Trump Admits Mass Deportations and Building the Wall Was All a Total Scam. Tucker Responds.

It's hard to remember now, but people mocked Ronald Reagan and in fact expressed what seemed like genuine alarm about Ronald Reagan based on his age when he was president. Ronald Reagan was the oldest man at the time to serve as president of the United States. He was 77 when he left office. Of course, he died of Alzheimer's. Um, but even while he was president, people accused him of having Alzheimer's. He was seen as very, very, very old. Well, 40 years ago this week, Ronald Reagan was in his second term, two years into it. It was right after the midterm elections. Of course, that year, 1986, in which Republicans did very badly. Ronald Reagan was 75 years old at the time. And this is not widely remembered, but it was that year, 40 years ago this week, that Ronald Reagan signed an amnesty bill, probably the first in American history, that gave amnesty legal status to people who had been breaking the law. basically wiped away their crimes sort of as if by magic, a stroke of a pen, and put them on what we now refer to as a path to citizenship. It legalized them, about 3 million people, people who are living here illegally. And thanks to Ronald Reagan signing this, they were on their way to becoming citizens. And people don't remember it in part because history records Ronald Reagan as a terrifyingly right-wing president. And by the second year of his second term, he'd been hearing that well for six years. Ronald Reagan is a racist because you may not remember this. He began his national presidential campaign in 1980 near a town called Philadelphia, Mississippi, where three civil rights workers famously had been murdered during the civil rights movement in the 1960s. Wasn't actually in Philadelphia. Not to relitigate all this 46 years later, but it was very meaningful at the time. Ronald Reagan began his first term as president with every headline in the country calling him a racist. And they kept it up. Well, almost the entire time he was president. So, six years in, Ronald Reagan had been called a racist, a fascist, a Nazi every single day for six years. And he was probably a little tired of it. In part because whatever Ronald Reagan was, he was not actually very right-wing, at least on the social issues. It was Ronald Reagan who signed the second legalized abortion law in the United States. Few months after Colorado signed its law legalizing abortion in 1967, Ronald Reagan legalized abortion in the state of California. He is not remembered for that. In fact, AI probably won't even tell you that, but it's a fact. Ronald Reagan was an abortion pioneer legalizing abortion in the country's biggest state. Ronald Reagan was also married to a liberal woman and had a liberal daughter and was, as just noted, demonstrabably liberal in the social issues. You wouldn't have known that unless you paid close attention because again he was constantly being attacked as a Nazi and too old. And so it's possible that six years into his term as president, he just kind of gave up and signed the biggest amnesty bill in American history. Ronald Reagan is really kind of the father of radical demographic change in this country. In any case, we thought it'd be interesting to look back 40 years to the week at Ronald Reagan signing amnesty for 3 million illegal aliens. Here he is. >> This bill, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 that I'll sign in a few minutes is the most comprehensive reform of our immigration laws since 1952. It's the product of one of the longest and most difficult legislative undertakings in the last three Congresses. Further, it's an excellent example of a truly successful bipartisan effort. The administration and the allies of immigration reform on both sides of the capital and both sides of the aisle work together to accomplish these critically important reforms to control illegal immigration. Distance has not discouraged illegal immigration to the United States from all around the globe. The problem of illegal immigration should not therefore be seen as a problem between the United States and its neighbors. Our objective is only to establish a reasonable, fair, orderly, and secure system of immigration into this country and not to discriminate in any way against particular nations or people. Future generations of Americans will be thankful for our efforts to humanely regain control of our borders and thereby preserve the value of one of the most sacred possessions of our people, American citizenship. >> Well, the first thing you notice, he doesn't seem that old really, certainly by modern standards. Again, he was 75 when he gave that speech. Some say he had Alzheimer's as he gave it. And yet he was still younger than at least 10 current sitting or in some cases slumping members of the United States Senate who are much older than Ronald Reagan was. And of course our current president is 80, 5 years older than Ronald Reagan was. In any case, if you listen to what he just said, he said this is actually this bill to provide amnesty to people breaking federal law is actually an effort to stop illegal immigration. He said that multiple times. future generations will thank us for securing our borders and preserving the value of American citizenship. So the reason to play something like that, the reason to watch that apart from its inherent historical interest is to measure the promises of the time against the reality of the present. And there is a big divide between the two. Of course, 40 years later, citizenship is barely recognized as a concept by states and municipalities across the country and perhaps coming soon by the federal government. People who are not citizens, who are foreign born and foreign nationals, people who are citizens of other countries but here illegally get to vote in elections across the country, not in federal elections, but in state and local elections. Did the amnesty law of 1986 reduce illegal immigration? Well, let's see. At the time there, and of course, no one ever knows exactly how many illegal aliens are in the country at any one time because they don't register. And for some reason, in a nation that has really led the world in counting things and creating metrics, in measuring everything that is based on the scientific method of measuring things, we can't seem to measure within like 10 million the number of illegal aliens in the country. Sort of weird. Flock cameras aren't helping at all. But in any case, it was about 3 3.2 million illegal aliens in the country estimated when Ronald Reagan signed that law. He gave amnesty to basically all of them. Today, 40 years later, we have well, let's see. So, the liberal pro-immigration groups claim there are maybe 15 million illegal aliens in the country. The Trump administration says at various times there are 25 million. They do run the government, so they might have some sense. Other times they say there are 50 million people here illegally. Greg Bevino who was the commander in charge of the border patrol whose job it was to keep track of these things just said recently there are 100 million illegal aliens in this country. So whatever it is whether it's anywhere between 15 the low estimate 100 the high estimate there are a lot more illegal aliens in this country than there were in 1986 when Ronald Reagan signed the law designed to secure our border and end illegal immigration. And this has been much written about subsequently in those 40 years. But that law giving amnesty to people who were under the shadow of the law before it was signed. In other words, they were breaking the law and they knew it and so did everybody else. Making them legal did not end illegal immigration. It inspired massive waves of it. And then the perhaps inevitable demographic change that followed. So when Reagan signed that in 1986, the United States had a population of about 240 million people. Today, again, we can only guess cuz the one thing we're not good at counting is who lives here. But it looks like the United States has a population of about 350 million people. So that's a huge increase in people, more than 100 million people in 40 years and a finite amount of space and certainly a finite amount of infrastructure. So by legalizing 3 million, you got tens of millions more. And if you think about it, considering the state of the American birth rate, which the higher you hike immigration, the lower the birth rate goes. And it's very low at this point below replacement. It seems very obvious that the majority of people included in that increase of 110 million, the majority of them are foreignb born. And that means that the country has turned over completely. And the bottom line numbers tell you that. So when Reagan signed that, the United States was about, I don't know, 80% white, 81, I think. And it's now about half. The state of California then as now our biggest state where Reagan was from. He was the governor of course famously of California. The state of California was about 70% white when he signed that and now it's in the range of about 30%. So that's a big change whether you welcome it or not. But there are all kinds of other changes which may or may not be connected to that observation that are not welcome by anybody. California had relatively little poverty in 1986. Now it's got an above average amount of poverty and if you drive through certain parts of it, it's all on display because there are hundreds of thousands of people living on the street. Not all of that is a result of immigration. But you can't say that stuffing the state with people from foreign countries have made it a better state because that's just not true. That combined with probably other phenomena have made it a much poorer and more dysfunctional state. When Reagan signed that was only 1986, not that long ago, the majority of public school students in the state of California, like the majority of the population, were white. Now it's about 20%. Now part of the reason for that is the absolute decline in white people in California and in America. by far the fastest shrinking group in the country by far. But also, it's a measure of the failure of California schools. So, California had above average in some cases top performing schools nationwide around the time Ronald Reagan signed that bill. And now, California has some of the worst schools in the country. And the test scores, though they can't quite be compared to each other because this test has been completely changed in an effort to hide the declining educational attainment of students, you can still play with the numbers a little bit and find out that the bottom line truth is fewer California students can read or do basic math than could 40 years ago. A lot fewer. And far fewer go to school. The absentee rate in California school is almost 20%. It's like a fifth of the class just doesn't show up. So the state in a lot of ways certainly at the public end services for the public the things that everybody gets roads education power if you're not rich the things that you rely on in every category the state has become well a lot more like the countries from which its population came. No one wants to hear that. But is there another explanation? That's just true. Sudden downpours are only threatening if you're not prepared for them. Nobody wants to be caught in a torrential rain wearing just a t-shirt. What happens when a storm strikes without warning? Even the best raincoat is useless if it's sitting at home in your closet. So avoiding that exact scenario is possible with Bare Skins hoodie. The Barekin hoodie and rain jacket combo guarantees you're ready for any weather no matter what. So when the heavy rain hits, just zip the rain jacket directly onto the hoodie, one seamless system, and you're totally protected. The Barekin Microfleece hoodie is warm, it's windresistant, and it's a lot lighter than you would expect it to be. Plus, it features 12 pockets, including a secure inner pocket for your cash and cards. It has over 40,000 five-star reviews on Trust Pilot. So, that's a lot of satisfied customers. Right now, buy any two Bearskin hoodies and get a free rain jacket thrown in for free. Text Tucker to 36912. 36912 and Bearskin will send you a link. Tucker 36912. And if you're on the move, they'll hold that deal so it's there when you're ready. Text Tucker to 36912. So if you think about it for a second, while all kinds of great things have happened since 1986, would you go back to a country before Ronald Reagan signed that amnesty bill? You'd have to say you would because on a baseline measurement, it was a richer, more stable, and certainly more unified country. And that leads to the part that like no one ever says out loud, but maybe the most important part and it's not how crowded are your hospitals. Answer way too crowded to use in a lot of cases. No, the question is what unites all 350 million Americans living within the borders of this country. And the answer is increasingly hard to find. Now, for most countries, the first answer, of course, is language. We all speak the same language. and language because it shapes the way people think and process information and imagine things and dream. Language is the main driver of culture and of the stories that over time form a history. So if you don't have a language unifying the country, well the country in the end probably falls apart or lives in a state of soft civil war like I don't know Belgium or Canada. There are tons of examples. It can't live in harmony, a country that doesn't have a common language, and it doesn't. Civil wars start over language all the time, and they always have. So, leaving aside the race question and even the income question, any economic question, at a core level, how does your nation hang together depends probably more than anything else on what language people speak? And unfortunately, the Reagan amnesty of 1986 has been followed by an explosion of languages and not just languages that people use at home, which seems legitimate, but languages that people use in public and that the government at the state level and at the federal level uses to communicate with them. So, for example, in the city of Los Angeles, election materials, and we actually have the list because it was hard to believe this was real, are now provided in 23 different languages. Here are the ele the languages that the county of Los Angeles, the biggest county in the state of California, uses to disseminate election materials. Armenian, Bengali, Burmese, Chinese, Cambodian, Kemer, Farsy, Filipino, Gujarati, Hindi, Indonesian, Japanese, Korean, Mongolian, Russian, Spanish, Thai, Vietnamese, etc. So the the question becomes like why would you educate people and give them voting instructions in a language that is not the majority language in the country? In other words, you're asking people to run a government that operates in a different language from the one they speak. How can they weigh in in a meaningful way? How are they part of the system if they don't speak the language? And no one has bothered to answer that question because it's almost never asked. In fact, the last time anyone in the Senate asked him that question, he was immediately denounced by Chuck Schumer, the then Senate Majority Leader, as a racist, despite the fact that language and race are completely different things. But in any case, the explosion of immigration into this country has been overwhelming in absolute terms. Very few countries in history have had a turnover demographically as quick as the one we've lived through for 40 years. But it has also been accompanied by a total unwillingness to think through basic questions like how do we not have a civil war? And in fact, if you think about it, if you take three steps back, the people pushing it, well, it's hard to know motive seem to be motivated by a desire to break the country into smaller pieces really to atomize it to make sure that there is no common anything. No language, no culture, no religion, no race. Just a bunch of individuals living in apartments on public assistance taking orders. I mean, not to be conspiracy- minded about it, but at every single turn, there has been an explicit effort to make certain that people aren't united in any common thing, that there's no working majority of anything. It almost seems like a divide and conquer strategy. Just saying it is recognizable in that way. But in any case, it has happened. And then the final and most obvious effect that we used to talk about but really do now, the mass migration into the United States that followed Ronald Reagan's 1986 Amnesty Act. Certainly his liberal wife and daughter were congratulating him after. And of course, he didn't live to see the consequences as elderly leaders never do. But one of the consequences could have been foreseen, and that was the total collapse in wages for people at the bottom end of the labor market. And the reason that previous generations would have understood this is because immigration was always always understood to be a response to labor needs. And the core tension was between employers who wanted more workers so they would have to pay less because supply and demand never changes. So if you got more of something, it's value falls. It's why grains of sand are cheap. If you have more workers, you don't have to pay them as much. But in a tight labor market with fewer workers, you have to pay them more. And what employer wants to pay more? So it was pressure from employers in 1986 and in 1965 and at the turn of the last century. At any point in American history in the 1840s where you've seen big waves of migration come to the US, it was always employers who pushed for it because they wanted lower wages. This is not a mystery and it's the main reason the immigration restriction of 1924, the act that kind of ended migration into the United States well for 40 years was pushed by the labor unions not because they were racist. Didn't want any more people from Eastern or Central Europe. In fact, they were run in large part by people from Eastern and Central Europe. No, it had nothing to do with race. It had to do with economics. If you have more of something, it's worth less. And that includes labor. So what has been the effect of this mass migration into the United States? Migration so mass, so vast kind of resembles an invasion. That's just true based on the numbers. What's been the effect on labor markets? Well, you may already know the answer, which is for high school educated men, they have been stagnant. For white Americanborn men of all kinds, they have been stagnant. White American-born women have done pretty well. White American-born men have not. And among black men, Americanborn, not immigrants from Africa, but people who were born here, usually descendants of slaves, their wages have gone down over 40 years. And that shouldn't surprise anybody. So that bill, which Reagan told us would end illegal immigration, actually sparked a lot more of it. 30x illegal immigration blew the population to 110 million more people at least in 40 years without building a say new interstate highway system or a brand new power grid. Basically the same infrastructure for 20 million new people and it completely shafted the group that we now refer to as Trump voters. And so if you think about it maybe for like 10 seconds, it's not that surprising that the people who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020 and 2024 did because they were overwhelmingly in the group whose wages had remained stagnant for 40 years thanks to immigration. Therefore, you should not be shocked when they vote for a guy who says he's going to shut it down because immigration, whatever else it is, a source of great new restaurants. And who even knew there was such a thing as Indonesian food? How exciting. But for most people, it means you're making the same money you made 40 years ago or less with much less respect. So there's kind of no upside. In fact, there is no upside for you unless you love Indonesian food. Having normal testosterone is good, but optimal testosterone, well, that's something totally different. If you've got optimal testosterone, it's a good thing. It means a longer life, leaner muscles, stronger bones, and a lot more energy. And if you want those things, which you probably do, then we would recommend Mars Men. Mars Men built their testosterone supplement around ingredients that scientists have studied for their ability to support healthy testosterone levels in a natural way. The last part is key. Natural means no weird stimulants or synthetic hormones, just real ingredients like vitamin D and zinc. And it's made in the United States. It's third party tested. It's good tasting, legit. Marsben helps you regain your edge and maintain consistent energy throughout the day. It's not like coffee. You don't crash after. Marsmen provides a steadier sense of drive that lasts the whole day. Plus, there's a 90-day money back guarantee. So, there really isn't any risk. For a limited time only, this show's listeners can get 50% off for life, plus free shipping and three free gifts at menotoars.com/tucker. That's menows.com/tucker for 50% off and three free gifts when you check out. And after you purchase it, feel free to say just mention that you heard about it on this show. So it's not a surprise why the Trump message, which and its core message was always against more immigration into the United States. Always. So given that, what we saw on 60 Minutes on Sunday was a little bit surprising. Or was it? Well, we'll let you decide whether you're shocked by this or not. But here is President Donald Trump days after losing in the biggest landslide probably in our lifetimes in the midterm elections when the Republican party was repudiated up and down. Lost the House and the Senate by huge margins. Lost seats in states that no one ever imagined were at play. Kansas, Mississippi, Alabama, total blowout. And the question was like, how is Trump going to respond to this? Will he be defiant? Well, here was his actual response. >> For getting people out, I get very high marks for getting the bad ones out. But I get hurt because we also took people that had good jobs that that created one violation or breaking of the law that was that they came into the country illegally. Now, there is a large part of the country that think that they should be put out and there's a large part of the country that think that they should be allowed to stay if they're good people working in a landscaping company or working in a hotel or doing something, right? And in some cases paying taxes >> and there's a large group of people think that they should be allowed to stay. So, uh >> So, so you think your deportation policy went far? It was too tough. >> I think it might be too tough. Yeah. And a lot of people would say that it's great, but a lot of people think it's too tough. >> What does the deal look like? >> I think ultimately that hurt me. >> I think it Well, the deal would be we would work something out. And I think it's something I think that's something that's actually doable. >> But you think the Democratic Party right now has people in it who would be interested in this kind of deal? >> I think so. Yeah. People have already called me. >> Yeah, people have already called me about doing the deal. about doing the one thing well after starting regime change wars in the Middle East that I said I would never do which is give amnesty to a number I've described as tens of millions of people here illegally but we've already been talking about it Trump says so what is this exactly well those who know Trump know exactly what it is and this is not a reflection of his deep desire to change the demographic mix of America probably not after all a racist remember no what it likely is is Trump's deepest desire, which is to be liked by other people. And so, stung by a nationwide rejection in the midterm elections, Trump casts about for someone who might like him and finds the Democratic party and decides, "Maybe we can make a deal. Maybe if I do the one thing that you want me to do," which is offer amnesty to tens of millions of people and thereby ensure that you will run this country forever because they're all going to vote for Democrats. Of course, that's how California, by the way, went from a state that elected Ronald Reagan and Pete Wilson and George Duke Majan, a state in which Bill Clinton lost in 1992, to the most reliable Democratic state out of 50. And it's because of immigration, because they're different people there. It was 70% white, now 30%. Like, it's kind of that simple. And the Democrats know that because they're, unlike the Republicans, not stupid, and they lie to themselves a little bit less. In any case, Trump looks around. He says, "Who could possibly like me?" Well, my own party's mad at me because I betrayed them and everything. And so, he just moves instinctively as a cold animal does to the fire toward the warmth of acceptance. And he wound up endorsing the one thing he said he would never do. So, if you're shocked by this, if you're shocked by this betrayal, you probably haven't been paying close attention because actually at almost every single point for the past six years that he has held power, Donald Trump, when under pressure, has moved in exactly this direction. You smack him hard enough and all of a sudden he starts offering his enemies the one thing that they want that will certainly destroy him. It's a tick of his personality, but those who've watched him are very familiar with it. Charlie Kirk saw this coming and he saw this coming at exactly the moment that Trump in the first two years of his second term was under the most pressure and that was during the period when he had unleashed what we now know is the prelude to the regime change war but it was the war to eliminate Iran's nuclear program and as that whole debate was going on Charlie Kirk in this clip saw what was going on beneath the surface watch this literally the day before President Donald Trump was signing the big beautiful bill. I got a couple phone calls from people that you would call members of the ruling class. A lot of money and a lot of connections. They said, "Charlie, isn't this amazing? We passed the big beautiful bill." I said, "Oh, yes, sir." And they said, "Now we need mass amnesty." What? I said, "We haven't even signed the the bill yet." They said, "Yeah, you know, these deportations, we're going to lose the midterms because of the deportations. the the people on the right, they'll understand and we need to come to the middle and we need to legalize the 25 million people here in this country. I was speechless. So, we don't know any details, but it looks as if President Trump might be in preliminary discussions and I could tell you that there are many different discussions that I've had with people and they are pushing it hard to create some kind of amnesty proposal aimed specifically at farm laborers in the United States. But it's more than that. It could be hotels. It could be leisure properties. If you want to break our coalition, go and push amnesty. That right there would be a complete collapse of everything that we have worked for. Everything. Farm labor. It always starts with farm labor. We need the farm. Who's going to pick the crops? There are still crops that are picked by hand. Not that many. No grain is picked by hand, of course. But increasingly the world is mechanized. I mean it's true when you go to a convenience store and you check yourself out and it's true if you're harvesting sugarcane for example. 1986 when Reagan signed his bill and of course it was heavily geared toward the a sector which we need. It's a national security question. No American's going to pick a crop obviously because they're lazy. When that bill was signed about twothirds of all sugarc