Speaker 1: Mr garbutsch Off teared down this wall. Either you're with
Speaker 1: us or you were with the terrorists. If you got
Speaker 1: healthcare already, then you can keep your plan. If you
Speaker 1: are satisfied with Trump is not the President of the
Speaker 1: United States, take to bank. Together, we will make America
Speaker 1: great again. You'll never sharend It's what you've been waiting
Speaker 1: for all day. The Buck Sexton Show joined the conversation
Speaker 1: called Buck Toll Free at eight four four nine hundred Buck.
Speaker 1: That's eight four four nine hundred to eight to five
Speaker 1: The Future of talk radio. Buck Sexton, Welcome to The
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show. Everybody, coming to you live from Savannah, Georgia.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for hanging out with me today.
Speaker 1: We've got a freestyle Friday in effect, and I have
Speaker 1: a lot of news to talk to you about. We're
Speaker 1: gonna deep dive into what's going on with the UH
Speaker 1: the tremendous announcement we had live for you on the
Speaker 1: show last night about North Korea negotiations, negotiations over North
Speaker 1: Korea's nuclear program. But we also have some information that
Speaker 1: just I'm trying to see when this broke to make
Speaker 1: sure I don't Yeah, just in the last few hours
Speaker 1: that Trump not content to look just at the issue
Speaker 1: of global trade and tariffs and take on China for
Speaker 1: its manipulations of currency and markets, but also UH to
Speaker 1: add North Korea into the mix. And then today Trump lawyers,
Speaker 1: according to the Wall Street Journal, are seeking a deal
Speaker 1: with Muller to get the Russia probe to finally finish up.
Speaker 1: This is high stakes poker, my friends. This is big.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the president of the United States
Speaker 1: who is going against all the conventional wisdom on trade
Speaker 1: right now, and it's like, this is how it's gonna be.
Speaker 1: Who is perhaps going to negotiate one of the most
Speaker 1: important and momentous national security diplomatic UH detons in decades
Speaker 1: with North Korea. We'll see, We'll see early. I know,
Speaker 1: I'm not. I'm not. We don't celebrate too early here
Speaker 1: in the Hut. One of our maxims. Don't celebrate too early.
Speaker 1: You know, you never want to be the guy gets
Speaker 1: tackled on the two yard line when you think you're
Speaker 1: gonna when you think you're in the end zone. No no, no, um.
Speaker 1: But then on top of that, Trump is willing to
Speaker 1: deal on the issue of his own presidency. I mean
Speaker 1: to put the presidents eat a sense at stake by saying,
Speaker 1: you know what, I'll sit down with Mueller. I've got
Speaker 1: nothing to hide, I'm not scared. Bring it Mueller. Wow.
Speaker 1: Assuming this is true and this is gonna happen, Uh,
Speaker 1: this is Trump really just calling out all of yes,
Speaker 1: I'll say, at the haters, the doubters, the underminers. Not
Speaker 1: sure that's really a thing, but we could, we could
Speaker 1: make that a word. I love how with the internet
Speaker 1: these days, you just start using a word enough and
Speaker 1: it becomes a word. They add it. So, you know,
Speaker 1: the the undermining of Trump by all these different individuals
Speaker 1: if he sits down with Mueller, which I will note
Speaker 1: I think is a very bad idea and precarious. But
Speaker 1: then again, what do we what do we see from
Speaker 1: Trump time and again people are like, oh, that's such
Speaker 1: a bad idea, and and then he does it, and
Speaker 1: then all of a sudden they go, you know what,
Speaker 1: that wasn't that actually wasn't a bad idea. And today,
Speaker 1: for example, we've had Democrats talking about how bad add
Speaker 1: the tax cuts were. I mean, Nancy Pelosi was acting
Speaker 1: like the tax cuts were the were the equivalent of, uh,
Speaker 1: some sort of war on the poor. I mean, it
Speaker 1: was just nonsense coming from her. And then today we
Speaker 1: see that the jobs are up for for the month
Speaker 1: of February. Jobs are thousand, folks. You've got over a
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty five million people employing the country right now,
Speaker 1: and manufacturing has added two hundred and sixty three thousand
Speaker 1: jobs since Trump took office. The Dow was up today
Speaker 1: four hundred and forty one points. What happened to Oh, China,
Speaker 1: the trade, it's gonna it's all gonna fall apart, tax cuts,
Speaker 1: It's terrible. He goes with what he thinks is right,
Speaker 1: and then we see what the results are on Mueller. Look,
Speaker 1: I understand the risks here, and I've been saying all along.
Speaker 1: Mueller likes to get people for minor and frac actions,
Speaker 1: and he has a long history of doing this. And
Speaker 1: he may decide that he's going to stare down Trump
Speaker 1: on this one. But you know what Trump is like,
Speaker 1: bring it, he will see. He sounds like he's willing
Speaker 1: to sit down with Mueller himself, and despite all of
Speaker 1: the legal evidence to the contrary, he does not care. Um.
Speaker 1: He's decided that he is going to sit down and
Speaker 1: have his say if this Russia nonsense will come to
Speaker 1: an end at some point if the Mueller pro will
Speaker 1: agree at least that the Trump portion of this has
Speaker 1: to stop at some point. Oh my gosh, this is
Speaker 1: going to drive Democrats insane. But once again we see
Speaker 1: the negotiator at work here, because if in fact they
Speaker 1: are meeting the Democrats, the Trump opposition all about just
Speaker 1: getting to the truth of this, that the President would
Speaker 1: sit down and speak the special counsel himself, that's something
Speaker 1: they really want, right They've They've been assuming, I'm not
Speaker 1: gonna lie to you. I've been assuming that Trump would
Speaker 1: never do that. If he does it, and if there's
Speaker 1: nothing there and then Mueller has to wrap it up
Speaker 1: within sixty or ninety days or whatever the agreement would be.
Speaker 1: Is that is this a bargain that the Democrats that
Speaker 1: the Atom ships and the Polo Seas and the Schumers,
Speaker 1: we're you know, will they take this one? New York Times,
Speaker 1: Washington Post, all these media outlets that are completely invested
Speaker 1: in the implosion of this presidency the end of this presidency?
Speaker 1: Are they going to advocate for against us? Do they
Speaker 1: want the truth or do they want an endless They
Speaker 1: want an endless investigation that just grinds on, and that's
Speaker 1: the purpose of it. The process is the punishment. I
Speaker 1: think we all know that they do want the process
Speaker 1: to be the punishment. But are they willing to make
Speaker 1: a trade one one chance to get the president in
Speaker 1: legal jeopardy? You notice notice how Trump is forcing their
Speaker 1: hand here just in the responses to this offer, which
Speaker 1: has been floated to the Wall Street Journal here and
Speaker 1: is the main story on on the Drudge Report as
Speaker 1: I'm on air. Just that he's put it out there
Speaker 1: will expose some of those who as, oh no, no,
Speaker 1: the Mueller probe it has to just keep going on
Speaker 1: and on and on. Oh no, he'll be done when
Speaker 1: he's done. Well, is this about finding out if the
Speaker 1: president included with Russia? Or is this about a special
Speaker 1: counsel that just exists to exist and has really just
Speaker 1: become a machine of petty prosecutions for the gratification and
Speaker 1: amusement of scorned Hillary voters. That's what the Mueller Special
Speaker 1: prosecut You should our special council is all about. This
Speaker 1: is what makes Democrats feel happy, safe and warm at
Speaker 1: night that Mueller's out there, uh, bringing felony charges bankrupting people.
Speaker 1: I'm one who likes to remind everyone of this. It's
Speaker 1: this is not without real pain and cost, even for
Speaker 1: those who are completely innocent of any wrongdoing, including process crimes.
Speaker 1: I gotta sell your house, gotta empty at your bank account,
Speaker 1: tens of thousands of dollars to have legal representation for
Speaker 1: just one of these hearings. Think about if it dragged
Speaker 1: on for months, so this would be this would be
Speaker 1: quite a showdown. Trump v. Mueller. And you know why
Speaker 1: Trump is willing to do what I think because he's
Speaker 1: just if he does it, well, I'm still concerned because
Speaker 1: what happens if Mueller then says that the president has
Speaker 1: has lied under oath or in this case, we line
Speaker 1: to federal investigators. And what if Trump says, no, I didn't.
Speaker 1: You want to talk about a constitutional crisis? Folks? How
Speaker 1: does that play out? And can the president even be
Speaker 1: guilty of obstruction? People that I know in respect in
Speaker 1: this area of constitutional jurisprudence say no, no, he cannot.
Speaker 1: So what the heck is going on? There? Is this
Speaker 1: just a political exercise. We will have to wait and see.
Speaker 1: But what a week look at what this president has
Speaker 1: piled onto his plate tariffs. That's which is really about
Speaker 1: staring down China nuclear negotiations, which is about staring down
Speaker 1: Kim Jong un North Korea. And and he's literally gonna
Speaker 1: stare down Kim Jong I mean, they're gonna be sitting
Speaker 1: across the room from each other and then staring down
Speaker 1: the mollre probe. You know, it starts to make more
Speaker 1: sense when we think back to the earliest days. And
Speaker 1: you know, one of the things that I try to
Speaker 1: do differently than a lot of other people who do radio,
Speaker 1: which is I I do as much work in research
Speaker 1: as I can to know as much as I can,
Speaker 1: so when I'm on there, I am never wasting your time, right,
Speaker 1: That is an absolute goal that I have. But I
Speaker 1: also know that I don't know everything. I learned so
Speaker 1: much from all of you who listened to this show,
Speaker 1: and I try to be I try to maintain a
Speaker 1: degree of humility and knowing that sometimes they're wrong. Sometimes
Speaker 1: I don't know things and sometimes I didn't see things coming.
Speaker 1: And I remind myself of that because I think it
Speaker 1: makes me a better analyst going forward. I remind myself
Speaker 1: because I want to bring the best that I can
Speaker 1: to you. Every single night here on this show. And
Speaker 1: that means being uh self critical one necessary. It means
Speaker 1: holding myself to account, and it means having a memory
Speaker 1: of what I've said and what I've believed to be
Speaker 1: true or what I've put forward here on the show.
Speaker 1: And when I start to think back to the early
Speaker 1: days of this whole Trump phenomenon, it's not even enough
Speaker 1: to call it a wave. I mean, it is a phenomenon,
Speaker 1: and it's still truly hard to believe. Hard to believe
Speaker 1: is a phrase that people throw around for all kinds
Speaker 1: of things, but this is still hard to believe. There
Speaker 1: are days that I wake up and I said, Trump
Speaker 1: is president. And I don't say it in a negative way,
Speaker 1: I just saying, and it's hard to believe, given what
Speaker 1: we were told in the Hillary apparatus and a lot
Speaker 1: of you listening to this show. And I know this
Speaker 1: because you called and you wrote, and you told me
Speaker 1: very early on you saw it coming. But I think
Speaker 1: back to those early days, those early moments of this
Speaker 1: uh this Trump phenomenon, and I remind myself, or I
Speaker 1: remind myself and think back to how it all seemed
Speaker 1: so impossible and improbable, and yet he told us all along,
Speaker 1: what was what was happening, what was going to happen.
Speaker 1: There was almost a surree little confidence that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: had in his run for the presidency. It felt like
Speaker 1: it could not be real. But then when you would
Speaker 1: go back and hear what he said and hear what
Speaker 1: his plans were, you think, well, this is and now
Speaker 1: that he's presidency, well this has been the plan all along.
Speaker 1: This is what he's been saying all along, right, And
Speaker 1: I try to remind myself of that, because we have
Speaker 1: a president who said that he would drain the swamp,
Speaker 1: he said he would build a wall, he said he
Speaker 1: would be He promised to be a disruptor, to be different.
Speaker 1: And what was unique about him and separated him from
Speaker 1: the other I can't remember I was at sixteen seventeen candidates,
Speaker 1: was that he wasn't going to do it the way
Speaker 1: that everybody else did. He wasn't going to listen to
Speaker 1: the conventional wisdom. He didn't decide that he would just
Speaker 1: sit down in a room, and whoever seemed the smartest
Speaker 1: at that point in time would be the person who
Speaker 1: was basically making the decisions as commander in chief to
Speaker 1: be disruptive means you have to change what is in repetition,
Speaker 1: should you have to change what is expected? And that
Speaker 1: is what Trump is doing. He is fulfilling promises by
Speaker 1: breaking with the traditional way of doing things. Is he
Speaker 1: right on all of them? I don't know. But do
Speaker 1: I think that he's earned the right to at least
Speaker 1: have our patience and good faith with some of these maneuvers. Absolutely? Absolutely.
Speaker 1: If I've learned anything from trying to analyze and understand
Speaker 1: the Trump way in politics, to understand the Trump world
Speaker 1: order that we are in now, it's don't underestimate this
Speaker 1: guy and don't think you know better than he does. China,
Speaker 1: there you go, Thank you. North Korea now, Mueller, it's
Speaker 1: quite a week. Quite a week. I want to get
Speaker 1: more into the aftermath of that. North Korea is uh,
Speaker 1: come out up here in just a few minutes. And also,
Speaker 1: oh wait, it's Friday, so John, you know what that means?
Speaker 1: Hit it action movie. People keep asking if I'm back,
Speaker 1: and I haven't really had an answer, but now yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm taking on back. Quote you ever like to be dead?
Speaker 1: Friday's Friday? Don't kung food? I know, kung food eight
Speaker 1: four four to five. Buck your thoughts on any of
Speaker 1: these huge hot topics or action movie quotes, were recipes
Speaker 1: for the best possible hush puppies or Jambalaya, any of
Speaker 1: the above. Colin, let me know. We'll talk be right back. Well,
Speaker 1: it's a deflection. Of course, it's a deflection. Willie comes Stormy, Well, yes,
Speaker 1: of course, Stormy, So tearriffs and North Korea, all the
Speaker 1: distract from a president that didn't go through the proper
Speaker 1: channels are used the proper interagency processes once to change
Speaker 1: the headlines from Stormy Daniel what it is? I mean,
Speaker 1: Joe Scarborough should really stick to his favorite pastimes shouting
Speaker 1: at maids and limo drivers. You know, not good analysis
Speaker 1: from this guy at all. He really thinks that this
Speaker 1: is all the distract from Stormy Daniels. Nobody cares. I
Speaker 1: have yet to meet a person that cares about the
Speaker 1: Stormy Daniels thing, whether they believe it or not. I
Speaker 1: just haven't met anybody who was focused on that when
Speaker 1: when we're talking about trade with China North Korea, this
Speaker 1: is about trying to stop a nuclear war from happening.
Speaker 1: And no matter how much you think Trump has his
Speaker 1: flaws or whatever, I think that he takes that seriously. Scarborough. Wow,
Speaker 1: that guy amazing. They gave him a show over at MSNBC.
Speaker 1: I think that for uh, you know, for a certain
Speaker 1: kind of republic in you know, they they identify with
Speaker 1: Scarborough because they're like, yeah, I always want to look
Speaker 1: like I just came off the beach from Nantucket too,
Speaker 1: and I don't have to really read or know anything.
Speaker 1: But if I just sound like the guy who sits
Speaker 1: at the cool table in high school, then people will
Speaker 1: believe me. There's that and on you hat Acosta as well.
Speaker 1: We're gonna get into some of the haters everybody, and
Speaker 1: then I'll talk to you about the real analysis. Michael
Speaker 1: Oslon will be joining us from the Hoover Institution. I
Speaker 1: will say this because I actually have a background in
Speaker 1: national security analysis. As you know, uh, I know who
Speaker 1: knows their stuff. And the people that come on this show,
Speaker 1: particularly in the realm of any anything national security or
Speaker 1: security related. You know, they aren't guys like Andy McCarthy,
Speaker 1: Gordon Chang, Michael Ostlin. These are people who are at
Speaker 1: the top. There are people who when they speak about
Speaker 1: these issues, they you know, they share a lot of
Speaker 1: important insights and give a tremendous drawn, a tremendous depth
Speaker 1: of information. So Michael will be joining us later to
Speaker 1: talk about what's going on here with this North Korean negotiation.
Speaker 1: I'll give you my take on it as well. But
Speaker 1: you don't need me to tell you. Don't but I'm
Speaker 1: gonna tell you anything. It's fun. Don't let Joe Scarborough. Yeah,
Speaker 1: don't let him shout at you like he shouts at
Speaker 1: bus boys where they don't bring him his ship is
Speaker 1: fast enough. Uh, you know, and don't listen to Jim
Speaker 1: Acosta either. Clip eight play it, clip eight play it.
Speaker 1: We were hearing from senior administration officials, uh, that that
Speaker 1: they were basically cautioning the president against this, that this
Speaker 1: was not going to be their recommendation. But Trump being Trump, Uh,
Speaker 1: it is not unusual for him to defy his advisors
Speaker 1: and decide to go with a bold move like this.
Speaker 1: The potential ramifications, all all this. You know, we can't overstate. Obviously,
Speaker 1: this is not reality television. This is not The Apprentice.
Speaker 1: When the President United States decides to me with Kim
Speaker 1: Jong un about denuclearizing North Korea, this is deadly serious. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we know, we we don't need you to tell us there,
Speaker 1: chief White House pundit for CNN that this is not
Speaker 1: the Apprentice. But thanks for that, Thanks for that. Oh gosh,
Speaker 1: it's really amazing, isn't it. Um. We'll get into it's
Speaker 1: more of the North Korea stuff in just a second.
Speaker 1: Here what it means why the left is obviously so
Speaker 1: deeply committed to making it seem like this is a
Speaker 1: huge mistake. Can you imagine if Trump is by the way,
Speaker 1: if I think about if he runs the table this
Speaker 1: week and he's he happens to be somewhat even a
Speaker 1: little bit right on the China tariff's issue, and then
Speaker 1: on North Korea and Mueller, just an extraordinary evening and
Speaker 1: of course opening the door to the big question President
Speaker 1: Trump can truly solve this problem, that would be going
Speaker 1: down as a great president. And there's no way around that.
Speaker 1: That is the reality here. Somebody pull over the we ambulence,
Speaker 1: you can tell, you can tell they really so we are.
Speaker 1: We're actually in a discussion, your folks, about a pathway
Speaker 1: to avoiding a military strike that could result in catastrophic life. Right,
Speaker 1: that's what the serious people, That's what you and I
Speaker 1: are thinking about here, And how can Trump, How can
Speaker 1: this administration achieve that? Meanwhile, in some of the Democrat
Speaker 1: corridors of society, the left wing progressive types, uh, their
Speaker 1: biggest concern is that if Trump pulls this off, then
Speaker 1: it will be so clear that one they've been wrong
Speaker 1: about him all along, but particularly the issue of national security,
Speaker 1: he will be as Aaron Burnet just said, they're a
Speaker 1: great president, and she said it almost like it was
Speaker 1: an admission of some calamity that would be followed it.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's like so sad, like if Trump stops
Speaker 1: this terrible situation in North Korea, like what's gonna happen
Speaker 1: to America? Because then he'll be a great presidents like
Speaker 1: exactly ex Actually, he'll be a great president. Yes he is.
Speaker 1: He I think he's going to be. Yeah, there's there's
Speaker 1: some rough edges here and there, there's some stuff. But
Speaker 1: you know, maybe part of the problem is that in
Speaker 1: the past we have put so much stock on the
Speaker 1: president sounds, presidential, comes across as presidential all that that
Speaker 1: we lost sight of, well, what really affects you and
Speaker 1: me and what really affects the world around us. And
Speaker 1: I think that that's going to be a big difference
Speaker 1: we shall see with Trump. But yeah, that's it actually
Speaker 1: reminds me of what was going on with some Democrats
Speaker 1: in Congress, and this was I saw this firsthand. There
Speaker 1: were some Democrats in Congress during the surge, which I
Speaker 1: know many people listening to this show right now we're
Speaker 1: a part of and thank you for your service. And
Speaker 1: I know that the Iraqi people also thank you for
Speaker 1: saving their country from descending into the seventh circle of hell. Uh.
Speaker 1: But during the surge there were Democrats who could barely
Speaker 1: high there uh agitation with the fact that the Bush
Speaker 1: administration plan to surge troops into Iraq to stabilize the
Speaker 1: country and to fight counterinsurgency the way that it is
Speaker 1: supposed to be fought, that it was working, which meant
Speaker 1: less violence against the Iraqi people. There was a drop
Speaker 1: in violence. That's how you know it's working, and also
Speaker 1: less casualties for US troops because it was working. And
Speaker 1: I'm talking when you were evaluating, you know, after a
Speaker 1: period of months. And there were some people have yelled
Speaker 1: at me for saying this. I do not care because
Speaker 1: I was there. I saw it. I remember, and there
Speaker 1: were some Democrats who I'm not saying they were rooting.
Speaker 1: They weren't thinking in their heads. And these are as
Speaker 1: a congress, some very well known ones. I'm not saying
Speaker 1: they were thinking out loud or saying out loud, oh
Speaker 1: you know, it's a bad thing that we're seeing us
Speaker 1: less violence in Iraq. But they were thinking, darn it.
Speaker 1: Trump's whole thing here, this whole gamble. Remember it was
Speaker 1: like they said, he was gambling his presidency on it.
Speaker 1: It's working. And you sense that same, that same idea
Speaker 1: here with some of these media folks and some of
Speaker 1: these Democrats, as Trump may have it may being the
Speaker 1: operative word, have set in motion the biggest diplomatic victory. Well,
Speaker 1: we'll have to see. Like I said, no, and I
Speaker 1: keep saying it, don't celebrate really very important thing to do.
Speaker 1: We don't. We don't spike the football until it's time,
Speaker 1: and then we spike it hard. But just to give
Speaker 1: you a little reminder what it was like here, this
Speaker 1: is what the media was saying before the announcements. We
Speaker 1: we pulled together a representative montage. We need a montage.
Speaker 1: I haven't watched Team American a while. Great film. See
Speaker 1: it's it's so great. I won't even clote a movie
Speaker 1: it's a film. Uh North Korea, North Korea. Here we
Speaker 1: go it this clip one. That is what they were
Speaker 1: saying before the meeting that Trump announced yesterday. This is
Speaker 1: what they were sounding like when it came at Trump
Speaker 1: and foreign policy in North Korea. Play one. Tweets like this,
Speaker 1: essentially poor gasoline on that blaze. President Trump is goading
Speaker 1: Kim Jong un to testament, I do worry about what
Speaker 1: his boiling point might be in the face of some
Speaker 1: of these, uh, inflammatory tweets and statements at the present
Speaker 1: makes this It's just how the snowball effects starts. It's
Speaker 1: very easy to get into and quickly. None of this normal,
Speaker 1: None of this acceptable, None of this frankly stable behavior.
Speaker 1: None of this is normal. Um, that's what they were
Speaker 1: saying about it. But I should have just read the
Speaker 1: montage myself, as you could tell there. I'm sorry if
Speaker 1: I talked over some of that, but gosh, it is.
Speaker 1: It is pretty made. It's christoff from the New York Times.
Speaker 1: If you speak like this and then everyone thinks you're
Speaker 1: so much smarter than they are. If you think that
Speaker 1: that doesn't sound like Nicholas Kristof, go listen to some
Speaker 1: Nicholas Kristof you like Buck, You're amazing. You've got the
Speaker 1: Irish gift of mimicry. Hey, lad um. Anyway, this is
Speaker 1: what they're saying now. So that was beforehand, right, that
Speaker 1: was with the tweets. And he's going and Kim Jong
Speaker 1: own into a ward. Oh my god, it's gonna be terrible.
Speaker 1: And and here's what they were saying once the announcement
Speaker 1: was made, to have our own madman who could potentially
Speaker 1: blow up the world. Trump. Yeah, I was thinking of
Speaker 1: Trump when I said that all of the summits are dangerous.
Speaker 1: Any president could have sat down with Kim or his father.
Speaker 1: Why has no suiting American president ever met with a
Speaker 1: leader from North Korea? Should I take that to mean
Speaker 1: that this might be a particularly risky or even an
Speaker 1: unwise move. All of the rhetoric and the insults, the taunts,
Speaker 1: the nuclear button mind is bigger than yours, all of
Speaker 1: that which has been a real crisis, even those who
Speaker 1: really were yearning for talks. I think that this is
Speaker 1: conferring legitimacy on Kim Jong. Oh. I know it gives
Speaker 1: me a headache. Two, But here we are dealing with
Speaker 1: it together on the I think this is important. On
Speaker 1: the Rachel matt Out point about and look like I
Speaker 1: always do say, I call balls and strikes credit words,
Speaker 1: matt I was smart. Don't underst me, Mattow. She just panders,
Speaker 1: but she's smart. There are some left wingers that you'll
Speaker 1: see on TV. They're just they're just dumb as dirt.
Speaker 1: But for whatever you know, they are on TV because
Speaker 1: of any number of reasons. We can talk about another time.
Speaker 1: Matt I was smart, but panders and is disingenuous with
Speaker 1: many of the things she says to that audience because
Speaker 1: she's looking for ratings and actually her ratings beaten CNN
Speaker 1: by a lot. That tells you something by a lot
Speaker 1: by like Miles and Miles. Uh. But to her point
Speaker 1: about no previous presidents done that, and she's very snarky
Speaker 1: about it. She's like, Oh, I'm just gonna be snarky
Speaker 1: about this. I wonder write no other president has done this. Well,
Speaker 1: First of all, there have only been three presidents that
Speaker 1: have really before the Trump administration. Before President Trump, I've
Speaker 1: really even had to reckon with the possibility of a
Speaker 1: nuclear North Korea, never mind an actual North Korea. Right,
Speaker 1: So you've got the Bush administration trying to negotiate their
Speaker 1: way through it with Kim Jong Ill, Manteline I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: Back before that, the Clinton administration trying to negotiate with
Speaker 1: Kim Jong Ill and Maddelin Madeline Albright running point on
Speaker 1: that didn't work out, big, big failure, massive fail as
Speaker 1: the kids say, thumbs down, as the old millennials like
Speaker 1: me would say, um. And then you had the Bush administration, which,
Speaker 1: as much as I know, we find many things about
Speaker 1: President Bush to be admirable, and also on North Korea,
Speaker 1: massive fail They did not. Now, they had some policies
Speaker 1: that were right. I'm not saying that it's it was
Speaker 1: all for nought. They had very smart people, think about it.
Speaker 1: The Clinton people had smart people trying to handle this.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think Madeline Albright was way overrated for
Speaker 1: a bunch of reasons. But you know that there were
Speaker 1: there were there were people that were looking at this
Speaker 1: in sanctions and these are the right moves. But if
Speaker 1: the point of that was to stop North Korea from
Speaker 1: advancing its missile and nuclear programs, that is they were failures. Okay,
Speaker 1: So Clinton failed, Bush one failed, Obama failed, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: Bush two failed. Obama failed. So you look back at
Speaker 1: this now and you say to yourself, Okay, you've only
Speaker 1: had a few presidents that have even had to think
Speaker 1: about a nuclear North Korea. So I mean to compare
Speaker 1: it to like, wow, look at Jimmy Carter North Korea.
Speaker 1: That's irrelevant, okay, because the reason that we can't ignore
Speaker 1: this is the possibility of the complete emmolation of a city.
Speaker 1: That's not something you can just write off. That's not
Speaker 1: something you can say, you know what, We're just gonna
Speaker 1: figure out this problem is some other time. No, And
Speaker 1: that's why there's been an urgency to this, and we
Speaker 1: are working on a timetable. We are working on a
Speaker 1: clock here. And so we keep being told by both
Speaker 1: sides of the political aisle that they're getting North Koreas
Speaker 1: getting closer and closer to definitively I don't even know
Speaker 1: if we know what they have quite honestly, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: you know there's that, but to definitively have an i
Speaker 1: CBM that is nuclear tip, that is nuclear cable that
Speaker 1: could hit anywhere in the continental United States, and then
Speaker 1: they'll try to get more of those missiles, a missile
Speaker 1: threat that could defeat our countermeasures, and then you're relying
Speaker 1: entirely on to terrens and we're hoping that North Korea
Speaker 1: is not crazy enough to try something. We all know
Speaker 1: that we're running out of room or running out of
Speaker 1: road here to work with. And the Trump administration is
Speaker 1: looking at this and saying, well, what's been tried in
Speaker 1: the past. This is and this brings us back to
Speaker 1: the matt Out point there, the snarky well, why did
Speaker 1: ever a president not doing this? Because every president has
Speaker 1: failed thus far to actually stop the program, never mind
Speaker 1: you to eradicate the nuclear program in North Crere. I
Speaker 1: just mean to stop it for a considerable period of time,
Speaker 1: and to stop the missile program and to get compliance,
Speaker 1: meaningful compliance with the career. Whe they've done in the
Speaker 1: past is pretending to negotiate and then just you know,
Speaker 1: psych I mean, it is Lucy with the football, my friends.
Speaker 1: It is just a total all the whole thing, a
Speaker 1: total scam. Oh yeah, all of our agreements, we we
Speaker 1: renounced those. Sorry, thanks for all the food aid though, suckers.
Speaker 1: That's what they're saying to the international community. So um,
Speaker 1: that's what I think we have to keep in mind.
Speaker 1: If we're gonna be judging the Trump administration's ability here
Speaker 1: or Trump Administration's decision making to go forward with this.
Speaker 1: It's different, but you need something different. This brings you
Speaker 1: back to the very beginning of the show. Disruptive, a
Speaker 1: change from the norm, outside of what is expected. Isn't
Speaker 1: that what Trump promised? And isn't that the reason that
Speaker 1: he is president right now? If we wanted somebody who
Speaker 1: was going to do what the panels of analysts that
Speaker 1: you know, ABC and CNN and etcetera, etcetera wanted him
Speaker 1: to do, wouldn't it what I mean? And assuming it's
Speaker 1: a Republican you know, we we could have had Kasik yikes,
Speaker 1: But there you go. We could have done that, but
Speaker 1: we didn't, did we. We've got a president that takes
Speaker 1: a different approach, that doesn't care what the consensus opinion is.
Speaker 1: He cares what he thinks the right move is on
Speaker 1: these issues, and he's going with it. And I think
Speaker 1: that we should see what happens. Let him play it out.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's going to eight four four to five
Speaker 1: eight four four, buck, we will hit a quick break
Speaker 1: and we'll be right back. Cavalier threats to start a
Speaker 1: war are dangerous and shortsighted. I am worried about some
Speaker 1: of the recent actions from the new administration that seemed
Speaker 1: to raise tensions. Our allies are now expressing concerns about
Speaker 1: America's credibility and reliability. And by the way, picking fights
Speaker 1: with Kim Jong un just puts a smile on his face. Wow. Actually,
Speaker 1: we do not need to hear from Hillary. I want
Speaker 1: to note what was Hillary's to take us back to
Speaker 1: another time that we will all remember quite well. Hillary
Speaker 1: was Secretary of State for what four years something like that.
Speaker 1: What was her big accomplishment as America's chief different in
Speaker 1: those four years, other than flying all over the world
Speaker 1: establishing foreign contacts so that there be even more people
Speaker 1: able to buy influence that she was peddling via the
Speaker 1: Clinton Foundation, what what did she really? What did she accomplish?
Speaker 1: In fact, I recall when asked some of her State
Speaker 1: Department spokespersons drew a blank, and I thought it was
Speaker 1: very unfair that those spokespersons were criticized at the time
Speaker 1: for drawing a blank on Hiller's accomplishments. It was an
Speaker 1: air fault. Hillary had no accomplishments. Right, There's nothing you
Speaker 1: can do about that. That was just the truth. In fact,
Speaker 1: the silence was the ultimate truth when it came to
Speaker 1: Hillary's ability to get deals done as America's chief diplomat
Speaker 1: under the Obama administration. And don't even get me started
Speaker 1: on BEng Ghazi. And we'll just talk about that for
Speaker 1: the rest of the show. Uh. And then there are
Speaker 1: others from the Obama ainistration that have come out of
Speaker 1: the woodwork to criticize this, including h MSNBC's Evelyn Farcas
Speaker 1: play clip three. And if what they really will be
Speaker 1: satisfied with is respect and normalization, great, we can give
Speaker 1: that to them, but we have to maintain the pressure
Speaker 1: because remember what got them to the table, the sanctions
Speaker 1: and unfortunately, probably some of the bluster coming out of
Speaker 1: the White House. WHOA, look at that. Look at that.
Speaker 1: She's admitting it, folks. She's like, ah, it's just like
Speaker 1: so upsetting. But like Trump was, maybe maybe Trump's like
Speaker 1: an evil genius. I know, I know it makes them sad,
Speaker 1: that makes them very sad. But I give her credit
Speaker 1: miss Farcas for admitting that, in fact, Trump's approach here,
Speaker 1: while breaking with the foreign policy orthodoxy, was in fact
Speaker 1: perhaps just a little just a little bit, a little bit,
Speaker 1: a little bit of the fuel to get this whole
Speaker 1: thing going. You know, when you have a regime that is,
Speaker 1: in fact, in a sense, a necrocracy, it is ruled
Speaker 1: by the dead because Kim Jong UN's grandfather, Kim Il sung,
Speaker 1: is still considered the the father of the state, and
Speaker 1: it's still really the North Korean command or in chief
Speaker 1: in a sense, not not really, but in North Korean
Speaker 1: h propaganda, Um, he's still officially the the supreme leader.
Speaker 1: And when you're dealing with that, and you have someone
Speaker 1: who is the leader of the free world who is
Speaker 1: finally willing to push back on that, you know, everyone
Speaker 1: right now is assuming that Kim Jung un is just
Speaker 1: trying to play us. But what if there was a
Speaker 1: realization that they couldn't keep the propaganda going, if they
Speaker 1: kept this if it was you know, Kim Jong un
Speaker 1: standing up to the world, staying up to America all
Speaker 1: the time, and doing so fearlessly, and you know, if
Speaker 1: you've ever seen North Korean propaganda, it's its own whole
Speaker 1: area of study. Uh. But what if it made the
Speaker 1: regime look weak that somebody was willing to say things
Speaker 1: like Kim Jong un is a little punk and we're
Speaker 1: not going to stand for this anymore. That's a form
Speaker 1: of pressure in and of itself. Right, It had been
Speaker 1: the traditional conventional wisdom that you can't you can't talk
Speaker 1: tough to Kim John don You have to say things
Speaker 1: like the the international community will come together and in
Speaker 1: bonds of in bonds of trust and legality to slowly
Speaker 1: eliminate the rogue behavior. No, no, no, Trump is just like, no,
Speaker 1: we're not standing for anymore. This guy's a punk and
Speaker 1: a coward, and he's gonna get it if he doesn't
Speaker 1: watch it. And sure enough, now they want to talk.
Speaker 1: So maybe it's maybe it is all a head fake.
Speaker 1: But I gotta say, you start adding up the the
Speaker 1: data points here, and it looks like maybe as ms
Speaker 1: fark Is just admitted it was some of Trump's bluster,
Speaker 1: I know. Good stuff. Welcome to our two of the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show. Thank you so much for being here.
Speaker 1: I've got news talk to you about. As I said,
Speaker 1: we are doing a bit of a deep dive into
Speaker 1: the talks that Trump is gonna have with Kim Jong
Speaker 1: un of North Korea later this hour coming up. Actually
Speaker 1: just at the bottom of the hour, so right around
Speaker 1: UH well, and just a little bit, we'll have Michael
Speaker 1: Oslin joining us of the Hoover Institution. He is an
Speaker 1: excellent UH security policy analyst on all East Asia issues.
Speaker 1: You'll want to hear what he has to say about
Speaker 1: where this is all going and what it means. And
Speaker 1: and then the third hour today we'll get into some
Speaker 1: stuff that comes to mind talking about my Savannah trip.
Speaker 1: I'm down here in Savannah, Georgia, broadcasting live from our
Speaker 1: I Heart affiliate, So we are gonna be talking about that.
Speaker 1: But first I've got to give you just some updates
Speaker 1: here on a on a breaking news story that a
Speaker 1: veterans home in California is on lockdown, the reports of
Speaker 1: shots fired and an our man uh taking three hostages
Speaker 1: according to Fox News here during active shoot shooter situation
Speaker 1: at a California veterans home in Yunville, California, at the
Speaker 1: young Ville Veterans Home. I do not have any additional
Speaker 1: information right now. Then SWAT is on the scene and
Speaker 1: they are trying to deal with what they what is
Speaker 1: a hostile situation right now. If we get any more
Speaker 1: breaking news on this one, I'll bring you up to speed.
Speaker 1: I don't have any word on casualties. Obviously, active shooter
Speaker 1: situation puts everyone on edge. It always puts everyone on edge,
Speaker 1: and that this involves one of the um larger veterans homes.
Speaker 1: It's got veterans who more than a thousand veterans uh
Speaker 1: stretching back all the way to World War Two. So
Speaker 1: are our thoughts and prayers are with all those at
Speaker 1: the home, all the families of those at the home,
Speaker 1: And as soon as we have more on that, we
Speaker 1: will bring it to you. I have an update on
Speaker 1: another active previous shooter situation. Pardon me, what happened in
Speaker 1: Florida at the Stoneman Douglas School. I have said to
Speaker 1: you and I stand behind this, and I think it's
Speaker 1: been proven increasingly correct with time that whenever we thought
Speaker 1: it couldn't get any worse. From the perspective of what
Speaker 1: law enforcement involved in this scenario, right, I don't like
Speaker 1: to just say law enforcement generally, because we've got hundreds
Speaker 1: of thousands of law enforcement officers across the country doing
Speaker 1: a phenomenal job, putting their lives at risk every day
Speaker 1: and making this an incredibly safe and prosperous country in
Speaker 1: the process. Right, but law enforcement involved in this shooting
Speaker 1: was in some cases absolutely uh appalling in their behavior
Speaker 1: and in other cases, which I'll talk to you about
Speaker 1: as well, very admirable. So you know, there you get
Speaker 1: both sides of it with the Stoneman Douglas shooting law
Speaker 1: enforcement response. But I was very critical of officer or deputy.
Speaker 1: He's a deputy in the ship, Brown County Sheriff's Department,
Speaker 1: Deputy Peterson's actions and some of you, as you are
Speaker 1: always you know, I am always open to good faith arguments, challenges, critiques,
Speaker 1: you know, calling if you think I'm you think I'm off.
Speaker 1: I want to hear from folks out there. I think
Speaker 1: that I'm off, I think that I'm getting something wrong.
Speaker 1: Always doesn't mean I'm gonna agree with you, doesn't mean
Speaker 1: I'm gonna let it slide on air. But I want
Speaker 1: to hear from you and some of some of those
Speaker 1: you listen. So I thought that I was being too
Speaker 1: hard on Peterson. Uh, now that we have more information,
Speaker 1: I'm I wasn't being hard enough on Peterson. A couple
Speaker 1: of very important points here about the Stoneman Douglas shooting
Speaker 1: in the law enforcement response to it. One is that
Speaker 1: it is in fact and was before this. Broward County
Speaker 1: Sheriff's Department policy that during an active shooter situation, you
Speaker 1: go and confront the threat. That is what armed law
Speaker 1: enforcement is supposed to do. That is the policy. So
Speaker 1: people who were initially saying, oh, no, the policy as
Speaker 1: a perimeter, it's not their fault. They're not trained for it,
Speaker 1: that is false. Broward County Sheriff's deputies are trained and
Speaker 1: expected to directly confront the threat. Obviously that's what should
Speaker 1: have been done, and that was what they were supposed
Speaker 1: to do. Now, once we heard about deputies on the
Speaker 1: scene who didn't go in, who were waiting outside the school,
Speaker 1: we knew there would be some maneuvering on their part
Speaker 1: to make it seem like it wasn't quite as bad
Speaker 1: as it was from the perspective again of their actions.
Speaker 1: And we even heard Peterson, I think through his lawyer,
Speaker 1: Deputy Peterson say well, I wasn't sure if a shooting
Speaker 1: was happening inside or outside the building, which you can
Speaker 1: go back and listen. When that was the I said,
Speaker 1: I don't believe that, no way, I that's not even
Speaker 1: issue of training. Right, Every single oneting listing is like
Speaker 1: I would know if the shooting was inside or outside
Speaker 1: the building, it's not that hard to figure out. Uh.
Speaker 1: I said that at the time, and now we have
Speaker 1: the audio tapes. Now that this stuff is is disturbing,
Speaker 1: We're not going to play a lot of the news
Speaker 1: networks and shows and everything. I've just been running the
Speaker 1: you know, terrified calls being made. That's not where we
Speaker 1: are past. Far enough past the event, and enough other
Speaker 1: people are doing that right now that I don't find
Speaker 1: that to be necessary at this stage. If it's out there,
Speaker 1: it's on the internet, you can hear that. But this
Speaker 1: the response and analyzing law enforcement response so that if
Speaker 1: this comes up again, UM, everyone is very clear about
Speaker 1: what needs to be done and also what the expectations
Speaker 1: of the of of the community, of all of us
Speaker 1: of civilians would be in this kind of situation, it
Speaker 1: is important to look at the response. So that's why
Speaker 1: I'm gonna play coming up here and into a second,
Speaker 1: a short clip from officer Peterson's nine one one call.
Speaker 1: This is in the initial moments, and Miami Herald has
Speaker 1: done some very good reporting on this. This is the
Speaker 1: initial moments. They've got a timeline now, uh and the
Speaker 1: nine one one calls have been released, but this part
Speaker 1: of it gives us some very important information. Play clup eleven.
Speaker 1: You're not put the twelve undred building daily away at
Speaker 1: good point, Stay away from building, stay away, stay five
Speaker 1: five hundred feet away from the building. My friends, come on,
Speaker 1: I know you know this, but wow, five ft away.
Speaker 1: There is an active shooter inside the building. And he
Speaker 1: obviously knows that that's what's going on, and he's saying
Speaker 1: stay five ht away, which is against policy and against
Speaker 1: their training. Uh, this is a disgrace. It's a good
Speaker 1: thing that he resigned, because otherwise he would have had
Speaker 1: to be uh dragged into a public I as well.
Speaker 1: It actually doesn't even I was gonna say it could
Speaker 1: be dragged into um more of a of a hearing
Speaker 1: than he already was. But it doesn't matter. We all
Speaker 1: know it's being tried in the public in a sense.
Speaker 1: Now we're all seeing this. It's really distressing though. Um
Speaker 1: it was as bad as we thought initially. He waited
Speaker 1: outside shootings going on inside. Kids are getting killed. They
Speaker 1: have no defense, they're defenseless. There's an active shooter. He's
Speaker 1: on the scene. He has trained, he has law enforcement,
Speaker 1: he has sworn to uphold lawn to protect the innocent
Speaker 1: and didn't do a darn thing. We know that other
Speaker 1: law enforcement showed up at the scene and was appalled
Speaker 1: at what the Brower County Sheriff's Department was doing. They're like, well,
Speaker 1: what are you guys doing? You know they knew. And
Speaker 1: then there's another part, And I'm almost mixed in my
Speaker 1: feelings of this one because on the one hand, it
Speaker 1: is a reminder of what law enforcements country is really
Speaker 1: all about, so that's good. On the other hand, I'm
Speaker 1: annoyed that they're getting in trouble. But you had to
Speaker 1: swat team members detectives Jeffrey Gilbert and Carl Schlausser, who
Speaker 1: rushed to Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School the moment they
Speaker 1: heard there was an active shooter there. They just went
Speaker 1: They're just you know, wheels up inbound hot and they
Speaker 1: got suspended. I know you're thinking what to swat members
Speaker 1: running running towards towards the gunfire. Exactly what we expect
Speaker 1: and know our law enforcement across the country does. And
Speaker 1: these guys have additional training and tactical skills to make
Speaker 1: them even more effective at confronting that threat. But they
Speaker 1: are emblematic of what American law enforcements all about. People
Speaker 1: are in danger, they're is a criminal who is harming innocence.
Speaker 1: We're on it. So in that sense, it's okay and
Speaker 1: that that's what we're that's actually forget about this Peterson
Speaker 1: Deputy Peterson for second American law enforcement every day, time
Speaker 1: and again across the country is represented by detectives Gilbert
Speaker 1: and Schlauser. But they got suspended because they disobeyed orders.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, we we can't let that one
Speaker 1: slide there. They're disobeying orders to go to the scene.
Speaker 1: Miramar Police Department spokeswoman Tanya Ruez said it quote created
Speaker 1: a danger for the officers who were responding. Well, now
Speaker 1: that we know what those some of those responding officers
Speaker 1: were doing, I'm not really sure how we're supposed to
Speaker 1: take this one, folks. You created a danger for the
Speaker 1: officers who were saying stay five feet away from the
Speaker 1: building where there's an active slaughter going on, where students
Speaker 1: are bleeding out. Remember, every second counts. These are trauma wounds,
Speaker 1: they're dying, students are dying from blood loss five feet
Speaker 1: from the building. As you all know, that's pretty far.
Speaker 1: That's not take up, you know, take cover and see
Speaker 1: if we can. I don't know, I don't know if
Speaker 1: officers would these officers probably wouldn't get into a stack
Speaker 1: and kick in the door, but try to tactically maneuver
Speaker 1: their way in the bill. No, No, that's that's like whoa,
Speaker 1: you know, we gotta let's let's go way way out there.
Speaker 1: Make sure we're nowhere in harm's way, five D free
Speaker 1: from building. That's insane. And you got these other officers
Speaker 1: from Miramar Police Department who were like, there are people
Speaker 1: in danger. This is what we do, this is how
Speaker 1: we roll. So God bless them. I mean's it's it's
Speaker 1: good here. And and the that other the other police
Speaker 1: department that was on the scene that was disgusted by
Speaker 1: the actions of this. You know, we're all very thankful
Speaker 1: to them. Were representing what actual law enforcement this country
Speaker 1: is all about and how they do their jobs day
Speaker 1: in and day out. But getting back to the failures here,
Speaker 1: you know with the FBI, the tip line, the FBI
Speaker 1: has said, yeah, we failed the we know they're gonna
Speaker 1: revamp the way they approach the tipline and some capacity
Speaker 1: who knows what that really means. But they dropped the
Speaker 1: ball many times. Um, I I have a you know,
Speaker 1: I'm less clear on what local law enforcement with with
Speaker 1: the passage of a little more time now and thinking
Speaker 1: about it, you know, Broward County Sheriff's Department, and I
Speaker 1: guess they could have pressed charges for the threats. They
Speaker 1: could have tried that maybe, But the actual response that
Speaker 1: day from what we see and what we now know,
Speaker 1: and if you listen to those audio tapes, you'll hear it.
Speaker 1: They had cops on the scene exactly what was going on.
Speaker 1: They just didn't want to go in They just didn't
Speaker 1: want to get shot at. Deputy Peterson just didn't want
Speaker 1: to get a shot at. That's it. That's what you
Speaker 1: take away from this this audio. And I know a
Speaker 1: lot of law enforcement law enforcement folks are hearing this
Speaker 1: and they're just saying, you know, that's just it's it's
Speaker 1: such a bad it's such a bad situation for all
Speaker 1: the other folks that were on the scene who wanted
Speaker 1: to go in there and wanted to be the ones
Speaker 1: that put themselves in harm's way to take those risks
Speaker 1: to protect people who had no chance of protecting themselves,
Speaker 1: and I know this is an issue people get very
Speaker 1: passionate about. I appreciate that, I understand it. I feel
Speaker 1: the same way. But I'm looking at the response. I
Speaker 1: think it's important and we know what happened there. I
Speaker 1: also want to know when we can get and this
Speaker 1: is a diversion of digression from Stone and Douglas, but
Speaker 1: I'd like to know when we can get actual information
Speaker 1: on what happened in Las Vegas. Were speaking about active
Speaker 1: shooter situations. The more I'm looking at that, it just
Speaker 1: keeps getting weirder. What's going on? I get no real
Speaker 1: information about so much that that have the nine one
Speaker 1: one tapes from this have been released, I might have
Speaker 1: missed them, But I feel like there's still a whole
Speaker 1: lot of information that we have access to about Las
Speaker 1: Vegas we could have access to that we haven't seen yet.
Speaker 1: What's going on there. Just that's something to think about,
Speaker 1: something we'll tackle another time. I'm gonna roll into a
Speaker 1: quick break. Your team will be back in just a moment.
Speaker 1: You've appointed someone outside DJ. Are they actually a special counsel?
Speaker 1: And I think that matters because that individual needs have resources,
Speaker 1: need to be able to go to the grand jury
Speaker 1: in Washington, where most of this stuff took place. So
Speaker 1: you can subpoena evidence documents, bring witnesses in, if you
Speaker 1: need search warrants, you can do that. Remember when Hillary
Speaker 1: was investigated, they didn't do any of those basic administrative steps.
Speaker 1: It was basically a proform investigation, a real investigation. Here
Speaker 1: if if this guy goes after this the way Mueller
Speaker 1: is scorching the earth, and you'll have a flurry of
Speaker 1: indictments based on what we already know. As Representative Rhonda Santis,
Speaker 1: I think he's totally correct here. If you applied Mueller
Speaker 1: tactics to a Hillary investigation, if you set up a
Speaker 1: second special counsel, which in effect I would not my friends,
Speaker 1: would really be a special counsel. To look at the
Speaker 1: special council, there'll be all kinds of people that would
Speaker 1: be in jeopardy, and I think in legal jeopardy. I
Speaker 1: think it also would be fair play because the way
Speaker 1: this is going right now, it just continues to drain
Speaker 1: resources and just ruin the lives of people caught up
Speaker 1: in the investigation. And you'll notice something about them. They're
Speaker 1: all Republicans, all tied to Trump. This is partisan warfare.
Speaker 1: That's what the Muller probe has turned into. That is
Speaker 1: what it is. This is the deep state's revenge, so
Speaker 1: to speak. And I think we're all sick of it.
Speaker 1: And if the shoe were on the other foot all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, or I guess we had shoes on
Speaker 1: both feet here, if there are two special counsels, you
Speaker 1: know what I'm saying. If that happened, then maybe in
Speaker 1: the future Democrats would be a little bit less sore
Speaker 1: losers and wouldn't go for the legal option to remedy
Speaker 1: their political disappointments, wouldn't just try to weaponize the law
Speaker 1: and the d o J in order to get for
Speaker 1: themselves what they could not get through a free, fair
Speaker 1: and oh be election speaking free for an open election.
Speaker 1: By the way, what I'm a Putin When Putin had
Speaker 1: something very uh interesting to say, this is through a
Speaker 1: tred it always it sounds not nearly as as tough guy,
Speaker 1: you know, as you would expect, right Putin shirtless carrying
Speaker 1: a rifle, three bears slung over his shoulder, that he's
Speaker 1: taken out himself, right, the whole thing. Whatever he does.
Speaker 1: Through a translator, it's like, yes, I will make sure
Speaker 1: that Vladimir is the biggest, strongest man. It's never really
Speaker 1: as scary as it should be, but this is putin
Speaker 1: through a translator. Fourteen. You mentioned a number of names,
Speaker 1: some individuals. Can you're telling me that they're Russians. A
Speaker 1: so maybe being Russian, they're actually working for some kind
Speaker 1: of American company. Perhaps one of them used to work
Speaker 1: for one of the candidates. I have no idea, but
Speaker 1: these are not my problem. Like I have no idea,
Speaker 1: these are not my problems. Oh lad uh, you funny man.
Speaker 1: You so. I do think that the second Special Council
Speaker 1: would be very useful, and I think that we should
Speaker 1: get it going. I think the representative to Santists makes
Speaker 1: the critical point there that we should see how the
Speaker 1: Democrats like it. When all of a sudden everything just
Speaker 1: turns into an examination where the facts are not what's
Speaker 1: really or rather crimes or not what they're really concerned
Speaker 1: with finding crimes that they can pin on political enemies
Speaker 1: is what they're trying to do right there, trying to
Speaker 1: create the conditions for violations of statute that then allow
Speaker 1: for retalent. What's just political retaliation on the Vladimir side
Speaker 1: of things that they're the some kind of American company.
Speaker 1: These are these are not my problems. I think he's
Speaker 1: just trolling. Look, he's if if you were here, what
Speaker 1: would you say at this point, Well, maybe we will
Speaker 1: be easier with Hilary, you know, I don't know what
Speaker 1: would you say, maybe a moving of middle Um. I
Speaker 1: think that at this point in time, we were starting
Speaker 1: to see that the Democrat narrative is fraying at the seams.
Speaker 1: They're getting desperate. That's why Trump wanted to stare down
Speaker 1: Muller in the first place. That's why we have a
Speaker 1: situation where finally, finally, um, there may be a breakthrough
Speaker 1: on North Korea, on the Mueller probe, and with China's
Speaker 1: unfair trade practices. Um, we will see, we will see.
Speaker 1: I have my I have some predictions in mind here.
Speaker 1: Oh I just realized. Sorry, I thought we were going
Speaker 1: to break there for a second, and we didn't. Because
Speaker 1: I'm in Savannah, so my timing is a little off there.
Speaker 1: So if it sounded like I was dozing off, it
Speaker 1: just because I was like, am I to stop speaking?
Speaker 1: And I need No, I'm not gonna stop speaking. We've
Speaker 1: got our friend Michael os Lynn joining us from the
Speaker 1: Hoover Institute, and he's gonna talk about North Korea a
Speaker 1: bit more, and then third hour Obama on net licks
Speaker 1: we'll talk about that and a whole lot of other stuff.
Speaker 1: I think it is a diplomatic shock and awe, and
Speaker 1: I think that it's because North Korea number one, is
Speaker 1: very close to achieving its objective of being able to
Speaker 1: deliver nuclear warheads to targets in the United States via
Speaker 1: ballistic missile UH and they want to buy time to
Speaker 1: get across that finish line. I don't think Kim Jong
Speaker 1: un acceptment expected that the President was going to take
Speaker 1: up his offer. I think he believed he'd get the
Speaker 1: usual response of six months of diplomatic preparation, nine months
Speaker 1: of talks that would go on forever. So that's a
Speaker 1: former US and BASSI United Nations John Bolton saying that
Speaker 1: we may have knocked Kim off balance here, perhaps with
Speaker 1: Trump saying he would accept it so quickly. A lot
Speaker 1: of different analysis coming in on this one and obviously
Speaker 1: a momentous event here or or is it that's were
Speaker 1: this all comes down to you to help us work
Speaker 1: through some of this. We've got Michael Oslin on the phone.
Speaker 1: He is the UH inaugural WILLIAMS. Griff's Fellow in Contemporary
Speaker 1: Asia Studies at the Hoover Institution. He specializes in global
Speaker 1: risk analysis, US security, in foreign policy strategy, particularly in Asia. Michael,
Speaker 1: great to have you, Thanks for having me. Book are
Speaker 1: what what do you make of this? I mean, just
Speaker 1: give me at first, your your thirty thousand foot view
Speaker 1: of what we found out about US North Korea South
Speaker 1: Korea diplomatic relations in the last forty eight hours or so. Well, honestly,
Speaker 1: I think this is actually what both leaders wanted. I
Speaker 1: think from the beginning the Trump administration, I don't think
Speaker 1: they actually wanted to go to war. I think what
Speaker 1: they felt, rightly is that eight years of inaction by
Speaker 1: the Obama administration and failed policies on the part of
Speaker 1: previous US administrations had left the US with almost no leverage.
Speaker 1: So they ramped up the pressure. They increased sanctions. They
Speaker 1: talked about war and fire and fury and bloody knows.
Speaker 1: And that gave Kim pause because he had never heard
Speaker 1: a U. S president consistently talk like that. On the
Speaker 1: other hand, go ahead, Kim Jong un pressed ahead with
Speaker 1: his nuclear and missile programs, ramped it up to the
Speaker 1: level where the United States seriously felt it either had
Speaker 1: to talk or it had to go to war. And
Speaker 1: so he got what he wanted, which is a sit
Speaker 1: down with the President of the US and the possibility
Speaker 1: of getting much bigger prizes. Now there's a lot of analysis.
Speaker 1: We've been playing some of it here on the show
Speaker 1: for people saying this is, you know, clearly just a ploy.
Speaker 1: How could Trump for this? Of course there are other
Speaker 1: people that take a more pro Trump you saying this
Speaker 1: is a breakthrough that Obama didn't manage in an eight years. First,
Speaker 1: let me just ask you about that. How how do
Speaker 1: you assess the change here from what we had seen
Speaker 1: for the last eight years or so in terms of
Speaker 1: the Obama approach North Korea? Is it fair to say
Speaker 1: that this is something new and different or is this
Speaker 1: just more of the same. Well, I think that it
Speaker 1: has been something like we might call it an Obama
Speaker 1: plus st ategy. What you know, the Obama administration adopted
Speaker 1: this policy of strategic Patients, which was basically a free
Speaker 1: pass for the Kim regime for eight years to build
Speaker 1: up its weapons systems. Uh. Now, they did do some sanctions,
Speaker 1: they did talk about working closer with with allies. They
Speaker 1: did do shows of force occasionally, but that's what all
Speaker 1: US administrations have done. I think with Trump it was
Speaker 1: that questioning of the madman theory, would he really go
Speaker 1: to war? Does he? Is he really so unpredictable that
Speaker 1: it might be a bolt out of the blue. Now
Speaker 1: you combine that with much stronger sanctions and absolutely much
Speaker 1: stronger rhetoric, and in a sense it it is something new.
Speaker 1: But I think the number one thing to remember when
Speaker 1: dealing with the North Koreans is never ever underestimate them.
Speaker 1: It may well be that Kim Jong un got nervous,
Speaker 1: and it may well be that he thought, you know,
Speaker 1: I better try to strike a deal before all the
Speaker 1: time runs out. But this is a regime's not forget
Speaker 1: that has survived for sixty years because of how wiley
Speaker 1: it is and how smart it is in negotiating its
Speaker 1: own survival. Uh. They don't do anything out of panic,
Speaker 1: at least we've never really seen it. Uh. They dance
Speaker 1: right up to the line where you can't turn back,
Speaker 1: and yet they always drag themselves back from the abyss.
Speaker 1: And I don't think there's any reason to believe that
Speaker 1: they've changed. So the Trump administration may well feel that
Speaker 1: it is its pressure that has brought Kim to this point,
Speaker 1: but that doesn't mean that Kim is necessarily on the defensive.
Speaker 1: They may come up with some sort of massive raikivic
Speaker 1: like plan that will seem too good to pass down
Speaker 1: or pass on. That would include very quickly getting United
Speaker 1: States troops out of the peninsula, normalizing relations with North Korea,
Speaker 1: recognizing them as a nuclear power, and the like. Uh.
Speaker 1: If Trump takes it, it's a worry because this needs
Speaker 1: to be negotiated very very slowly, with everybody understanding what
Speaker 1: the implications are. And of course, if Kim comes in
Speaker 1: with this grand bargain and Trump turns it down, then
Speaker 1: Kim gets to turn to the world and say, look,
Speaker 1: I was the one who wanted peace. I offered this
Speaker 1: grand deal, the Americans turned it down. I'll never give
Speaker 1: up my nuclear weapons. We're speaking to Michael Oslin, who
Speaker 1: is a security expert from the Hoover Institution. Uh. Michael,
Speaker 1: people have been also putting out a lot of unsolicited
Speaker 1: advice to the president in terms of what needs to
Speaker 1: happen between now and this proposed meeting, which is supposed
Speaker 1: to happen in May. Right, that's what we've been told.
Speaker 1: What what do you make of that? Do there have
Speaker 1: to be preconditions, specific preconditions for this meeting that we
Speaker 1: could already assess, or do you have to kind of
Speaker 1: see what the North Koreans come to us with first?
Speaker 1: I mean, how does this dance between now and the
Speaker 1: day of actual talks have to go? Yeah? Well, I
Speaker 1: think that horse has left the barn. Trump already agreed,
Speaker 1: and I don't think you can walk back and say,
Speaker 1: by the way, here are our preconditions. Kim will walk
Speaker 1: away and say, you know, I'm not going to do that.
Speaker 1: So I think that the president, you know, publicly sending
Speaker 1: the South Koreans National Security advisor out to say, hey,
Speaker 1: Kim offered, Trump accepted, and then the White House confirms
Speaker 1: it means you've already given up that question of of
Speaker 1: of preconditions. Your question, I think is very right on
Speaker 1: the idea of speed. Here. This is happening very very quickly.
Speaker 1: We're talking about this potentially taking place over the next
Speaker 1: two months. Two to three months at most is the
Speaker 1: timeline they've given us. Usually these things take years to
Speaker 1: to put into place, and you have all sorts of
Speaker 1: negotiations at lower levels, working their way up the chain
Speaker 1: so that when it gets to the presidential level and
Speaker 1: it gets to the level of of a summit, everything
Speaker 1: has been worked out. The danger here is that nothing
Speaker 1: has been worked out, and there's certainly no time to
Speaker 1: work anything out in a methodical, sort of measured way.
Speaker 1: Either it's going to be a dramatic hail Mary to
Speaker 1: solve the Korean crisis, or they're going to go into
Speaker 1: the meeting without or both sides will go into the
Speaker 1: meeting without any real idea of of where they're gonna
Speaker 1: go with this. Again, I think the North Koreans definitely no,
Speaker 1: they're going to press hard on getting rid of sanctions.
Speaker 1: They're going to press hard for some type of recognition
Speaker 1: for getting troops off the peninsula, all in exchange for
Speaker 1: probably largely unverifiable uh freeze on their nuclear program, or
Speaker 1: at least we can never be fully sure that they
Speaker 1: will have lived up to their words if this comes
Speaker 1: to not If let's say there's this meeting and it's
Speaker 1: a propaganda victory for the North Koreans, we don't get
Speaker 1: anything that's acceptable from our end. Really, from the rest
Speaker 1: of the world's end on this one. Are we on
Speaker 1: a march toward military conflict with North Korea if we
Speaker 1: can't figure this out this time around, Well, I I
Speaker 1: don't think you're ever on a march necessarily because you
Speaker 1: can't figure it out. Look, we've been dealing with North
Speaker 1: Korea for twenty five years now, I'm the nuclear is
Speaker 1: 're now we failed, you know, we've failed to stop
Speaker 1: them from getting a nuclear weapon. So we're in a
Speaker 1: new era. But I I am of the school that
Speaker 1: thinks that deterrence is not yet completely useless. You know.
Speaker 1: Hr McMaster, national Security Advisor, has indicated his belief otherwise.
Speaker 1: I think that the regime in North Korea certainly understands
Speaker 1: that it cannot win a contest with the United States,
Speaker 1: and since survival is its number one goal, it's it's
Speaker 1: it's overriding goal, and it's it's always going to be
Speaker 1: careful in terms of pushing us into some type of
Speaker 1: military conflict. Um. But I don't think also that walking
Speaker 1: away from the table from this meeting without having solved
Speaker 1: anything means that you're back to square one. This is
Speaker 1: obviously a breakthrough of some kind, and we've seen it before.
Speaker 1: The North Koreans have proposed the nuclearization talks before the
Speaker 1: logic of diplomacy is that we have to follow up,
Speaker 1: but you have to be extraordinarily successful. But you're right, Buck.
Speaker 1: What this does give and what can never be taken away,
Speaker 1: is that this gives Kim Jong n a massive propaganda coup.
Speaker 1: When you sit down at the table as a equal
Speaker 1: to the North Korean president, which is you know what
Speaker 1: the diploma, diplomatic protocol will be, uh that legitimizes him
Speaker 1: in a way no US president has been willing to do.
Speaker 1: If the Trump administration is making a strategic change because
Speaker 1: they think this will actually get more cooperation towards the
Speaker 1: end goal of the nuclearization, that that's fine, but they've
Speaker 1: done it with such rapidity and so precipitously that you
Speaker 1: haven't prepared allies, you haven't prepared the U. S. Public.
Speaker 1: We're not sure if all the different parts of the U. S.
Speaker 1: Government have weighed in with with what they think this means.
Speaker 1: So there are a lot of risks here, but obviously
Speaker 1: it's a gamble that the President feels he's well placed
Speaker 1: to take. Before we head off here into into the weekends,
Speaker 1: Michael I wanted to ask for your rosiest but realistic
Speaker 1: UH scenario here and meaning, if things go as well
Speaker 1: as they could realistically be expected to with this meeting,
Speaker 1: based on North Korea's red lines, and what it would
Speaker 1: what it would need for there to be some kind
Speaker 1: of a bargain here, What would that What would that
Speaker 1: look like? What would a huge Trump I'd like to
Speaker 1: establish now kind of where the goalposts are for what
Speaker 1: is Wow? Trump just managed to pull off the greatest
Speaker 1: diplomatic national security victory since the end of the Cold War. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think he has to avoid the raky Vic temptation
Speaker 1: to try to solve this in one fell swoop, as
Speaker 1: Reagan did with Gorbachev. In Rekyvic, I think the most
Speaker 1: realistic and best case scenario is that they come away
Speaker 1: with an agreement to now can begin very serious high
Speaker 1: level talks about the nuclearization where the US has given
Speaker 1: up nothing, has not agreed to remove any of the sanctions,
Speaker 1: and quite frankly, all you can do is play that out.
Speaker 1: I think we know that the North Koreans undercut almost
Speaker 1: any deal they make. We know that they play for
Speaker 1: time again. I think the logic of diplomacy is that
Speaker 1: you have to see where it goes. But given that
Speaker 1: it's at this level, any talks from now on we'll
Speaker 1: have Kim Jong UN's stamp on them, so to speak.
Speaker 1: So if they come away saying we are now going
Speaker 1: to begin a serious round of negotiations and the White
Speaker 1: House reserves the ability to uh to put on more
Speaker 1: sanctions or do other things, you know, I think it's
Speaker 1: better than them walking away saying, well, we failed and
Speaker 1: now let's prepare for war, or that they rush into
Speaker 1: a deal where no one is really sure of what
Speaker 1: the implications are. Michael Oslin is the author of the
Speaker 1: End of the Asian Century, which is available on Amazon
Speaker 1: for you folks who want to do some deep dive
Speaker 1: reading on this on your own time, and he's also
Speaker 1: a fellow at the Hoover Institution. Michael, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for joining us anytime. Buck, Thank you, Tim. We
Speaker 1: are going to roll into a quick break here. We
Speaker 1: are going to come back and get into a bit
Speaker 1: of a freestyle because it's the third of the show soon,
Speaker 1: So stay right there and we'll be back. It's a
Speaker 1: little bit of political tumult out in California. This is
Speaker 1: of the fun kind, though, because you got Democrat on
Speaker 1: Democrat issues. Latest is that our our may man, our
Speaker 1: home slice. Bernie Sanders, what do you mean? What are
Speaker 1: you talking about? The Republican show? Don't talk about me?
Speaker 1: What about it? He refuses. He refuses to endorse UH
Speaker 1: Senator Diane Feinstein in advance of her primary in California.
Speaker 1: I see, I think this is a this is a
Speaker 1: harbinger of things to come. My friends, Here's why, Horbinger.
Speaker 1: Why are you using those words? What is that supposed
Speaker 1: to mean? Horbinger? So Bernie is the left wing darling
Speaker 1: of the elected poor, the Democrat party. Right. Bernie is
Speaker 1: where the Democrats were emotionally in the last presidential election.
Speaker 1: I had so much fun at CNN whenever they would
Speaker 1: occasionally allow me to be part of a post Democrat
Speaker 1: debate panel, just looking at all the all the hillary Bots,
Speaker 1: all little Hillary supporters, and say, we all know that
Speaker 1: Bernie is the authentic one, right, authentic baby, real, the
Speaker 1: real deal. We all know that Bernie's what the Democrats
Speaker 1: would like to vote for, but instead they're going to
Speaker 1: vote for How wow, Hillary, she's the best, She's amazing,
Speaker 1: and they went with Hillary. And now we all know
Speaker 1: what happened, and they wish they could have voted for Bernie.
Speaker 1: But the Democrat left is going to reassert itself. And
Speaker 1: let me tell you, there is nothing better that I
Speaker 1: can think of for the Republicans that the Democrats could
Speaker 1: due to themselves. Then actually let the American people what
Speaker 1: Democrats really want and think and believe you see, fine
Speaker 1: Stein is the and now keep on, this isn't when
Speaker 1: I say old school. I think fine Stein and Senators
Speaker 1: are are pretty close in age, right, They're both They're
Speaker 1: both up there. But fine Stein is the uh, the
Speaker 1: more centrist model of left wing Democrat. At least she's
Speaker 1: viewed as being too conservative because she has voted this
Speaker 1: according to the progressives in the Democrat Party, because she
Speaker 1: has voted with Trump. This is what they say thirty
Speaker 1: percent of the time. So she goes against Trump seventy
Speaker 1: percent of the time. Not that's not progressive. And keep
Speaker 1: in mind these are things like you know, we're talking
Speaker 1: about every vote that she has, right, so you know,
Speaker 1: with the defense budget, you know, you look at all
Speaker 1: these different votes that senators will will take in any
Speaker 1: at any point in time, and sure enough, Diane Feinstein
Speaker 1: is with Trump three out of ten times, and that
Speaker 1: is too much for the Democrats. So there's gonna be
Speaker 1: a little bit of a progressive feeding frenzy. Uh last year,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry this year, well maybe there was one last
Speaker 1: year two. But there's the progressive feeding frenzy that's coming up.
Speaker 1: And I think this would be absolutely fantastic for the
Speaker 1: Republicans in the midterms because if if the American people
Speaker 1: see that it is in fact the left wing uh,
Speaker 1: social justice warriors that have become the ideological the ideological
Speaker 1: vanguard of the Democrat Party, the American people are are
Speaker 1: going to run from that. So I want more. I
Speaker 1: want Bernie like fun Fun She's practically right wing. That's crazy,
Speaker 1: you know. I think that's way better because what you
Speaker 1: get with the Hillary fine Stein win the Democrat Party
Speaker 1: is meant it's really this much of the same him
Speaker 1: left wing stuff you'd get anyway, but they pretend to
Speaker 1: be more sort of centrist and down the middle and
Speaker 1: technocratic and reasonable. Right fine Stein, And look, I think
Speaker 1: on something's fine Stein is more reasonable than say Bernie Sanders.
Speaker 1: I'm not I'm not gonna pretend like there's no differences,
Speaker 1: but I'm much more concerned about a a fine Stein
Speaker 1: surge in the mid term or people, I shouldn't say
Speaker 1: fine Stein surge, but Democrats, especially in purple states that
Speaker 1: are you know, They've got this guy in Pennsylvania's former marine.
Speaker 1: He's telegenic, you know, you know these are formidable candidates folks, right,
Speaker 1: these are people that they're Democrats and they people can say,
Speaker 1: you know what, I'm gonna give this guy or this
Speaker 1: gall of shot. They look like they know what's up.
Speaker 1: You're gonna have Bernie Sanders style candidates in a lot
Speaker 1: of these races, or Bernie Sanders approved. It's gonna be
Speaker 1: a wipeout for the Democrats relatively speaking. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: probably gonna be pretty close no matter what happens. But
Speaker 1: I like to get excited about the my political prognostications
Speaker 1: that everyone's gonna for get me. Remember, I'm gonna write
Speaker 1: a film. I'm gonna record it. Okay, Bernie, you do that.
Speaker 1: Our three coming up Stay with me team, Welcome to
Speaker 1: our three. Our Freestyle Friday is continuing here. Gonna be
Speaker 1: talking to you about violent video games, then share some thoughts.
Speaker 1: All my time down here in Savannah and visiting with
Speaker 1: some of the UH fantastic sponsors of the Buck Section show,
Speaker 1: as well as getting to get a tour and hang
Speaker 1: out with some of the folks here at w t
Speaker 1: k c UH, which is the station or I Hard
Speaker 1: affiliate down here in Savannah. So I'll get a note
Speaker 1: some of that, and then we'll finish up as is
Speaker 1: our custom team with roll Call. But this is something
Speaker 1: that came across my radar and it fits into the
Speaker 1: category of just when is it gonna stop? You know?
Speaker 1: I am a Netflix and nap kind of guy on
Speaker 1: the weekend. Now, Netflix and nap is Netflix and then
Speaker 1: taking naps Apparently Netflix and chill means something else, which
Speaker 1: I have found out. So there's that. But I'm a
Speaker 1: Netflix and Nap kind of go on the weekends. I
Speaker 1: love watching things on demand, and yeah, I read as
Speaker 1: much as I can on the weekends too, because that's
Speaker 1: when I do a lot of my additional research for
Speaker 1: this show for podcasts, and I just also love reading.
Speaker 1: Um I love reading, and I'm not afraid to say it,
Speaker 1: but you know, I'm somebody who enjoys some good netflixes.
Speaker 1: I just burned through Ozark with Ms Molley. We loved it.
Speaker 1: I really like that thought it was very well done.
Speaker 1: And if if somebody likes the show, um breaking Bad,
Speaker 1: I think Ozark is a very good not as good
Speaker 1: as Breaking babb It's a very good similar genre. But
Speaker 1: you know, Netflix is doing great stuff. They don't get
Speaker 1: you know, some of their shows or strikeouts, but they
Speaker 1: they definitely get on base a lot, and they've even
Speaker 1: hit some some home runs. And then I see this
Speaker 1: and it just makes me frustrated, folks, As somebody who
Speaker 1: works in the media works very very hard and tries
Speaker 1: to put out the best content possible all the time.
Speaker 1: It could be that we lived in a world where
Speaker 1: content that the best content would win out. But instead,
Speaker 1: what you have a lot of the time is that
Speaker 1: the platforms are dominated by by political interests, meaning that
Speaker 1: there are people who have their own versions of what
Speaker 1: they think politics should be. They make the decisions about
Speaker 1: what shows are on what shows aren't, and that's how
Speaker 1: you get abominations like bill Ny the Science Guy on Netflix,
Speaker 1: which was the worst, least funny, least informative, steamy pile
Speaker 1: of yak crap I have ever watched on any Netflix, Amazon,
Speaker 1: any of these new platforms ever period. It was unwatchable.
Speaker 1: I mean it was you know, gosh, I have like
Speaker 1: had flashbacks to try to watch this. It was terrible.
Speaker 1: Now I find out that Netflix is thinking about having
Speaker 1: Barack Obama appear as the this is from CNN as
Speaker 1: the on camera moderator of a new series, or he
Speaker 1: might stay off camera as a producer of a show
Speaker 1: about uplifting American stories. Or maybe he'll do both. So
Speaker 1: Obama is about to become quite a force on Netflix. Now,
Speaker 1: a couple of things on this one. It's a great show.
Speaker 1: We're gonna tell stories about my background, how I saved
Speaker 1: the world a sport brother. So there's that. Uh. But Obama, look,
Speaker 1: I I give credit where it's due. He knows much
Speaker 1: better to control the culture. He will be much more
Speaker 1: influential as somebody who is on Netflix. We're pushing show
Speaker 1: is on Netflix. You know, that's the way that the
Speaker 1: the upcoming generation starts going hard left. That's the way
Speaker 1: that they mold minds into being progressive social justice warriors,
Speaker 1: not by having another you know, Obama doesn't need to
Speaker 1: appear on CNN or MSNBC. Brop rop broop blop Ryan.
Speaker 1: He's done plenty of that already, eight years of NonStop
Speaker 1: coverage and the Obama's amazing. This is the most brilliant
Speaker 1: man in the universe. Oh no, it's hard for me
Speaker 1: to talk to you people because you're not as smart
Speaker 1: as I'm I'm really smart, and I'm amazing and perfect
Speaker 1: and basically demigod, So you may worship my feet. Uh
Speaker 1: So he already had that, right, So now he's maybe
Speaker 1: gonna be doing the Netflix thing. Uh But I I
Speaker 1: take this very seriously, folks, because the influence that he
Speaker 1: could have in the culture is much more than the
Speaker 1: influence that he would have as just another former president
Speaker 1: talking head. You know, you see how this this happens. Now,
Speaker 1: the Clintons understood that, especially given their look. The Clinton
Speaker 1: Foundation in a sense was brilliant. I mean, it polluted
Speaker 1: charitable giving and it's disgusting to use charity as a
Speaker 1: vehicle for self advancement and all kinds of kickbacks in favors.
Speaker 1: Don't even get me started on uranium one, but no
Speaker 1: on all the other things as well, the open stuff
Speaker 1: that was going on, not even just the stuff we
Speaker 1: haven't yet found out the full details of. I think
Speaker 1: that's a total disgrace. But it was brilliant from the
Speaker 1: perspective of the Clintons. You basically get to have a
Speaker 1: tax free marketing campaign for the Clinton brand, right and
Speaker 1: and and you get to burnish your brand by being
Speaker 1: involved with a charity and running a charity. So it
Speaker 1: was brilliant stuff. It's just the Clintons are grasping and
Speaker 1: disgusting and so they they made it too obvious what
Speaker 1: was really going on. And that's also why the Clinton
Speaker 1: Global Initiative shut down after Hillary didn't win. All of
Speaker 1: a sudden, people don't care abou charity. They were given
Speaker 1: so much money, but then Hillary is no longer going
Speaker 1: to be the president and they don't care about charity.
Speaker 1: The donations dry up, they have to shut things down.
Speaker 1: Oh almost like the whole frigging thing was corrupt, but
Speaker 1: the Clintons had their charity. Obama, I've been I've been
Speaker 1: saying this for a while. Actually, he's going to be
Speaker 1: a major force in the media, you know. He They're
Speaker 1: they're going to make Obama a crossover of political and
Speaker 1: cultural importance, and the left will do everything they can
Speaker 1: to elevate him. And the left is very powerful. He
Speaker 1: look at the HBO, left wing Netflix, left wing Amazon,
Speaker 1: left wing we don't control any of these platforms, folks.
Speaker 1: I mean, when it comes to like heavyweight punchers in
Speaker 1: the media realm, we really We've got Fox News Talk Radio,
Speaker 1: thank you very much, and you know, some some websites,
Speaker 1: but we don't have the platforms. And you know, they're
Speaker 1: going to get the same information dominance that they had
Speaker 1: in the past, in the pre Internet age, because they're
Speaker 1: gonna control all the major portals. You're already seeing this
Speaker 1: with the social media platforms, but they're gonna use I mean,
Speaker 1: Obama is going to be the new Democrat media brand
Speaker 1: in a sense. He's going to be political, he's going
Speaker 1: to be cultural, He's going to be you know, all
Speaker 1: of the uh, all of the media reverence and you know,
Speaker 1: the the intellectual political stuff that they imputed that they
Speaker 1: kind of pushed for the Clintons. Obama will have all
Speaker 1: of that, but also the you know, the media reach
Speaker 1: and savvy and relationships of you know, Ellen and Oprah
Speaker 1: and I mean, I don't know who's you know, really
Speaker 1: big these days, but you know, he might be a producer.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying that this is both something to be
Speaker 1: aware of where area of because I think it will
Speaker 1: have a real impact. And also now I'm just gonna
Speaker 1: come to you. Now, I'm just gonna complain for a second.
Speaker 1: I'm just upset about I'm just upset about this. Okay,
Speaker 1: Like I like watching Netflix, and when Bill Night came on,
Speaker 1: I don't mean to harp on that one, but I'm
Speaker 1: going to it was like, Netflix, you really gotta do
Speaker 1: me like this. This is how it's got to be. Now,
Speaker 1: Bill Ny the not funny, not even real science guy.
Speaker 1: He's he's a mechanical engineer. Okay, he runs around in
Speaker 1: a white coat. I don't know a lot of mechanical
Speaker 1: engineers that wear a white coat. Um. But then, and look,
Speaker 1: if the show was good, I would admit it. I
Speaker 1: admit when the left is doing something well, and I
Speaker 1: usually want to either steal it or copy it, or
Speaker 1: you know, find a way to do it on our side. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, enough with the think tanks. How many of
Speaker 1: these right wing billionaires are gonna be running around and
Speaker 1: and you know, sending big check. We we've got things.
Speaker 1: We've got wonderful thing tanks the right wing. We've got policy.
Speaker 1: We were good there. We need competitive media outlets, and
Speaker 1: I don't just mean news. I mean I mean entertainment media.
Speaker 1: You know, we need to I know this gonna sound crazy.
Speaker 1: We need a Netflix of the Right. And by the way,
Speaker 1: we can get that, they could license TV shows that
Speaker 1: are you know, more in in the realm of what
Speaker 1: you know, traditional America would like to see, our traditionalist
Speaker 1: Americans would like to see. You know, it's it's not
Speaker 1: all about the transgender struggle and progressive social justice issues,
Speaker 1: which is what you see on Amazon and Netflix. You know,
Speaker 1: we could actually get some older shows that actually that show, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, traditional struggle of good versus evil, I don't know,
Speaker 1: stuff like that, and then create some new content. I mean,
Speaker 1: people keep talking about it, but it doesn't happen, and
Speaker 1: there's really no excuse now. So I'm putting out the
Speaker 1: call to all the billionaires who listened to this show.
Speaker 1: All I don't know, maybe one or two of you
Speaker 1: have no idea. Uh, we need a Netflix of the
Speaker 1: Right because you're seeing this with Obama, they're going to
Speaker 1: bring him in. They're gonna bring in you know, Chelsea Clinton.
Speaker 1: It's just the media political apparatus, the entertainment political apparatus,
Speaker 1: is going to shut us down and drown us out
Speaker 1: unless we get savvy. We're gonna talk about speaking of media.
Speaker 1: Violent video games coming up after the break. Violent video
Speaker 1: games not something that I spend much time thinking or
Speaker 1: talking about, but I know that it often comes up
Speaker 1: when there's one of these terrible shootings, school shooting, or
Speaker 1: any number of mass casualty shootings, and I usually think
Speaker 1: to myself, you know, that's just not that's not a solution, clearly.
Speaker 1: And I don't think that the people that are opposed
Speaker 1: to violent video games say it would solve, but they
Speaker 1: just think that it would that that there are deeper
Speaker 1: cultural roots to the problems of some of the violence
Speaker 1: that we see in our society, and and I get that,
Speaker 1: but I gotta say, you know, I grew up this
Speaker 1: is a part of my life. I don't talk all
Speaker 1: that much about. I grew up playing a lot of
Speaker 1: video games. I read a lot of books too. I
Speaker 1: played a lot of video games. I was I went
Speaker 1: through a phase. I'm one of four. I've got two brothers,
Speaker 1: and I have some cousins also who are are close
Speaker 1: to my age, you know, guy cousins and man, we
Speaker 1: all we played video games, and I remember all these
Speaker 1: different systems. Uh, I had Sega Saturn. My mom was great,
Speaker 1: you know, she tried to spoil the kids a little
Speaker 1: bit sometimes when she could. And at Sega Saturn and
Speaker 1: Turbographic sixteen Nintendo obviously, I mean Duck Hunt Duck Hunt
Speaker 1: for Life game was amazing. Uh. So many of these
Speaker 1: different consoles over over time, and and then eventually PlayStation.
Speaker 1: And I've told you before about fond memories I have
Speaker 1: of playing Sid Meier's Civilization and games like Medieval Total
Speaker 1: War that I think actually have a really useful impact
Speaker 1: on the way that people think about strategy. I mean
Speaker 1: at a young age and you learn a bit of history,
Speaker 1: especially Medieve Total War. They've based it on all these
Speaker 1: different military units completely accurate. The uh names of the
Speaker 1: provinces at this period, the I Medieval time, very accurate.
Speaker 1: So you know, if you play that game, you know
Speaker 1: what you know what a ghazi is, you know what
Speaker 1: a janissary is, you know what gendarme comes from a
Speaker 1: French term. This is all. Yeah, these are all historical,
Speaker 1: uh data points that are useful and it's fun to
Speaker 1: play these games. But when I think of games, that's
Speaker 1: kind of what I think of maybe Street Fighter two
Speaker 1: and and I'm not somebody who's in favor of banning
Speaker 1: video games. I'm just opposed to censorship. I tend to
Speaker 1: the more libertarian side of arguments whenever it involves content.
Speaker 1: But I gotta say this is just I'm not advocating
Speaker 1: for a policy here. I'm just saying. And if you're
Speaker 1: going on this weekend, you're gonna be playing a lot
Speaker 1: of games. I get it. But this montage that they
Speaker 1: played at the White House for Trump, when they're having
Speaker 1: the discussion about video games and violent video games, it's
Speaker 1: the most violent stuff I've ever seen. I mean it
Speaker 1: was crazy. I mean you get people up close and
Speaker 1: personal with hatchets literally lopping off heads and anatomically correct
Speaker 1: and there's blood spurting everywhere, and it's it's a mess.
Speaker 1: And I'll say, I do I have my limits? I mean,
Speaker 1: there are there are shows that are too violent for me.
Speaker 1: There are movies that are too violent for me. And
Speaker 1: I grew up watching a lot of action films and stuff.
Speaker 1: But there's different you know, there's different levels, right, There's
Speaker 1: something very different about let's say, as you know, I
Speaker 1: love action movies, but Commando, you know, layoff, lit off
Speaker 1: some steam. Bennett, um My Schwarzenegger was not good there,
Speaker 1: but we'll just let that go. Nudolf's no, I can't
Speaker 1: do it. I can't do it at all. It's because
Speaker 1: people think of schwartzening gob you know, because of Conan
Speaker 1: O'Brien och the gobintor. That's not really how he sounds
Speaker 1: in movies though, so um sometimes he does get to
Speaker 1: the choppa, but that's different with Schwartzenegger running around wearing
Speaker 1: just a tactical vest nothing nothing underneath it and short
Speaker 1: sleeves obviously because that's how he rolls, and firing an
Speaker 1: M sixty one handed from the hip on a full
Speaker 1: run and moan dudes down from two yards away and
Speaker 1: none of them can hit him. By the way, if
Speaker 1: you haven't seen Commando, this is actually what happens in it.
Speaker 1: That's very different than say the movie Saw or Hostile
Speaker 1: or some of these other I think they call them
Speaker 1: torture porn. Uh, these other incredibly violent and really depraved
Speaker 1: movies out there. I'll tell you, I was actually on
Speaker 1: a first date once, and a young woman that I
Speaker 1: was on the date with. There's many many. This is
Speaker 1: over a decade ago, said that, you know, her favorite
Speaker 1: movies were all of the Saw movies and Hostile, and
Speaker 1: I just remember thinking, I don't know if this is
Speaker 1: gonna work out, because I thought that was a little intense,
Speaker 1: you know, I thought that was a bit much. Uh uh.
Speaker 1: But you know, there there are limits for me. And
Speaker 1: I don't think that that means that necessarily it translates
Speaker 1: into policy. I'm just telling you that I was a
Speaker 1: bit I was a bit surprised and a little taken
Speaker 1: aback by just how violent some of these video games
Speaker 1: really are, and it was a surprise to me. I
Speaker 1: feel like I'm I'm out of touch with some of
Speaker 1: these things because I gave up playing video games really
Speaker 1: after college. Not that I got any problem with I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, they're still fun. I still I still think
Speaker 1: I'm probably pretty good at them, played a little bit
Speaker 1: here and there. But things have changed with them, and
Speaker 1: they're so hyper realistic now in the graphics and the
Speaker 1: first person aspect of these games also, it's so it's
Speaker 1: already so close to virtual reality. I feel like that's
Speaker 1: one of the reasons why virtual reality hasn't taken off more,
Speaker 1: because you play these first person games and you're already
Speaker 1: it's like your storm and the Beaches of Normandy there
Speaker 1: right in your head. I mean, you're you know, all
Speaker 1: these different call of duty games and I didn't play
Speaker 1: much of those. Um trying to think of my my
Speaker 1: my real first person shooters, uh, you know, Awakening, that's
Speaker 1: a good way to put it. Was Golden I on
Speaker 1: the Nintendo sixty four. I played that with my friends
Speaker 1: when we were in maybe early high school so much,
Speaker 1: and that was a great game at the time, and
Speaker 1: that was my first time. I was like, Wow, first
Speaker 1: person shooter is really But that's if you look at
Speaker 1: that now, it looks like it's from another it looks
Speaker 1: like it's from the Stone Age or something. It's not
Speaker 1: not nearly as advanced of stuff I have now. So
Speaker 1: I just looked through this montage and it's up on
Speaker 1: different sites that they showed the president, just with the
Speaker 1: most graphics stuff from video games you could find. And
Speaker 1: I gotta say, I was a little wow, that's actually
Speaker 1: really violent. I was a little uh you know. Taking
Speaker 1: it back is actually a nautical term for when the
Speaker 1: wind shifts and it hits the sale at an angle
Speaker 1: that all of a sudden kind of makes the boat
Speaker 1: uh slow or even feel like it comes to a
Speaker 1: stop taking it back, but I thought it was. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a little much, a little more than I had expected.
Speaker 1: I will say that, and I don't think that necessarily
Speaker 1: factors into any policy recommendations, although it does make me
Speaker 1: think more about what is going on in the culture.
Speaker 1: You know, some things I think we can we can
Speaker 1: at least advocate for a certain level of decorum and taste.
Speaker 1: And you know that that's and so I guess that's
Speaker 1: what I'm doing. I'm not saying band super violent movies
Speaker 1: video games. I'm just saying I wouldn't let my kids
Speaker 1: play the most violent video games. I would hold off
Speaker 1: on that until a little later on. I don't have
Speaker 1: kids yet, so this is easy for me to say.
Speaker 1: But you know, I'm thinking about what that would be like,
Speaker 1: and that's the volent video games. I would pretty much
Speaker 1: put a put a hold on that. You know, there
Speaker 1: were movies I was allowed to see action movies that
Speaker 1: were rated are but you know, I didn't watch a
Speaker 1: lot of at least not till I got into high school,
Speaker 1: and I wasn't allowed to watch things. You know that
Speaker 1: came out in the theaters and everybody, if you remember
Speaker 1: basic instinct, very violent very uh graphic movie, not just
Speaker 1: with violence, and I wasn't allowed to see that, you know,
Speaker 1: with there are limitations, There are limitations that uh certainly
Speaker 1: were in place when I was a young you know,
Speaker 1: a teenager. So I've just changed my thinking a little bit.
Speaker 1: On the video games. We've come a long way from
Speaker 1: sid Meier's Civilization, where the worst thing you'd see is
Speaker 1: Montezuma getting really upset at Genghis Khan. All Right, we'll
Speaker 1: hit a quick break, we come back. I've got some
Speaker 1: thoughts from Savannah and then some roll call. Stay with me.
Speaker 1: I have had a great time down here in Savannah, Georgia.
Speaker 1: I love this place. I'm gonna find every excuse I
Speaker 1: can to come and visit. And also want to thank
Speaker 1: our I Heart affiliate here uh W t k C.
Speaker 1: They have been so generous and and warm and and
Speaker 1: help me out here making sure that I've got a
Speaker 1: great studio for my my days visiting in Savannah, and
Speaker 1: so thank you to all all the folks here. And
Speaker 1: also just had a great time visiting with our friends
Speaker 1: at nine Line Apparel and Black Rifle Coffee. Got to
Speaker 1: hang out with both of them. And actually I'm hoping
Speaker 1: that tomorrow I'll be able to get out to the
Speaker 1: nine Line facility again. UH. Today I took a tour
Speaker 1: with the CEO and some of his uh, some of
Speaker 1: his corporate officers who go check it out. UH. Tyler
Speaker 1: Merritt and his crew also got to see Evan Hafer
Speaker 1: of Black Rifle and Matt Best because they've opened up
Speaker 1: a franchise inside of the Nine Line Apparel store. It's
Speaker 1: an incredible facility. They've got out here just outside of George,
Speaker 1: outside of Georgia, outside of Savannah, about fifteen twenty minutes
Speaker 1: from downtown maybe twenty minutes and UH, it's a really
Speaker 1: cool facility. So I very much enjoyed getting to see
Speaker 1: all them today. And some members of Team Buck showed up.
Speaker 1: I just want to say thank you so much to
Speaker 1: all of them for deciding to h to make the trek.
Speaker 1: Some of you were in the neighborhood. Some of you
Speaker 1: drove quite a bit. I saw some uh, I saw
Speaker 1: some freedom hut T shirts in effect. And to those
Speaker 1: of you that made made the trip, I really do
Speaker 1: appreciate it. And you made me look good in front
Speaker 1: of Miss Molly, who was with me today. She came
Speaker 1: out too, and saw everybody out at the nine Line store.
Speaker 1: So all in all, very very successful day. Really enjoyed myself.
Speaker 1: And tomorrow morning, Saturday morning, I'm planning on going out
Speaker 1: again to the nine Line facility. It's they've got a factory,
Speaker 1: they got a store. It's incredible, folks. If you're within
Speaker 1: driving distance, they're gonna be basically throwing a big party
Speaker 1: tomorrow and I'm planning to be out there tomorrow Saturday morning.
Speaker 1: I'll get there around probably nine thirty am, so that's
Speaker 1: the plan. So if you wanted to just go check
Speaker 1: out some great gear, Matt Best will be there. There's
Speaker 1: probably gonna be a line of like four thousand people
Speaker 1: just to see Matt, and uh, that's just gonna be
Speaker 1: really fun, so you can come check it out with
Speaker 1: all the rest of us. They had today a bouncy
Speaker 1: castle for the kids, so it's a family event. They
Speaker 1: got a bouncy castle for the kids. They had Clydesdale Horses,
Speaker 1: drawing horse drawn carriage, taking people on carriage tours, all
Speaker 1: kinds of food trucks with delicious food, barbecue, burgers, you know,
Speaker 1: you name it, and they really do it right. Man,
Speaker 1: these guys, the Black Rifle and nine Line guys know
Speaker 1: exactly what they're doing. It was a really fun event
Speaker 1: today and I got to drink some delicious ice coffee.
Speaker 1: Miss Molly was so happy. She goes, I don't think
Speaker 1: they're gonna have almond milk, because you know, she doesn't
Speaker 1: really drink the cow milk and which I just prefer
Speaker 1: to as milk because that's true. And hopefully miss Molly
Speaker 1: is not listening to this because she might yell at me.
Speaker 1: But they have almond milk at the nine I mean
Speaker 1: well at nine Line Slash Black Rifle because it's delicious
Speaker 1: coffee and they want to make sure that all their
Speaker 1: customers are happy. So really good time today, and I
Speaker 1: think those folks as well. So it's it's We've got
Speaker 1: a whole whole squad of of thanks that I'm giving
Speaker 1: out W T K s C. I heart um affiliate
Speaker 1: here in Savannah, Georgia. Also nine Line and Black Rifle.
Speaker 1: And then just a quick before we get into some
Speaker 1: roll call, a little a little fun story where you
Speaker 1: I took a drive. I'm pulling a Tom Friedman here,
Speaker 1: but this this is actually a good one. I took
Speaker 1: a drive over here and I took a an uber
Speaker 1: as is my as is my habit. And the gentleman
Speaker 1: who drove me over here was really insightful and and
Speaker 1: nice and friendly dude. And you were talking a little bit,
Speaker 1: and I think he was surprised because I have some
Speaker 1: I have some knowledge of some places of the world
Speaker 1: that are surprising to folks. So when he said what
Speaker 1: when he started talking, and I said, you're from West Africa.
Speaker 1: You're You're from Nigeria, aren't you. And he says, he, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: how do you know? I said, well, what part of
Speaker 1: the country you from? And he and he told me,
Speaker 1: he said, I'm from the southeast. I said, oh, you
Speaker 1: must be Ebo and he goes, you know my tribe
Speaker 1: to I said, sir, I'm a man who knows many things.
Speaker 1: And we had a great conversation about politics and I
Speaker 1: love it. This guy told me that I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: use his name just because you know, he's a civilian.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm not I wanna bring him in this, but
Speaker 1: he might be listening because he downloads. He's now a
Speaker 1: subscriber to the Bucks Exton show. We by the end
Speaker 1: of our ride, I turned him into a subscriber, so
Speaker 1: you know, here we have a legal immigrant to the
Speaker 1: country who is highly educated, highly motivated, really great conversationalist,
Speaker 1: fun guy to talk to. And he is a Republican,
Speaker 1: my friends, that's right. He's like, what is it with
Speaker 1: people that are hating on Donald Trump? He's like, you know,
Speaker 1: people tell me these things about how he's racist. He's like,
Speaker 1: he's not racist. Why do people say this? And I
Speaker 1: was like, I don't know, man, it's crazy, isn't He go? Yeah,
Speaker 1: because what's with Hillary? Hillary is no good. I'm like,
Speaker 1: I know. He's like, it's I'm not saying that she's
Speaker 1: inhuman or anything. She's just not very not particularly easy
Speaker 1: to relate to as a human. I said, yeah, that's
Speaker 1: very student analysis, my friends. So we had a really
Speaker 1: good chat. But I was just great to talk to
Speaker 1: somebody down here in Savannah who um is representative. I
Speaker 1: think of this new type of Trump voter or new
Speaker 1: type of Republican people that are like, you know, what,
Speaker 1: the economy is good, things are going well. You know,
Speaker 1: you can't trust the mainstream media, you can't trust some
Speaker 1: of these big outlets. And I said, sir, I couldn't
Speaker 1: agree with you more. Man. We had a really a
Speaker 1: really fun chat. So it's as you can get a sense,
Speaker 1: I think from my tone, it's just been a really
Speaker 1: good visit, uh down here in Savannah. I'm a I'm
Speaker 1: a big fan of this place. I'm a big fan
Speaker 1: of New Orleans. I mean, I'm gonna be hitting up
Speaker 1: Austin pretty soon, definitely hitting up already on the schedule
Speaker 1: those of you who are listening on Whoa, Whoa. I
Speaker 1: will be out in Fort Wayne, Indiana in about three
Speaker 1: weeks for Talk Tank, which is an event that that
Speaker 1: that excellent affiliate Wow Oh, will be putting on. So
Speaker 1: if you can come to that and I'll be hanging
Speaker 1: out all day, So if you want to chat, no
Speaker 1: miss Molly for that one though, Miss It was kind
Speaker 1: of a special treat for the folks today that came
Speaker 1: out from the team, including some original Saturday Squad that
Speaker 1: Miss Molly was in effect. That usually doesn't happen, but
Speaker 1: she sure enough was there for this one. So a
Speaker 1: great time down here. As soon as I'm done with
Speaker 1: the show, I'm gonna be hanging out with some of
Speaker 1: our friends from the veteran community who are involved in
Speaker 1: Black Black Rifle Coffee and Nine Lines. So We're gonna
Speaker 1: have quite a night. I'm glad I do not have
Speaker 1: a radio show tomorrow morning, because that would be pretty tough.
Speaker 1: And that's uh, that's that's my story, and for now
Speaker 1: I'm just sticking to it. It should be fun. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna go into a quick break. When I come back,
Speaker 1: we will do the actual roll call that I promise
Speaker 1: you we would do, so we'll hear from all of you.
Speaker 1: So stay with me back in just a few quick minutes. Alright,
Speaker 1: live from Savannah, Georgia, w t k C. This is Friday,
Speaker 1: Well Freestyle Friday roll Call. Hey, teen Buck, it's time
Speaker 1: for roll call. I feel like that music gets us
Speaker 1: all fired up and ready for the weekend, at least
Speaker 1: for those of you that that dig it. Some of
Speaker 1: your probably like, Buck, why don't you stick to the
Speaker 1: classic rock? My friend? You should probably not play too
Speaker 1: much dub STEFP. People might be like, that's not really
Speaker 1: my thing. Um So first up here, Oh wow, that's great.
Speaker 1: We got Eric who sent me a photo of the
Speaker 1: two of us hanging out at the nine Line store
Speaker 1: here in Georgia because he just posted this up on
Speaker 1: Facebook said thanks for taking the time, brother. Sorry, I
Speaker 1: couldn't stay and talk, had to pick up my daughter
Speaker 1: from school. While Eric, I totally understand my friend. Thank
Speaker 1: you very much for coming out. Um, and let's get
Speaker 1: to uh the next one here, because other than that's
Speaker 1: just a photo. Was a great photo, Eric, Great to
Speaker 1: meet you. Uh, Seth Rights, hey buck podcast listener here.
Speaker 1: Just worry to let you know that I enjoy your
Speaker 1: occasional rants about things that bother you. They're educational and hilarious. Well, Seth,
Speaker 1: first of all, thank you for your note. And since
Speaker 1: you've opened the door, I'm going to walk through it.
Speaker 1: So I happened to check into a hotel here in
Speaker 1: downtown Savannah. The hotel will remain unnamed, but they told
Speaker 1: me when I'm checking in, oh, there's some construction going
Speaker 1: on inside the hotel. They're doing some renovations. And I said, okay,
Speaker 1: well where is it and they said, well, it's kind
Speaker 1: of in a few places, and and I said, well,
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna tell you right now, I am a
Speaker 1: grumpy old man when it comes to unnecessary noise. And
Speaker 1: this is gonna be a situation where I'm gonna need
Speaker 1: you to put me as far as possible from the noise.
Speaker 1: And the young woman at the front desk, I mean,
Speaker 1: I think actually she's my age, but I'm just gonna say.
Speaker 1: The young woman at the front desk said yeah, yeah, sure, sure, whatever,
Speaker 1: and kind of hustled me through the check in processes,
Speaker 1: and well, I think we're gonna have And I said,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe we should take a little bit of
Speaker 1: a peek here and see what what rooms are available.
Speaker 1: She says, no, no, I think you'll be fine. I said, well,
Speaker 1: why do you why do you take that opinion? Well,
Speaker 1: because we're totally sold out, so this is your only
Speaker 1: room option. M So I go up in. Sure enough,
Speaker 1: I get to the room and it sounds like someone
Speaker 1: is taking a jackhammer to the wall, and I said,
Speaker 1: you know, this is not really gonna work for me.
Speaker 1: It's not really what I signed up for. So I
Speaker 1: go downstairs and I have to go through this whole
Speaker 1: thing of Look, I'm I am unfailingly polite for the
Speaker 1: first few exchanges when I'm annoyed about something, but I
Speaker 1: know that there's a place that they can put me
Speaker 1: that's not there's no way that this place has no
Speaker 1: rooms that I just I refuse to believe that it
Speaker 1: is a hundred percent occupied, and sure enough I got
Speaker 1: to get somebody else to come out, and they had
Speaker 1: to do the whole you know, clack clack, clack, clack clack,
Speaker 1: you know, pressing all the different buttons on the computer.
Speaker 1: And yes, indeed, oh there's a room that's far far
Speaker 1: away from all of the noise that they could have
Speaker 1: given me. So my thing that annoys me is whenever
Speaker 1: you are trying to change either your hotel room, your
Speaker 1: plane ticket, whatever it may be, and the initial reaction
Speaker 1: is to tell you that there's nothing they can do,
Speaker 1: and then you find out because I know that that
Speaker 1: is true. Sometimes that is true something on planes, it's
Speaker 1: often the case, right, I feel bad or the well,
Speaker 1: actually that's not true. I rarely feel bad for the
Speaker 1: people that are dealing with you on an airline, because
Speaker 1: the airlines are they needed, they need a swift kick
Speaker 1: in the bottle a lot of the time. I'm just
Speaker 1: gonna say it, but I do feel badly for the
Speaker 1: man or a woman that stands there and has all
Speaker 1: the all the rage directed at them when they are
Speaker 1: flight cancelations and everything else, and people think that they
Speaker 1: can move them and they can't. But when they can
Speaker 1: when you tell me there's no other seed option, or
Speaker 1: when you tell me there's no other room option, or
Speaker 1: there's no other table at a restaurant, and then I
Speaker 1: have to find out that that wasn't true, which I
Speaker 1: basically always end up finding out. Can't we just skip
Speaker 1: that step? Can I please talk to your supervisor? Can
Speaker 1: I please talk to your manager? I don't want to
Speaker 1: do that. I'm a very reasonable guy, you know, a
Speaker 1: little curmudgeon ly, but very reasonable. So there you go, Seth.
Speaker 1: There's one thing that that bothers me a little bit.
Speaker 1: Um that would be oh, oh, now you I mean,
Speaker 1: I know I'm completely interrupting our roll call here for
Speaker 1: I'm interrupting our previously scheduled programming. Another thing, folks, I
Speaker 1: don't know how else to say this, but the things
Speaker 1: that go in your car, that you hang from the
Speaker 1: dashboard that you think smell good, you become accustomed to
Speaker 1: it because you're in the car for a long time
Speaker 1: and you think maybe it smells nice. But for anyone
Speaker 1: who's not spending that time in the vehicle as much
Speaker 1: as you are, it is an overpowering smell. And I
Speaker 1: don't actually necessarily want to get into a vehicle and
Speaker 1: feel like I am being face dunked into a tank
Speaker 1: of pine needles and lemon. You know, I don't need that.
Speaker 1: It's not good. So the smell that you want in
Speaker 1: a vehicle, it's just clean vehicle smell, which doesn't really
Speaker 1: smell like anything, and that's what you want. I am
Speaker 1: very opposed to. And I actually know people that will
Speaker 1: tell you those chemicals they used to create those smelly
Speaker 1: tree things that they put in cars are very a
Speaker 1: are are noxious, They're not good for you. I'm not
Speaker 1: sure if I take that route. I just think they
Speaker 1: smell bad. And I go in some parts of the
Speaker 1: country and they're very common. I just go, mmm, I
Speaker 1: don't understand this. It's a little overpowering, particularly the the
Speaker 1: the fruit smells. So that's another thing that annoys me.
Speaker 1: And I don't really need to feel like someone's taken
Speaker 1: cherries and shoved them up my nose and his fear.
Speaker 1: Especially you're in kind of a long drive. That's not fun,
Speaker 1: all right, that's an I'm gonna setsy. You open the
Speaker 1: door for me to complain, and I'm like, here I go.
Speaker 1: Next up Erica on roll called buck. I think you
Speaker 1: belong in the South. Your love of y'all boat choose kindness,
Speaker 1: keeping a casual is very much in keeping with the
Speaker 1: low country style oss in Charleston. Enjoy Savannah. Well, thank
Speaker 1: you so much, Erica. I love Charleston too, So I'm
Speaker 1: gonna find we have an affiliate in Charleston, so I'm
Speaker 1: gonna have to come down there for a market visit
Speaker 1: and go visit. Are are great affiliate in Charleston. And
Speaker 1: but it's funny people in New York actually often say
Speaker 1: that I seem I have a somewhat Southern I don't
Speaker 1: know I was. I don't know what the word would be,
Speaker 1: vibe maybe even though obviously I don't sound Southern at all.
Speaker 1: But the name is Buck and so that's you start
Speaker 1: with that. I do like boat shoes, I have long,
Speaker 1: kind of poofy, floppy hair. And I used to wear
Speaker 1: Sear sucker pants just all the time because I thought
Speaker 1: they were comfortable. I didn't realize that was Sear sucker
Speaker 1: pants and flip flops actually, which I have since found
Speaker 1: out is like southern fraternity boy standard issue. But my
Speaker 1: family is partially from the South, so maybe that's where
Speaker 1: I I get some of my dad's side of the
Speaker 1: family has a whole lot of Kentucky and Virginia in
Speaker 1: the background. So there you go. Um next up here, Duke,
Speaker 1: he writes, Buck, you're right. Even when you think you're wrong,
Speaker 1: you're right. Trust Trump. I voted for McMullen. Oh, Duke, buddy, Hey, look,
Speaker 1: we all make mistakes, my friend. I would not have
Speaker 1: made the McMullen move myself. I I had Evan on radio.
Speaker 1: I was very fair to him as a as a
Speaker 1: radio host. I think I asked him questions. He's clearly, uh,
Speaker 1: an intelligent fellow, and I think he's well intentioned. I
Speaker 1: think with the anti Trump stuff, he's gone way too
Speaker 1: far and to the point where I can't even have
Speaker 1: a based on his positions. I can't even have a
Speaker 1: constructive conversation with them. And he gets a little came
Speaker 1: esque with the you know, the country was founded on
Speaker 1: the principles of honesty and integrity and Trump is destroying
Speaker 1: all of it. I'm like, you know, let's let's try
Speaker 1: to look at let's try to look at big picture here.
Speaker 1: So that's uh, that's where I am on all that.
Speaker 1: Um stand next up here, and uh, he writes, Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: I've really been enjoying your show in Austin, Texas well.
Speaker 1: Stand speaking of wonderful affiliates and visit it's uh. K
Speaker 1: l b J in Austin is one of the radio
Speaker 1: stations that has been kind enough to add the freedom
Speaker 1: HUD to add the Buck Section show to its lineup,
Speaker 1: and we are honored, and I really hope that the
Speaker 1: folks in Austin are enjoying the show. And I I
Speaker 1: will admit I have yet to go to Austin my
Speaker 1: whole life. I've spent so much time in Dallas because
Speaker 1: the blaze, so a lot of I've logged, you know,
Speaker 1: lots of man hours in Texas, but just not in Austin,
Speaker 1: which is a place I really want to go to.
Speaker 1: So I'm gonna go check it out. Actually, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: go check out k l b J in Austin as
Speaker 1: soon as I can. Will do an event down there, Barbecue,
Speaker 1: Barbecue and Buck. There. You know what, that's the name
Speaker 1: of our event right there, Barbecue and Buck. We just
Speaker 1: stumbled on it. We're geniuses, folks. See what we do,
Speaker 1: see the magic that we make happen. So there we go.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Dan. Please spread the word to
Speaker 1: your friends in Austin too to tune in on on
Speaker 1: k l b J. And that's gonna be it, unfortunately
Speaker 1: for the show. For this Freestyle Friday, I think we've
Speaker 1: we've covered a lot of territory today. I hope you've
Speaker 1: all had as much fun as I have. I am
Speaker 1: gonna be go meeting up with some folks and friends
Speaker 1: on the waterfront here to go chill with some of
Speaker 1: our Nonline and Black Rifle and Miss Molly and the
Speaker 1: whole squad. So I'll try to put out some photos tonight.
Speaker 1: If you see me on the waterfront team down here
Speaker 1: in Savannah, come by and say hi. Maybe we can
Speaker 1: drink some mescal together. Until next time, from down in
Speaker 1: the South Shields High