want to say out loud, I agree with you 100%, through much experience, 25 years. But it does raise the question, as it does with Bill Buckley, that then Rupert has great personal decency. And I've seen it. But the editorial product is aggressively opposed to basic American interests. So what is that? This guy likes America. He treats people around him well. There's a lot good to say about Rupert, but the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Harper Collins, all of them are engaged in a very aggressive campaign against. Against America's interests. So why. Why is that, do you know?

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, I think he handed over the sort of intellectual, the thinking part of a News Corporation or 21st Century Fox, whatever it's called now, to the neoconservatives. And so he took on a lot of neoconservative baggage at that point. I mean, they used to run an editorial every year saying there ought to be a constitutional amendment, they shall be open borders. You know, I mean, it was really lunatic. And. And I believe that's still the case.

[Tucker Carlson]

But why would he do that?

[Peter Brimelow]

First of all, because they're very good. They're extremely active, full of ideas, full of energy. They were extremely good in the Cold War.

[Tucker Carlson]

They were. That's correct.

[Peter Brimelow]

You know, but that was then, this is now, and they have just simply haven't made. Made the transition. But that, that's. That's a major reason. I Know, suite operating in New York. And, you know, he was under a lot of suspicion there and. And has been. You know, he had to show what he was. What Gore Vidal called once an okay guy, and he's. And he's showing that it's genuine, though, with Rupert. I remember once talking to him about why he was so pro. The. The initial Iraq War, the Gulf War, and he said, well, you know, it goes back to. It goes back to my father and Gallipoli. You know, his father played a major role discrediting the Gallipoli expedition, which was this attack orchestrated by Winston Churchill. They're trying to break through the Dardanelles to get to Russia to help Russia during the war. He said, so. So I'm just. I guess I'm just basically anti Arab. I said, those aren't Arabs, the Turks.

[Tucker Carlson]

Well, exactly. Yeah, exactly.

[Peter Brimelow]

Yeah. You know, they're all the same.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yeah. The Ottoman Empire is gone, and they've done an enormous amount of business in the Gulf with Arabs who help finance his companies. So it's kind of a strange answer. His father was a famous journalist in Australia who broke the news of the disaster at Gallipoli, and he was very proud of that. But that's not much of an answer, is it?

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, you're doing better than I do. Tuck it.

[Tucker Carlson]

I don't know. He's had such an effect on the world and on my life. And as I said five times, I've always liked him and still do, but it does me.

[Peter Brimelow]

Once one of his henchmen in Australia said to me that Rupert is a businessman who wants to be a journalist, and his father's a journalist. You want to be a businessman. Because he did found a publishing empire in Australia, of course. Sir Keith Murdoch. I think there's a lot in that. I mean, I think that you and I are ideologues, professional ideologues. But Ruby's not a professional.

[Tucker Carlson]

No, that's.

[Peter Brimelow]

He's somebody who spends all of his time looking at the numbers. It's a fantastic memory for numbers. He knows all. I can never remember any phone numbers. He remembers every phone number he's ever dialed. You know, and. And that running an operation like. Like his, it requires a tremendous attention to detail and a tremendous application to going out, going over pages and pages and pages of figures. And I don't know that he spends a great deal of time thinking about politics, except in a sporting sense. I mean, he likes to be. He. Like. He likes. Yes. You know, he likes to be backing winners and winning elections and that Kind of thing. But then he lets go into Australian football matches too. So I think it's kind of a similar thing.

[Tucker Carlson]

That is a very smart analysis. I think you're exactly. I think you just answered the question. He's outsourced a lot of the thinking to others. It's transactional. He's not tightly wedded to ideological details at all. But he's really allowed the Wall Street Journal editorial page to become a force of destruction.

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, I have to admit it's many years since I bothered to read the Wall Street Journal. Yeah, me too. I rely on people sending me things and they don't send much from the Wall Street Journal or for that matter from National Review.

[Tucker Carlson]

Very rarely is National Review still in existence.

[Peter Brimelow]

Apparently so. It has the Republican establishment to support.

[Tucker Carlson]

It's like Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz and what do you know the editor of National Review?

[Peter Brimelow]

I have the. Have the. You mean Rich Larry? He's got. He's gone for some time now, isn't he? Isn't, isn't. He hasn't even done there somebody else?

[Tucker Carlson]

I haven't the faintest idea. But did you know him?

[Peter Brimelow]

No. I sat in rooms with him and I went to Bacchus parts with him. Absolutely no memory of him at all. He never said anything to him of significance. I think that's why Bill hired him, because he was completely malleable.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yeah, I think that sounds right. Sad. Sad. How much has been lost? So, speaking of lost, what happened in the end and I interrupted your story. My apologies. But to Vider.

[Peter Brimelow]

Vidair is suspended. Suspended in July of 2024 because we just ran out of money. The foundation is still in existence and Lydia is still. She's not paid, but she's still paying lawyers. And dealing with the legal situation, which continues to ramifies, I say we're being sued personally and, and as a foundation.

[Tucker Carlson]

On what grounds are you being sued?

[Peter Brimelow]

Oh, there's a whole bunch of things fundamentally technical issues to do with. With. To do with whether we had the right number of directors vote on the right number of things. It's all paperwork stuff. It's all stuff that could. Would normally resolve with a phone call and possibly a refiling and stuff like that. They've not found any evidence of. Of misappropriation of funds. And in fact we moved to dismiss on this basis. Although they huff and puff a lot. I mean the 60 odd pages of rhetoric, but the actual charges, they haven't got anything.

[Tucker Carlson]

Who is suing you?

[Peter Brimelow]

This is New York state.

[Tucker Carlson]

So they're using tax dollars still to sue.

[Peter Brimelow]

Oh, yes, that's right. Enormous. They've spent a great deal of money on this. They also very weirdly subpoenaed Facebook for all our records of all our dealings with Facebook. Well, Facebook banned us in 2020 as part of Zuckerberg's campaign to defeat Donald Trump. They thought we were. We were pro Trump. So we actually had not. Hadn't had any deal with Facebook for more than two years when they came after us. And. But nevertheless, they got all these records off of Facebook, but they've done nothing with them because, of course, there's nothing there. I think they. I think they genuinely thought that they would find that we were accepting money from the Russians or something to run. To run bat farms. Do you remember that was the allegation with interference in the 2016, that the Russians were financing tiny little Facebook pages and that's how they were manipulating the election. I think they genuinely believe that. I think one of the things about Democrats is that they really do believe their own propaganda. They do think that the middle America's full of people wearing pointed hats.

[Tucker Carlson]

We'll be at war with Qatar by the end, just because they've talked themselves, themselves into believing Qatar secretly controls America as they did with Russia. Then we went to war with Russia, and we're still at war with Russia over that.

[Peter Brimelow]

Right. The difficulty with this is that the Republicans believe the Democrat propaganda too, which is why they won't, for example, appeal to the white vote. One of the things we did at Vdell is we discussed and documented what we call the sailor's tragedy, as opposed to Rove tragedy. In 2000, Karl Rove was saying that the Republicans have got to do outreach to Minnesotans, minorities. And it makes no sense statistically because I think George Bush, Judge W. Bush got, got like 51% of the white vote. It's appalling performance. So Steve Saylor, who's one of our writers who you've had on, pointed out that if they could just increase that potential proportion of the white vote to what his father got, which was like 57, 58%, that would swamp and overwhelm any possible conceivable gain among minority voters. So we would say, saying, you should go for the white vote. And now this caused a great deal of trouble for us. I remember got a letter from an email from Jude Winisky. Do you remember Jude Winisky? Very well supplied therapy. He said, peter, you've gone too far. In other words, appealing to the white vote is not allowed. And look, it's just a Question arithmetic. You know, there's more of them than there are of minorities. Any case, to this day, the Republicans still are still not done that. They've done it test.

[Tucker Carlson]

Why was Jude Winiski mad?

[Peter Brimelow]

Jude was a liberal, you know, way back when he was a liberal Democrat and he still had a lot of these reflexes, but it was just thought to be. People just got very emotional about it. You know, they think it's somehow illegitimate and they still do think it's illegitimate. For example, so we see in Virginia in this last election, you know, this youngkin who's a complete cipher as far as a Wall street cipher, as far as I can see, chooses, has his success in the Ontario race. A candidate who was one, an immigrant, two, a woman and three, black. She's a black Jamaican immigrant. And this is how he's going to appeal to the white vote. They're going to get people in the south, south or the halls of Southwest Virginia out to vote for this black immigrant. It's ridiculous. And of course they got a terrible share of the white vote. It was like 53% and that's why they lost. But they would rather lose than make a full out appeal to white voters.

[Tucker Carlson]

I think the tell was in the ability, so this was in karate. You know, I'm not saying a bad person, but Winsome Sears was not a good candidate. It was kind of an incapable candidate and, and hard to, hard to deal with. So, like they chose her because she was black.

[Peter Brimelow]

That's right.

[Tucker Carlson]

Despite the fact that she wasn't good at her job.

[Peter Brimelow]

I mean, this is epidemic in the Republican Party.

[Tucker Carlson]

Well, it's epidemic in the country.

[Peter Brimelow]

They've chosen, so no, but Republicans in particular, they've chosen so many black candidates about to adhere to Florida. The next gubernatorial candidate is likely black, unless a miracle occurs. Why is that? They are just pixelated by this, transfixed by this. I'm trying to find the right word, hypnotized by this phenomenon, by the whole race question. They're just race whips is what it comes down to. They're just so afraid of being called racist that they'd rather lose with black candidate than run a candidate who appeals to whites. Trump did appeal to whites. Not enough, but he does it in some kind of really implicit way. If you actually look at what Trump said, in spite of all the rhetoric, he's not said anything that's explicitly white nationalist or anything. I see no sign that he's only a civic nationalist. But for some reason he's made some connection. I mean, all Through West Virginia while Biden was president. You would see, see these signs supporting Trump and saying very rude things about Biden. And these are outside trail.

[Tucker Carlson]

Very rude things about Biden.

[Peter Brimelow]

Yeah, I mean, you know, this is a poor area. These rundown trailer homes that you see with these Trump signs on them. For some reason Trump made a connection with them and it's eerie. Now on the other hand, he also made a disconnection with the other side. So you get this Trump derangement syndrome. But he was able to mobilize the white voters.

[Tucker Carlson]

Why do you think think that was?

[Peter Brimelow]

Which part of it that he was able.

[Tucker Carlson]

Working class whites love Trump. Trump is not a racist. I never seen any sign of that at all. And not a white nationalist at all and hardly a Christian nationalist. But he for some reason had an emotional connection with these voters. Why do you know there's a concept.

[Peter Brimelow]

In sociology called the implicit community and know communities that, that represent or appeal to some people without actually saying it explicitly. The classic example, nascar, for example. Why is NASCAR a white stronghold or everybody watching NASCAR is white and the NASCAR operatives don't like this and they hate it.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yeah.

[Peter Brimelow]

Constantly trying to diversify. Republican Party is a classic example of this. I mean, without ever, without ever doing anything deserve it. The Republicans have become absolutely unbeatable in Virginia. And you and I both remember then when the Democrats were unbeatable in Virginia. You know, I forget when the last Republic. I also keep forgetting when the last Republican Democrat to carry West Virginia was. But it might have been, it might have been Clinton. And now, now it's just, just the Democrats have ceased to exist in, in West Virginia, even though this is a very poor state. Republicans prevailed by simply by virtue of not being Democrats.

[Tucker Carlson]

Bill Clinton lost California in 92 and won West Virginia. Virginia. That's how much has changed. Right.

[Peter Brimelow]

So there's something that's going on at a very deep psychological level, some kind of implicit signaling. It's baffling. Now, of course, he did say, you know, when he came down the elevator and said just a few words about Mexico, about Mexican immigration, and never looked back. So he obviously struck a nerve there. So he did enough to strike a nerve and simply by raising immigration in the sort of world rather, you know, I'm sure it drives Stephen Miller crazy, incoherent and peculiar and constantly forgets his lines and says the wrong thing way that Trump does talk about immigration. But he did, did raise it. And of course until then it was, it's been driven out of Republican politics completely. I know we wrote about it for.

[Tucker Carlson]

You were fired over it. Right.

[Peter Brimelow]

Just you know and we, there's, there's almost no sign that any Republican would pick it up. But then when he did the damn broke and now what big difference that I found Tucker is if you speak to grassroots Republicans as opposed to elected Republicans, the consensus overwhelming that immigration's got to be ended. The consensus is overwhelming. Whereas when I got involved in this in the early 90s a lot of Republicans never heard of this question and they would assume for example that republic that immigrants don't go on welfare to the same extent that native born do which is completely wrong. It's completely reverse of truth was back then it was obvious that they were going back into welfare in disproportionate numbers. But people didn't know and the Wall Street Journal's not telling them. Well the Wall Street Journal still isn't telling them but they do know now and maybe we played a role in that.

[Tucker Carlson]

Well yeah and it's had a, you know, such a complex and degrading effect on the native population. It hasn't been. It's not just a matter of competition in the job market or my, you know, my tech job went to an Indian or something. It's, it's way more complicated than that. And and as immigrant communities became totally dependent on federal benefits it changed the incentive structure for native born communities and a lot of them started going on it at higher rates also. So it created a vortex that's hurt everybody I think especially the whites. Where does it go from here?

[Peter Brimelow]

The big thing that has to the next if I was still running Vida and on my own website peterbrynmore.com now what I'm interested in is legally immigration. Legal immigration is still running at a million a year. No that puts the fact that the foreign born population in the US has fallen by two and a half million in the last just joined this year. That's absolutely extraordinary number. I used to track it via the foreign born population because of the way of tracking the impact of immigration. It very rarely goes negative. It went negative briefly when Trump first got in because they were frightened of him and a lot of people legals left and then towards the end before COVID it was falling because of various technical executive action measures that Trump had taken the administration taking to tighten up on both legal immigration and illegal immigration. Now it's two and a half million gone foreign. Two and a half million foreign born population. Even though we know a million legal immigrants have come in, 90% of them colored by the way only about 10% white. So what we really need is an immigration moratorium. And I'm delighted to say that there is a bill proposed by Chip Roy in, in the, in the, in the House called, it's called the Pause act, calling for moratorium. And there's several other very interesting bills. A very good bill on birthright citizenship, and look at my list here. Secure the border. I mean, in other words, they should set and codify Trump's, Trump's activities, tighten up on the executive action, tighten up on the southern border, because we know that when the Democrats get in, they'll reverse it, but they won't be able to do that if it's in the law. They'll have to pass a law and have to admit what they're doing. The problem is that the White House seems to be, is not pushing any of these bills. And unless they do, I don't think that Speaker Johnson is going to raise anything. He's just gonna, you know, it's just going to lie, lie low. And I don't know why the White House isn't pushing these bills. Of course, it's got his hands full in, in Minnesota, where they clearly need to declare the Insurrection act and that kind of thing. And it keeps, keep going around blowing up foreign governments and stuff like that and sinking ships and stuff. I mean, which. It must be very entertaining. But I would really rather than focus on ending this, this, this, ending this immigration disaster. You know, it's, whatever it is. 34 years now since I started writing about this in National Review. I'm 78. I can't wait much longer. I think that you just get on.

[Tucker Carlson]

With it and you have a number of children who will inherit the country.

[Peter Brimelow]

Well, that's, that's really the point. You know, people occasionally. Yeah, people say, okay, I get attacked all the time for, for not being, for being an immigrant. So my position is, you know, I'm an immigrant doing a dirty job that Americans won't talk about immigration. But the real reason is I have children here. My youngest child is 10 years old. And God knows what the country's going to be like by the time she's a grown woman.

[Tucker Carlson]

Are you bitter?

[Peter Brimelow]

I've been extremely blessed in my personal life, even though my first wife died.

[Tucker Carlson]

So.

[Peter Brimelow]

I don't think, I think things could have worked out differently for me professionally. But in my personal life, I'm very blessed.

[Tucker Carlson]

You don't seem angry, because my read on it is what happened to you is grotesque and is evil and not the kind of thing I thought would ever be allowed here. So I'm shocked, always shocked to hear your story.

[Peter Brimelow]

I am, I guess I am bitter at the conservative movement, people in the conservative movement, people I've known for, for 30 and 40 years who basically haven't helped us, haven't defended us. The most prominent people who have defended us, Tucker, are you and Laura Loomer, your friend Laura Luma. So that, that just shows how ecumenic like we are.

[Tucker Carlson]

So Loomer helped you?

[Peter Brimelow]

Oh, yeah. She, she, she supported us on, on Twitter when we were good for her, when we were trying to defend ourselves. And she. May I have a give send go, which I just launched before Christmas, frankly, to help us personally because of course, we're now facing tremendous legal costs personally, and I believe she's helped us with that.

[Tucker Carlson]

Have you received any help from the Department of Justice?

[Peter Brimelow]

We know that there are people in Department of Justice who are not directly. On the other hand, Trump can't stand Letitia James, quite rightly. And they've made various attempts to bring her to book for her various crimes, for one thing. I mean, she's clearly guilty. Massive mortgage fraud going back over 40 years. But, you know, the obverse of lawfare run by Democrats, it's joined notification by Democrats. They've been unable to indict her because, because, basically because judges keep disallowing the prosecutors and because the grand juries won't, won't, won't indict, won't indict Democrats. And so that, I don't know where that's why that stands. They also have an investigation into her deprivation of Trump's civil rights in this, these scandalous cases and, you know, this hush money case and the fraud case and so on. We should never have been allowed to go to court. The judges should have started. But of course, the judges are on the other side and a judge is just trying to get, try to strike that down by disallowing the prosecutor. I mean, what's happening is these Democrats, senators not only have the power to, to veto judicial appointments, federal judicial appointments, but they also have the power apparently to veto prosecutors, federal prosecutors. And they're apparently taking the position that they won't allow the appointment of a federal prosecutor if he's likely to prosecute Letitia James or any other Democrats, you know, and God knows there are enough Democrats out there that need prosecuting. That's how they're protecting them. Many respects. You know, we're looking to slow motion civil war here. I mean, New York essentially secedia and Minnesota, but essentially it's a city from the union. The whole legal systems are opposed to what the federal government is doing. Jonathan Turley, who is a First Amendment specialist, wrote recently that New York is the land that law forgot because normal legal norms simply don't apply there. What happens is what the Democrat operatives want. And of course, this is not a government under law. So, in fact, New York is seceding from, from the union. And that's why I think ultimately we're going to have to go to the Insurrection act, and we're going to go. Have to go to wholesale impeachment of judges. All these judges brought in by Biden, I think he had one or two white men, both of whom were gay, something like that. All the, all the others of women and people of color and so on, and they deliver in the most extraordinary rulings, disregarding the plain letter of the law. Ultimately, it's going to have to be a purge of the judicial, of the judicial system.

[Tucker Carlson]

Trump. When that happens, Trump will be attacked as destroying the third branch of government. But it's been completely destroyed long before Trump.

[Peter Brimelow]

Right, right.

[Tucker Carlson]

My last question to you, Peter Bruno, and thank you so much for doing this, is are you hope.

[Peter Brimelow]

I have a. I have a. One of the sayings I want to be remembered for is based on a talk I gave in about 2015, is that miracles happen quite often in politics.

[Tucker Carlson]

Yes.

[Peter Brimelow]

I mean, nobody. Nobody expected the Soviet Union collapse. Are you old enough to remember that?

[Tucker Carlson]

I'm 56. Yeah. I remember it like it was yesterday.

[Peter Brimelow]

30 years ago. I know, 30 years ago. I mean, that's literally true. Nobody, nobody either on the left or the right, expect the Soviet collapse. On the other hand, you know, I don't think they expected the Catholic Church going the direction it went. Vatican II and, and, and, and, and on the third hand, nobody expected Trump. And he has been a miracle. I mean, he's changed the situation so many, so many ways, not of which I think he. He has probably thought about, but. But he does it anyway. Yes. So I'm hopeful because I think miracles happen in politics frequently, but when you need one, the situation right now, we're heading a very, very bad direction. And in the situation where Democrat politicians are openly calling on people to disobey federal law, disobey law, prevent ICE from deporting illegals, that's more extreme than ever happened in the south. Joined desegregation.

[Tucker Carlson]

Much more. It's more extreme than what the south did at Fort Sumter. I mean, this is, this is insurrection, actual insurrection.

[Peter Brimelow]

It's insurrection.

[Tucker Carlson]

That's right.

[Peter Brimelow]

That's right, it's insurrection. And of course, Eisenhower and Candy did use the Interaction act to impose integration.

[Tucker Carlson]

He sent the 101st Airborne to a high school.

[Peter Brimelow]

Yeah, right, right with the total applause from the mainstream media then of course. Completely oligopolistic. I mean, it was dominant at least now we have. We have Twitter. Even if we are shadow banned on.

[Tucker Carlson]

Twitter Are you still shadow banned?

[Peter Brimelow]

Oh, yeah. Well, as far as we can see, we are. Ann Calder, you know her. Her followership has not risen for like six years. It's been 2.1 million for six years. Doesn't go up, it doesn't go down. I mean, it's obvious. You can see from an engagement that there's. There's something. There's something very strange going on. It's all the Indians he has in there. He hasn't been able to root them out yet.

[Tucker Carlson]

Peter Roma, thank you very much.

[Peter Brimelow]

Thank you, Tucker. Sam.