Conservatism, by itself, is not the defeating agent for liberalism today. At one point I was among many who thought it would be. It's too bifurcated. It's too disjointed. It's too fractured, too un-unified, disunified, whatever, to be a formative opposition force. But there are still millions of people that want nothing to do with what liberalism and the Democrats stand for.

I've always thought that people always wonder why conservatives don't stick together like liberals do. You know, they kind of throw the person to the wolves.

I'm not afraid of having an agenda. I do have an agenda. It's a positive agenda.

I think a lot of the energy that the media and the Democrats are bringing to this is rooted in a belief that they can get rid of Donald Trump. I really think that that's something they think they can do.

I don't care if Trump has $100 billion. He's earned it. He's had a job. There are ways you can track what he has earned. The Clintons don't want to admit how they've earned their money. They love to brag about their wealth, but how did they get it? Making speeches, $750,000 for one speech from a firm that now has close ties with Mrs. Clinton as a secretary of state and potentially as president? It's $750,000 for one speech.

The media is fully fine and hunky-dory with the idea that they may destroy somebody, and they think that's part of the job description. But you turn around and criticize them, and that's not permitted in the vacuum in which they live. They have free rein over you, because I guess this is how they define their constitutional responsibility. And since they have constitutional recognition, somehow they've all been taught at journalism school that nobody may assail them, that nobody may criticize them.

[The American people] would rather invest in themselves than listen to a bunch of people in Washington who do not have a record of fixing anything.