Speaker 1: Strike Force Energy veteran owned, American made, and one of
Speaker 1: the hottest new energy products on the market. Strikeforce Energy
Speaker 1: was developed by veterans for one simple reason. The fight
Speaker 1: will always follow you, and it waits for no one
Speaker 1: buck sex in here force strike Force, and I invite
Speaker 1: you this summer to join us in giving back to
Speaker 1: America's troops. Over the last three years, Strikeforce Energy has
Speaker 1: shipped millions of packets to our troops both at home
Speaker 1: and abroad. And now we're bringing this battlefield proven liquid
Speaker 1: directly to your door. Strikeforce Energy Liquid packs, available in
Speaker 1: four flavors, have zero sugar, zero calories, and are made
Speaker 1: with only the finest ingredients. For the fuel to power
Speaker 1: through your toughest fights, simply adds strike Force to sixteen
Speaker 1: to twenty ounces of water, tea, lemonade, yogurt, even a
Speaker 1: nice cold beer. Go to strike Force Energy dot com,
Speaker 1: enter discount code buck at checkout, and for every packet
Speaker 1: you buy, we will donate a packet to military members
Speaker 1: around the globe. Strike Force Energy dot Com discount code buck.
Speaker 1: Because strike Force Energy is the fuel for the fight
Speaker 1: you are entering. The freedom hunt. The media claims the
Speaker 1: biggest concern we should all have is the safety of
Speaker 1: the media. And they, of course are pointing to Trump
Speaker 1: supporters after last night's riley in Florida as the reason
Speaker 1: for this rise in concern. We'll talk about what's really
Speaker 1: going on here, and also the latest from the Muller
Speaker 1: probe and the possibility of it getting shut down. That
Speaker 1: and we're coming up on the buck Sexton Show. This
Speaker 1: is the buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission
Speaker 1: is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make
Speaker 1: no mistake American, You're a great American. Again, the buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show begins. It is a text, no, it won't.
Speaker 1: Just to give you a sense as to what's happening
Speaker 1: right now. You can hear there is a forest of
Speaker 1: foods and other chance of this trunk crowd here in Tampa, Florea.
Speaker 1: They're saying things like CNN sucks, go home and fake news. Well,
Speaker 1: obviously all of those things are false. We're staying right here.
Speaker 1: We're to do our John. They're not all rally to
Speaker 1: all the reviewers here tonight. But I think Washington is
Speaker 1: so anti Trump and the liberal media is so anti Trump.
Speaker 1: They don't understand what's happening out there. Let's just give
Speaker 1: you one example, sanctuary cities. Let let's let's let's cause
Speaker 1: for a second. Welcome to Bucks exit show. Everybody. Uh
Speaker 1: so you had you had a cost to last night
Speaker 1: there at the route. Look, I I have I have
Speaker 1: so many thoughts on this. Well, I think it's funny
Speaker 1: that people are chanting CNN sucks and go home CNN
Speaker 1: and CNN is fake news. And their response to this
Speaker 1: is that those things are not true. It's like, well,
Speaker 1: it's really a matter of opinion, dude. Um, But what
Speaker 1: ended up happening here is that there was a lot
Speaker 1: of a lot of focus on this last nd the rally.
Speaker 1: Bubbaly Trump did a phenomenal job at the rally last night.
Speaker 1: He's incredible as a live performer. He is a force
Speaker 1: of nature. He is unlike any other unscripted people say, oh,
Speaker 1: bood Obama. I'm like Obama could give a compelling left
Speaker 1: wing Democrats speech with a prompter that he had practiced
Speaker 1: beforehand on and somebody else writing it for him. But yes,
Speaker 1: he could deliver that effectively. All right, I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: say whereas Hillary can't even do that. Ah yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: really got a prompter it's just horrible, right, it hurts
Speaker 1: your ears. You don't want to see it. It's not good.
Speaker 1: Trump just gets up there and he just lets it
Speaker 1: ripped for an hour. It's it's incredible that this guy
Speaker 1: does this and he's he's making all these points and
Speaker 1: he's really getting to get the crowd that energest. You know,
Speaker 1: I'll say this, I do it a lot of different
Speaker 1: kinds of media. There's a different energy when you're in
Speaker 1: front of a live crowd like that, especially a really
Speaker 1: big crowd. I don't care if you used to speaking
Speaker 1: to millions of people on TV or millions of people
Speaker 1: on radio. It's a little bit, there's a little it's
Speaker 1: a little more intimidating, isn't the right word, But the
Speaker 1: energy is different. You gotta bring your a game. You know,
Speaker 1: there's there's no hiding whateveryone's in the room with you.
Speaker 1: You know, you can't you can't cut the commercial break
Speaker 1: what everyone's in the room with you, or in the
Speaker 1: in the arena with you, as the case may be.
Speaker 1: But here's what you get. You know that this this
Speaker 1: martyrdom complex that CNN and much of the mainstream media
Speaker 1: have was on display last night and You're getting a
Speaker 1: lot of this in the follow up to it, uh,
Speaker 1: And I want to break this down for you because
Speaker 1: it is symbolic or really emblematic of what they still
Speaker 1: don't get. Let me tell you the real situation here. Okay,
Speaker 1: Jim Acosta, by the way, I don't know him really
Speaker 1: from sing and I never met him. I just know
Speaker 1: his work, so I don't know him personally, so none
Speaker 1: of this is personal. There's some people see Ann that
Speaker 1: I know personally, and I tend I I avoid uh
Speaker 1: unfairly criticizing anyone, but I particularly look. I'll tell you
Speaker 1: if I'm friends with somebody, I'll say I'm friends with
Speaker 1: that person, and I generally won't go after them, even professionally,
Speaker 1: because I feel weird doing that. And I think that's
Speaker 1: a tough spot for some some people in the commentary
Speaker 1: business to be in sometimes. But at least I'm honest
Speaker 1: with you about it. There's only few people see Ann
Speaker 1: feel that way about. They're a handful. Uh. I don't
Speaker 1: know what cost him. I do know that he's become
Speaker 1: a almost household name for people that watch TV news,
Speaker 1: if not a household name because of the Trump opposition,
Speaker 1: he is better known wealthier, and it's gonna be able
Speaker 1: to I know that you don't want to hear this,
Speaker 1: but write his own ticket after this administration, go wherever
Speaker 1: he wants to go, or get his own show at
Speaker 1: CNN because of Trump. Now, are we really supposed to
Speaker 1: feel badly for him? I'm con used. Oh it's so hard,
Speaker 1: and they really just Oh, it's just this victimology complex
Speaker 1: that the left has. It stretches beyond identity politics. It
Speaker 1: stretches beyond you know, the way that they pander to
Speaker 1: different identity groups. Now it's the media has a victimology complex.
Speaker 1: I mean, the media thinks that they are being victimized
Speaker 1: by Trump. I keep having to point this out too,
Speaker 1: whenever they say something like, oh it's authoritarian. Look at
Speaker 1: out trumpet so authoritarian. I want to say. Authoritarians have
Speaker 1: the whole media in their pocket. Authoritarians don't have the
Speaker 1: entire media against them trying to end them and take
Speaker 1: down their regime or take down their government. Obama was
Speaker 1: much scarier for press freedom than Trump was. That's what
Speaker 1: they don't understand. Obama had the press doing his bidding,
Speaker 1: had the press asking questions when he When Obama would
Speaker 1: step out of line when Obama's Justice Department put a
Speaker 1: Fox News reporter in a in an espion indictment as
Speaker 1: a as a co conspirator, didn't charge him, but put
Speaker 1: him in the indictment. Yeah, the press corps, they made
Speaker 1: some noises about it. There's some of them who are like, well,
Speaker 1: this is troubling. They're calling Trump hitler. I mean, they're
Speaker 1: saying that he's running concentration camps at the border. They're
Speaker 1: saying that he's a he's a fascist. You want to
Speaker 1: talk fascism. Obama's Justice Apartment was actually talking about journalists
Speaker 1: being criminals for doing their jobs. Use the ESPIONA Espionage
Speaker 1: Act more than every other administration combined. Yeah, they covered it,
Speaker 1: but they covered it. Was like, well, let's for us
Speaker 1: troubling questions about press freedom. I'm not sure Obama's the
Speaker 1: best messenger for this press freedom all with trumpets. He's
Speaker 1: a fascist, he's a Nazi, he's hitler. And some of
Speaker 1: us understand the difference here, folks, people listening to the
Speaker 1: show understand the difference. But you know CNN that they
Speaker 1: forget all this stuff now and we're supposed to buy
Speaker 1: that that Trump is some terrible enemy of the press,
Speaker 1: because he says that the press of the enemy of
Speaker 1: the people. He says that large. I mean, look, he's
Speaker 1: he's not joking and then it's haha, but he's he's
Speaker 1: trolling on a little bit. He's goading them. Oh and
Speaker 1: Trump gives all kinds of access to the press. He'll
Speaker 1: sit down for interviews with you know, Maggie Haymerman of
Speaker 1: the Times and these other people who all hate his guts.
Speaker 1: I'll talk to them. Unlike, let's be very clear about this.
Speaker 1: Trump has never, unlike Obama, really thought seriously about and
Speaker 1: taking actions that made people believe that he would prosecute
Speaker 1: journalists for doing their jobs. Obama, that was a real thing.
Speaker 1: You know, with Obama, that was something you had to
Speaker 1: really consider because he had the whole press in his pocket.
Speaker 1: So there wasn't going to be this real rallying around.
Speaker 1: Oh that's right. Fox News, which was singled out, it
Speaker 1: singled out in that d o J indictment under Eric
Speaker 1: Holder's d J and also singled out by Obama for
Speaker 1: ridicule and contempt on a regular basis. That's right. Now,
Speaker 1: CNN is getting a little what they used to, you know,
Speaker 1: dish out to the other side or seeing how the
Speaker 1: other side had to take it, and they're all where,
Speaker 1: pull over the we ambulance please. And then there's a
Speaker 1: there's a bigger issue here too, which is you had
Speaker 1: these uh, you know, these journalists last night who recovering
Speaker 1: by the way, there's their security there, they're all on camera.
Speaker 1: Nobody hit anyone, Nobody threatened anyone that I that were
Speaker 1: aware of, like threatened actually harm anybody, you know, physical violence.
Speaker 1: Nothing happened. That's not the case. And we talk about
Speaker 1: what happens to conservatives and Trump supporters, that's not the
Speaker 1: case when you look at I mean that CNN. Uh.
Speaker 1: And you know, I know Dana pretty well from from
Speaker 1: working with her at the Blaze. Um. You know, I
Speaker 1: don't know her really socially, but I know her professionally.
Speaker 1: And I mean with what happened to her at that
Speaker 1: CNN gun rally thing was was an abomination. You know,
Speaker 1: people were menacing her as a woman who walked in there.
Speaker 1: And and that audience has been has been fed this
Speaker 1: line by CNN, by the analysts they put on TV,
Speaker 1: by the so called anchors were really just pundits without
Speaker 1: the the goal to really fight and stand up for
Speaker 1: their positions. Right there was hide behind this little facade.
Speaker 1: It's cowardly. That's the problem with the CNN approach to
Speaker 1: this stuff. It's cowardly. If you want to be a pundit,
Speaker 1: be a pundit, if you want to stand for if
Speaker 1: you want to be an activist, if you want to
Speaker 1: stand for issues, If your reason for getting out of
Speaker 1: bed every morning is you hate Trump, at least be
Speaker 1: a man about it, or be a strong woman about
Speaker 1: it whatever, you know what I mean, at least be
Speaker 1: honest about what's all. You know, We're just I'm just
Speaker 1: gonna sit here and tweet snarky stuff to undermine Trump
Speaker 1: all day. And I'm just gonna do one story after
Speaker 1: another on Michael of Nadio and Stormy Daniels and Russia, Russia, Russia.
Speaker 1: But but oh no, I don't. I don't. I don't
Speaker 1: want to. I'm not I'm not partisan. I don't want
Speaker 1: to have to defend anything. Oh don't play it on,
Speaker 1: back off, don't be mean to me. It really is cowardly.
Speaker 1: I mean, they could start to say at the cowardly
Speaker 1: News network. I wrote this piece for The Hiller in
Speaker 1: the week you know, I does not make me popular
Speaker 1: among the swamp set. I'm like this notion that journalists
Speaker 1: are under threat in the era of Trump. It's just garbage.
Speaker 1: It's preposterous. They were so desperate to make that terrible
Speaker 1: shooting in Baltimore about Trump, But that guy was a
Speaker 1: deranged maniac who had been coming after them for years
Speaker 1: before Trump was even in office. Nothing new with anything.
Speaker 1: And that and one other incident, which was if something
Speaker 1: you remember, if you forget exactly what it was. The
Speaker 1: guy felt like he had been passed over. It was
Speaker 1: essentially a workplace it was workplace violence. But the guy
Speaker 1: televised it. It It was a journalist to forget in North
Speaker 1: or South Carolina. I think, um that was a few
Speaker 1: years ago. Those are the only incidents of more than
Speaker 1: one person being harmed doing journalism in this country in
Speaker 1: the last thirty years. A total of eleven journalists have
Speaker 1: been killed in the United States for doing their jobs
Speaker 1: since nine team doing their jobs for any reason. By
Speaker 1: the way, so then, and you know that this includes
Speaker 1: writing stories about somebody that don't like it includes being
Speaker 1: in a dangerous neighborhood. Eleven journalists have been killed in
Speaker 1: this country. Now, I wish the number were zero, but
Speaker 1: let's not all sit around and do this. Woe as me.
Speaker 1: Journalists in America under threat? You know who was under threat?
Speaker 1: And this is one I want to spend some real
Speaker 1: time digging into this because I think that I think
Speaker 1: this is I think this is important. I think it
Speaker 1: matters because the other side doesn't get that we're not
Speaker 1: giving in on this one. We're not playing their game anymore.
Speaker 1: You know who was under threat under the Obama administration.
Speaker 1: Cops And you can say, oh, buck, but no, that's
Speaker 1: not that's not fair. And well, no, the Black Lives
Speaker 1: Matter movement, which President Obama was supportive of, which is
Speaker 1: Department of Justice was supportive of, which the media was
Speaker 1: fanning the flames of all the time. And I went
Speaker 1: to those rallies to cover them as a journalist I
Speaker 1: saw what was going on there, or to cover them
Speaker 1: as a pun it whatever I heard the chance. You know,
Speaker 1: I remember pigs in a blanket, fry him like bacon,
Speaker 1: and I remember what we want dead cops when we
Speaker 1: want it now. I remember all that, and the media was, oh,
Speaker 1: you know, man, racism is real, so you know, we
Speaker 1: can't really you can't really call this out and police
Speaker 1: officers were murdered because of that rhetoric that led. There
Speaker 1: was a direct connection between a widespread narrative that the
Speaker 1: media really created with the help of activists, and the
Speaker 1: Obama administration and the White House. Obama was there. You know,
Speaker 1: if I had a son, he would he would have
Speaker 1: looked like Trayvon. You know, Obama did not hold back.
Speaker 1: You know, the whole Mike Brown thing and everything else.
Speaker 1: There was a lot of support given for this idea
Speaker 1: that cops are racists who are hunting down black men
Speaker 1: for sport. That was what Black Lives Matter protesters were saying.
Speaker 1: And I know because I heard them say it, so
Speaker 1: I've been through the stuperilde. Let's not what they were No,
Speaker 1: that is what they were saying. That is what they
Speaker 1: were saying. And police officers were murdered because of that.
Speaker 1: And CNN was the worst offender in giving that narrative,
Speaker 1: giving that storyline, oxygen, giving it more room to burn,
Speaker 1: throwing gasoline on the fire. They were doing all of that,
Speaker 1: and now they want to lecture us about creating a
Speaker 1: hostile environment. Now now they want to tell us, oh
Speaker 1: my god, the protesters. You know, there's there's more on
Speaker 1: these books, but I've really had enough of this. I
Speaker 1: don't want to hear any more of the journalists, these
Speaker 1: these you know, cosseted, overpaid, wimpy milk post stealth liberals
Speaker 1: that go on TV and get all all all this
Speaker 1: acclaim and yeah, you know, people say, don't talk about
Speaker 1: George John cocktail parties. It's such a cliche. Okay, fine,
Speaker 1: I'll talk about color rama cocktail parties, right, I mean
Speaker 1: the fancy day, I'll talk about what goes on and
Speaker 1: Martha's Vineyard and Nantuckett and the Upper West Side. And
Speaker 1: that's actually where all these journals live. And they're being
Speaker 1: treated as heroes among their friends. Their paychecks are only
Speaker 1: getting bigger, even though their audience is getting smaller at
Speaker 1: the NIT. But they know they'll be taking care of
Speaker 1: any risks, risks please. Everybody's watching them, was like, oh,
Speaker 1: thank you for standing up for truth against Trump the tyrant.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, you're so brave. And you know, cost
Speaker 1: is just he just this is this is theater now right,
Speaker 1: we all know that he but others do it too.
Speaker 1: You know, you can't say CNN sucks? Why not? Why not?
Speaker 1: I remember covering Occupy Wall Street. As I said, and
Speaker 1: if you had a Fox News, if you had a
Speaker 1: Fox News uh signed microphone on up, if you'd signed
Speaker 1: itge that said Fox News up, people would people would
Speaker 1: get up in your face and threatened to yell at you.
Speaker 1: And nobody was, Oh Fox News. It's so sad. And
Speaker 1: that's one network, the only network, the only network that
Speaker 1: represents the other fifty percent of the country that you
Speaker 1: think could have maybe more than one network, and that
Speaker 1: something you're gonna say, like news Max or in America.
Speaker 1: But if you look at the rate things, folks, there's
Speaker 1: one network in this, Fox News. So I'm not done
Speaker 1: with this because this got this, This got further coveragetay
Speaker 1: in the White House press conference. I mean we we
Speaker 1: really should, we should really air this out, We should
Speaker 1: really dive into this a bit. I'll talk to you
Speaker 1: more about policy and immigration and all that other stuff
Speaker 1: later on on the show. This media fight right now
Speaker 1: is the center of Hey, we'll all talking about Muller
Speaker 1: probe and this Manafort, the Manaphort trial. This is like
Speaker 1: a It's a glorified tax evasion case, that's all it is.
Speaker 1: I've got some thoughts on that I'll share the two
Speaker 1: eight four or four to five eight four four nine
Speaker 1: Buck as you can tell a little fired up today, team,
Speaker 1: I don't want to hear from you. Send me or
Speaker 1: not send me, call me, or send me a tweet
Speaker 1: if you want at buck Sexton, I'll go back. But
Speaker 1: I think Washington is so anti Trump, and the liberal
Speaker 1: media saw anti Trump don't understand what's happening out there.
Speaker 1: Let's just give you one example, sanctuary cities. Eighty four
Speaker 1: of the American people believe sanctuary cities increased crime. Now
Speaker 1: every Democrat in the Senate co sponsored Senator Einstein's open
Speaker 1: border bill. There's no state in the country we're more
Speaker 1: than people favor open borders. So that the Democrats are
Speaker 1: talking themselves out on these radical left agendas, which in
Speaker 1: the Washington Post, the New York Times, and CBS News
Speaker 1: all sounds terrific. But I think when you get down
Speaker 1: to September in October, we're going to discover that there
Speaker 1: there's a red wave, not a blue wave, and that
Speaker 1: people are going to repudiate the kind of radically streamism
Speaker 1: that we're seeing emerging in the Democratic Party. There is
Speaker 1: this extremism, I mean new Newt has been it's been
Speaker 1: been you know when new it's in the sweet spot.
Speaker 1: He's pretty good and uh, he's he's been making a
Speaker 1: lot of sense these days. Well for a while. Now.
Speaker 1: You know this, this notion of sanctuary cities. I talked
Speaker 1: to you about it yesterday. There is really no good
Speaker 1: reason for this. There's nothing about sanctuary cities that respects
Speaker 1: the rule of law. There's nothing. It's just pandering from
Speaker 1: Democrats to constituencies that are in the country illegally. This
Speaker 1: this is speaking of collusion. Sanctuary cities are how the
Speaker 1: Democrats collude against the rule of law. That's what's going on.
Speaker 1: And I think people need to know that and that
Speaker 1: story I told you yesterday. I really want more people
Speaker 1: understand that that because of these sanctuary policies, the Immigrations
Speaker 1: and Customs enforcement, criminal investigators who are handling drug trafficking, uh,
Speaker 1: child sexual exploitation, human smuggling, you know, crime crime, really
Speaker 1: important issues of criminal justice and keeping communities safe, they
Speaker 1: don't get cooperation from local law enforce And that was
Speaker 1: told me by Obama's acting Ice director. Okay, so this
Speaker 1: is not I'm not looking at this on some blog
Speaker 1: somewhere you know that this guy told me to my
Speaker 1: face and somebody who was generally, you know, sympathetic at
Speaker 1: least to what Obama was trying to do on a
Speaker 1: lot of other immigration areas, but on this one, he's
Speaker 1: just like, that's not a good idea anyway. I just,
Speaker 1: you know, this is where we were as we're getting
Speaker 1: closer to mid terms. I just hope the American people
Speaker 1: remember that abolished Ice was for about a month a
Speaker 1: rallying cry of the Democrat Party until they realized, oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, that's crazy. We probably we can't fool centrists
Speaker 1: and independence into voting for us if we're calling for
Speaker 1: abolishing ICE for doing their job. But I do want
Speaker 1: to get back to what happened at the White House
Speaker 1: today in response to CNN's ambulance session. Uh, this is
Speaker 1: gonna be good, Sarah, how could be Sanders? She had
Speaker 1: a home run today in response, So we'll get to that.
Speaker 1: He's back with you now, because when it comes to
Speaker 1: the fight for truth, the buck never stops. Is the
Speaker 1: White House willing to say right now, in view of
Speaker 1: what happened with one of our TV colleagues last night,
Speaker 1: that it is wrong for his most vocal supporters to
Speaker 1: be menacing towards journalists doing their jobs in a situation
Speaker 1: like that, or in any situation, nobody was last night.
Speaker 1: They were trying to prevent a broadcaster from getting his
Speaker 1: broadcast out and yelling at his network sucks. Is that
Speaker 1: right or wrong? I'm I'm sorry, what was the first
Speaker 1: part of your question? I said, no one was being
Speaker 1: violent last night in terms of hitting anybody, and no
Speaker 1: broadcaster was broadcasting state secrets. They were trying to do
Speaker 1: stand ups at a public rally, and he had people
Speaker 1: trying to yell over them, preventing them from doing their
Speaker 1: jobs and yelling that their network sucks. On live TV.
Speaker 1: Support that or not. They really want to see if
Speaker 1: they can get on the record the White House calling
Speaker 1: out Trump supporters for saying that CNN sucks. That that
Speaker 1: seemed to be a quite quite a focus today for
Speaker 1: a few minutes there at the White House Press conference.
Speaker 1: By the way, I'm a believer in get get rid
Speaker 1: of the get rid of the cameras in the White
Speaker 1: House press conments. You know how this goes? By the way,
Speaker 1: folks speaking of the swamp and things that you learn
Speaker 1: when you're down here, you know, they are signed seating,
Speaker 1: which is very very hierarchical in the White House Briefing Room,
Speaker 1: the White House Correspondence Association, you know, the people who
Speaker 1: are in charge of the White House Correspondence Dinner. Those uh,
Speaker 1: those elitists, throne shiners, they're the ones that decide who
Speaker 1: gets to sit where in that room, and they're very
Speaker 1: involved in all this. And as I've said to you before,
Speaker 1: you know, I think the White House Correspondence Dinner, it's
Speaker 1: just the whole thing, is Ikey. I went many years ago,
Speaker 1: really my first year in media. I didn't know any better.
Speaker 1: I was like, yeah, I'll go. I was invited, I'll go.
Speaker 1: Uh it's it's first of all, it sucks. It's not fun,
Speaker 1: and you're around a lot of people who I don't
Speaker 1: really want to hang around, and it's really slow and boring,
Speaker 1: and the food is bad. So what's the point. I
Speaker 1: went to a a couple of parties thrown by some
Speaker 1: other media entities that were after parties. Those were fun.
Speaker 1: I mean, did buck Gingham style? Can neither confirm nor deny. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Gettingham style? That was awesome? So where was I on this? That?
Speaker 1: That will give you a sense of how many years ago.
Speaker 1: It was too there was there was Gangham style folks.
Speaker 1: I think there was actually a video. I don't know,
Speaker 1: somebody somebody at BuzzFeed may or may not have Gangham
Speaker 1: style buck video. Uh So, but back to the the
Speaker 1: guy saying that, oh no, look, how there's so mean
Speaker 1: to them? Ah, well, you know what. I want to
Speaker 1: give you my analysis. But first here's here's Sarah Houckeby Sanders,
Speaker 1: who's they're they're trying to box her into a corner.
Speaker 1: And I think she's at the she's kind of at
Speaker 1: the screw it part of this whole thing, where she's like,
Speaker 1: you know what, if you're just gonna take cheap shots
Speaker 1: at the president of the the time, we're gonna give it
Speaker 1: as much as we get. And uh. Here here's how
Speaker 1: she responded to this line of question in play six team. Please,
Speaker 1: the President condemns and denounces any group that would uh
Speaker 1: and violence against another individual, UM, and certainly doesn't support
Speaker 1: uh groups that would promote that type of behavior. We've
Speaker 1: we've been clear about that a number of times, uh
Speaker 1: since the beginning of the administration. On the second part
Speaker 1: of your question, Um, the President, as I just said,
Speaker 1: does not support violence against anyone and or anything, and
Speaker 1: we've been very clear, um every single time we've been
Speaker 1: asked about that. When it comes to the media, the
Speaker 1: President does think that the media holds a responsibility. Uh.
Speaker 1: We so fully support a free press, but there also
Speaker 1: comes a high level of responsibility with that. The media
Speaker 1: routinely reports on classified information and government secrets that put
Speaker 1: lives in danger and risk valuable national security tools. This
Speaker 1: has happened both in our administration and in past administrations.
Speaker 1: One of the worst cases was the reporting on the
Speaker 1: US ability to listen to Osama bin Laden's satellite phone
Speaker 1: in the late nineties. Because of that reporting, he stopped
Speaker 1: using that phone and the country lost valuable intelligence. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: it's now standard to abandon common sense ethical practices. This
Speaker 1: is a two way street. We certainly support a free press,
Speaker 1: We certainly condemn violence against anybody, but we also asked
Speaker 1: that people act responsibly, uh and report um accurately and fairly. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that this this didn't all just start today or last
Speaker 1: night at the at the Florida rally. You know, I'm
Speaker 1: sorry to have to keep repeating this because it's I know,
Speaker 1: it's uh, it's one of these events that we all
Speaker 1: wish we could kind of forget. But which political party
Speaker 1: and under which administration? Was there a mass assassination attempt
Speaker 1: of congressman against right? Which political party almost lost a
Speaker 1: bunch of its congressmen to a mass assassination? And did
Speaker 1: you know did get some of our people did get shot? Right,
Speaker 1: some congressmen did get shot? But where was that? That's right?
Speaker 1: It was Republicans of the Freedom Caucus. And who shot
Speaker 1: them a Bernie bro a Democrat while Trump's president. So
Speaker 1: the only act of truly heinous political violence at that
Speaker 1: level against elected officials that has occurred while Trump has
Speaker 1: been in office has been against Republicans. And yet we
Speaker 1: have to sit around and get lectured by CNN and
Speaker 1: their ILK about how the president occurred his violence, the
Speaker 1: president coured his violence? Here? Here, here's little test, folks,
Speaker 1: find me a news story of somebody who got punched
Speaker 1: in the face, had a drink poured on them, got
Speaker 1: slapped around because they had a Obama Biden T shirt
Speaker 1: on for all eight years of Obama in office. Maybe
Speaker 1: you'll find it, I mean, but you're gonna have to look,
Speaker 1: and I don't know if you'll find it. Good luck,
Speaker 1: you probably won't find that. Now if I ask you,
Speaker 1: if I ask you to find an incident of a
Speaker 1: Trump supporter getting hit that way, literally hit getting getting assaulted,
Speaker 1: you'd be like, well, Buck, which week you want last week?
Speaker 1: Or you want the week before that, or you want
Speaker 1: the week before that. You know this happens, it happens
Speaker 1: to our side. Okay, I'm the one who has to
Speaker 1: walk around this city and when people see me, if
Speaker 1: they recognize me from what I do, which, by the way,
Speaker 1: you know, I do conservative stuff. So I'm not saying
Speaker 1: that happens a lot. But if it does happen, or
Speaker 1: if I see a member of Team Buck, that's always exciting.
Speaker 1: But I have to think of myself. Okay, well, am
Speaker 1: I gonna have a problem here because what the mainstream
Speaker 1: media has been feeding its audience since Trump won is
Speaker 1: a steady diet of they don't care about murdered children,
Speaker 1: which is horrifically ironic because of course they're the pro
Speaker 1: abortion party, but they're saying, you know, children that get
Speaker 1: killed in mass shootings, Republicans don't care about it. That
Speaker 1: was the whole tone and tenor of that that hate
Speaker 1: fest that they said was a town Hall. I mean,
Speaker 1: CNN should be ashamed of itself for that town Hall ashamed.
Speaker 1: You'll notice, by the way, all these anchors they talk
Speaker 1: tough on CNN. When was the last time you saw
Speaker 1: one of them going to a an unfriendly political environment
Speaker 1: and try to defend their reporting. They don't do it
Speaker 1: like cowards. They snark on Twitter and then they go
Speaker 1: in their their their little privileged purchase and that they
Speaker 1: don't I've by the way, I've invited CNN anchors on
Speaker 1: this show lots of time never come on this show.
Speaker 1: I don't think that I won't. I mean, don't think
Speaker 1: that I don't. I just stopped because I kept getting
Speaker 1: told a little corporate won't allow. A corporate won allow?
Speaker 1: What's because they're cowards? Do they really want to have
Speaker 1: this debate? Here's how they debate with a CNN anchor
Speaker 1: would go on this network with me who who spent
Speaker 1: real time there and knows a lot of people on
Speaker 1: the different shows, knows their producers, knows some of what
Speaker 1: these guys and gals are really like. By the way,
Speaker 1: which also they don't like. You know, I've gotten a
Speaker 1: little bit of a peak under the hood, and it's
Speaker 1: not good. Uh. I'm would start with CNN. Is CNN
Speaker 1: a partisan network? To CNN have a point of view,
Speaker 1: the CNN a Democrat aligned news organization. They would all
Speaker 1: say no, so they start from the premise of they
Speaker 1: start from a lie, and then the conversation would just devolve.
Speaker 1: But that's they're still you know. I mean, if you
Speaker 1: had MSNBC on, they would say, yeah, we're you know, no,
Speaker 1: we're journalists. We're trying to print the facts. But you know, yeah,
Speaker 1: we have we're we're progressive or you know, we're I
Speaker 1: think they would say that. Maybe not, and maybe they're
Speaker 1: just as delusional. And I just don't know them as
Speaker 1: well because I know CNN stuff better. But that rally
Speaker 1: they had or they're not rally, uh whatever. The town
Speaker 1: hall where Dana lash showed up and Marco Rubio and
Speaker 1: Marco Rubio, I don't know what he was doing there.
Speaker 1: I don't know why he thought that was a good idea,
Speaker 1: Mark Rubio, I gotta tell you, really disappointing. You know,
Speaker 1: I think there was some raw town There was obviously
Speaker 1: some raw talent there. The guy got elected U S
Speaker 1: Senator itself made I mean, I still have respect for him.
Speaker 1: I'm not. But in the era of Trump, just you know,
Speaker 1: I don't need to hear the little model u n
Speaker 1: speech about how he knows he knows some things he's
Speaker 1: been briefed on about this or that national security issue,
Speaker 1: like let's actually get on board and get some get
Speaker 1: some wins on the board for the Republican Party here
Speaker 1: at home. And I think on that issue he has
Speaker 1: been more than lacking. So I am just I'm disappointed
Speaker 1: in a a little little Marco. That's an aside, but I
Speaker 1: just want to put that out there. But CNN had that,
Speaker 1: and then they also allowed one of the survivors of
Speaker 1: the Parkland shooting to go on TV and and say
Speaker 1: unchallenged that people that don't agree with his myriad gun
Speaker 1: control ideas, you know, we gotta listen to eighteen year
Speaker 1: eighteen year old now explained to us all gun control
Speaker 1: his mirroad gun control, I deals, don't care about dead
Speaker 1: children and have blood on their hands. That's what was
Speaker 1: being said, with anchors just nodding enthusiastically. I mean, Rachel
Speaker 1: mattaw was was fan girling when the Parkland kids came.
Speaker 1: I mean, I remember we played the audience like, oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, I'm so you know, this is so amazing.
Speaker 1: You know, it was of course all the theater for
Speaker 1: her audience too, because they were the the political tool
Speaker 1: of the left for the moment. But then they weaponized
Speaker 1: that tool by having kids, one kid in particular, David Hogg,
Speaker 1: go on TV and go after people, and go after
Speaker 1: their careers, go after their sponsors, really trying to take
Speaker 1: them down. I really trying to hurt people, get people
Speaker 1: fired for disagreeing with them on policy, and call them heartless,
Speaker 1: you know, heartless people with with blood on their hands,
Speaker 1: who don't care about dead children. And and and now
Speaker 1: CNN wants to lecture us all on discourse and civility.
Speaker 1: Do you think that they've spent a lot of time
Speaker 1: uh at at CNN or any of these other networks,
Speaker 1: any of the non Fox networks focused on what really
Speaker 1: goes on a campus. Now, when I when a college
Speaker 1: uh invites a conservative speaker, I don't want to talk
Speaker 1: about that. I don't want to talk about that issue.
Speaker 1: Do you think that they really cover how much security
Speaker 1: is needed for some of these speakers? Of course not.
Speaker 1: And I mean I just say this to you, and
Speaker 1: I was saying before about Obama Biden. You could walk
Speaker 1: around any city in America for all eight years of
Speaker 1: Obama's presidency with an Obama Biden t shirt on, and
Speaker 1: you were either going to be a d percent safe
Speaker 1: or a percent and get a high five from other
Speaker 1: leftists you walk around. I will tell you this, I
Speaker 1: would not be comfortable. And I know I look young,
Speaker 1: but you know, six ft tall, two hundred pounds, I
Speaker 1: would not be comfortable walking around Washington d c uh
Speaker 1: wearing a Maga hat for let's say a week. I
Speaker 1: want to stay not be comfortable. I don't mean I
Speaker 1: mean that, I know that I'd be looking for problems.
Speaker 1: I know that somebody would say something, they'd start something
Speaker 1: with me. And I also depends on what part of
Speaker 1: the city we're talking about, too, So that is reality.
Speaker 1: Jim Acosta with cops everywhere on TV, with people yelling
Speaker 1: you suck, well, that's also reality. But that's not a threat.
Speaker 1: Nothing bad is gonna happen to Nothing bad is gonna
Speaker 1: happen to see ann They're going to continue to be,
Speaker 1: you know, an overpaid legacy media institution that has all
Speaker 1: kinds of access and gets its way all right. And
Speaker 1: this is just complete and utter slap sism. They're obsessed
Speaker 1: with themselves. They're dishonest and how they present things. And
Speaker 1: for the very people who have done the most in
Speaker 1: this country to course in the political discourse and make
Speaker 1: it seem acceptable to really debase your political opponents, to
Speaker 1: drag them on Twitter, to make them hated, to make
Speaker 1: them untouchable, to make them less than dirt in the
Speaker 1: eyes of fellow Democrats. Right to just take Conservatives and
Speaker 1: Republicans and trash their character in their lives, get them boycotted,
Speaker 1: all that stuff. For those people now to play oh
Speaker 1: wait here, we are just be night to each other.
Speaker 1: I just I don't want I won't have it. I
Speaker 1: won't have it. And they won't even go out and
Speaker 1: make this case publicly. They'll just go on friendly media
Speaker 1: outlets or people that really, you're right, thank you for
Speaker 1: thank you for holding the administration to account, thank you
Speaker 1: for speaking truth to power. Just punks. Really, it's just punks,
Speaker 1: and the American people are onto the game. I hope
Speaker 1: that look. I hope see it changes. It wasn't as
Speaker 1: crazy five years ago. It really wasn't. It's gone into
Speaker 1: some other gear. It's some other level of wacko eight
Speaker 1: four eight to five eight four f Buck, we have
Speaker 1: much more show. I'd love to hear from you. Give
Speaker 1: me a ring, will be right back. Are we got
Speaker 1: lines lit here in the freedom hunt? Let's take some
Speaker 1: calls Herb in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Hey, Herb, Hey Buck, how
Speaker 1: you doing. I'm good man, thanks for calling in. What's up?
Speaker 1: She'll tie? Hey listen, um, First of all, let me
Speaker 1: assure you that you could come to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, any
Speaker 1: day of the week, and as an analyst, uh, I
Speaker 1: believe you will appreciate this. You could bring your bright
Speaker 1: red maga hat and any day of the week and
Speaker 1: you could disappear in the crowd. Well that sounds nice.
Speaker 1: I gotta go hang out in Harrisburg more. Absolutely, Hey listen, um,
Speaker 1: I can't believe these uh cry baby journalists are actually
Speaker 1: whining about Please make them stop. You know, you can't
Speaker 1: send that reporter over to a war zone for fear
Speaker 1: that they might you know, how, Hey, stop shooting so
Speaker 1: I can do my live shot. I mean, come on,
Speaker 1: if you can't take controversy, you ought not be there
Speaker 1: to try to report on it. Yeah, and I would
Speaker 1: just point out not a single journalist. Not a single
Speaker 1: journalist has been uh physically assaulted at a Trump rally
Speaker 1: that I am aware of, not one at all the rallies.
Speaker 1: So I mean, well, you know, I'm just presenting the facts.
Speaker 1: And how many rallies have there been, how many journalists
Speaker 1: have been to those rallies? You know, they tried this
Speaker 1: crap with the Tea Party to the Tea Party got
Speaker 1: together hundreds of thousands of Americans at rallies. How many people,
Speaker 1: how many Tea Party assaults happened? I mean, the worst
Speaker 1: thing that ever happened at Tea Party is, you know,
Speaker 1: somebody put something in the recycling that they meant to
Speaker 1: put in the trash. I mean, that's it. And and
Speaker 1: yet they acted like the Tea Party with some sort
Speaker 1: of a you know, some sort of mob assault on
Speaker 1: American democracy. It's just crazy, man. The only the only
Speaker 1: assaults I ever heard reported at a Tea Party rally
Speaker 1: where a Tea Party attendees getting assaulted. That's correct. I
Speaker 1: was gonna say that there are some union goons that
Speaker 1: assaulted some Tea Party people. I remember that happened to
Speaker 1: Shields Higher. Thanks for calling from a Harrisburg Rachel. We've
Speaker 1: got about a minute. Rachel from California, what's on your mind? Hi? So, um,
Speaker 1: I keep hearing, how are you talking about the media
Speaker 1: and how they just don't really have brains and the
Speaker 1: sense that they're just really But how much do you
Speaker 1: think that like CNN reporting and affecting the American people, Like,
Speaker 1: do you think that people actually listen to that and
Speaker 1: agree with them and then do something about it? Because
Speaker 1: I know, like, do you have CNN on in the background,
Speaker 1: because I hear a baby crying, so that would make sense?
Speaker 1: Does the baby here Accosta's voice? I would cry too.
Speaker 1: But I'm sorry you're You're asking a serious question, and
Speaker 1: I'll give you a serious answer. Um, I think that
Speaker 1: CNN is poisoning the discourse and his poisoning dialogue. But
Speaker 1: I think that also their audience is dwindling, and it's
Speaker 1: down about twenty or twenty five percent year to year,
Speaker 1: which in TV terms is big. And you know, they've
Speaker 1: got less than a million people watching, which when you
Speaker 1: compare it to Fox, you know, on on a good
Speaker 1: night Fox and some of its lineup will have three
Speaker 1: or four million people. I mean, on Hannity will have
Speaker 1: four million people watch the show. So it's pretty amazing, right,
Speaker 1: But yeah, I do think Rachel that that CNN is
Speaker 1: making things worse. Shieldsay sorry for for jumping in there quickly. Uh, team,
Speaker 1: we got a big second hour. We gotta talk about
Speaker 1: Muller probe and more. There was a time, my friends,
Speaker 1: when I would start every day drinking that commie coffee
Speaker 1: whatever was offered to me by some leftist cooperative, by
Speaker 1: a bunch of guys that's been way too much time
Speaker 1: waxing their mustaches and talking about anarchy. You know what
Speaker 1: I drink now, Black Rifle coffee. Step into the light,
Speaker 1: drink that amazing aroma of freedom from black Rifle coffee.
Speaker 1: I actually have black Rifle in my hand right now.
Speaker 1: It is delicious. It is small batch roast to order coffee.
Speaker 1: You will love it. You should also have it delivered
Speaker 1: to you. You You can join the coffee club That's what
Speaker 1: I'm in, and you get the cake up coffee rounds,
Speaker 1: or you can get a ground or a whole being
Speaker 1: delivered you every month. The companies run by a bunch
Speaker 1: of awesome veterans. These are your kind of people. Support
Speaker 1: their business and support veterans who are making sure that
Speaker 1: they support patriotism and freedom and some delicious coffee too,
Speaker 1: is it? Black Rifle Coffee dot com slash buck received
Speaker 1: fifteen percent off your order. That's black Rifle Coffee dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck for fifteen percent off Black Rifle Coffee
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. This is the coffee all of
Speaker 1: you should be drinking. Buck Sexton mission, decoding the news
Speaker 1: and disseminating information. Who is actionable intelligence? Make no mistake, American,
Speaker 1: You're a great American. Again. This is the Buck Sexton Show, Analyst. No, well,
Speaker 1: they're treating it like it's the O J Trial in
Speaker 1: terms of its importance right now. I mean, this is
Speaker 1: there's so much focus on this whole manifort situation, and
Speaker 1: I think this this should be a snooze fest, folks, right,
Speaker 1: this should be a nothing burger with cheese? Perhaps care
Speaker 1: yeer pretty sure? Mike? What is the best cheese for
Speaker 1: a burger? We did not cord to this beforehand. No, No,
Speaker 1: let's just forget all about all the calls. I know
Speaker 1: people want to talk to you, but this is an
Speaker 1: important question. We'll get to the calls in a moment. Mike,
Speaker 1: do you have producer? Mike, do you want to jump
Speaker 1: in on this one. What is the best cheese for
Speaker 1: your burger? Is the important question the folks need to know.
Speaker 1: The answer is I got with American. It's a safe
Speaker 1: choice with this audience. I see what you did there. No, well,
Speaker 1: I will eat any cheese anytime, anywhere too. I'll go American. Um.
Speaker 1: That was I'm a big fan of Um. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: that's that's the good American. What do you Yarlsberg guy?
Speaker 1: There you go, Yarlsberg. I was gonna say, I think
Speaker 1: the answer is Cheddar. I don't care that it's I
Speaker 1: think technically British. I think Cheddar is good. Wisconsin, Hey, Wisconsin, Cheddar.
Speaker 1: There you go. We didn't get John in on this
Speaker 1: from but I have a feeling he's a blue cheese
Speaker 1: crumble guy. You know he's he's secretly he's got some
Speaker 1: hipster in there. He likes a little blue cheese crumble
Speaker 1: from you know, the raw milk Commune. That's that's the
Speaker 1: that's the way to get the blue cheese going. Anyway,
Speaker 1: important questions that we have to answer sometimes during the show.
Speaker 1: I just thought of that now, Manafort though whatever he
Speaker 1: likes the most expensive cheese. I did have to note
Speaker 1: that yesterday it came out that he bought a a
Speaker 1: fifteen thousand dollar Ostrich jacket, and that's one of the
Speaker 1: things in this Manafort trial that they're all focused in on.
Speaker 1: This Judge T. S ellis the third who doesn't suffer
Speaker 1: fools lightly. He had to tell them to stop with
Speaker 1: just the the the the wealth shaming or really the
Speaker 1: bling shaming that's been going on in this trial. But
Speaker 1: I will say, an Ostrich coat, that's really something that's released.
Speaker 1: You know, you really need your Ostrich coat as you're
Speaker 1: driving around in your tesla on your way to your
Speaker 1: holistic life coach. So he's spent fifteen dollars on that,
Speaker 1: and the judge today in this trial, I had to
Speaker 1: tell that prosecutors to lay off this whole thing. But
Speaker 1: you know you can tell the interest in the Manapoort case.
Speaker 1: This is your folks. This is very straightforward. The fairer
Speaker 1: thing is just an add on because that's essentially how
Speaker 1: Mueller justifies that this falls under his purview in some way. Right,
Speaker 1: the Foreign Agent Registration Act violation, which people don't go
Speaker 1: to prison for. Usually they just say, all right, you
Speaker 1: gotta register. I mean, it's kind of a you know,
Speaker 1: you get a mulligan on this one. Usually it's not
Speaker 1: that big a deal, but they throw that in there
Speaker 1: because it at least explains why this is being even
Speaker 1: looked at by Manaford. But then when you when you
Speaker 1: go a little a little further into this, you see that, Okay,
Speaker 1: so this guy did all this consulting, and how many
Speaker 1: people even knew that until Trump? I think Trump tweeted
Speaker 1: this out today. Manaford had worked for a lot of
Speaker 1: previous administrations. Uh, Manaford had you know, spend time. By
Speaker 1: the way, do we have the CNN sucks chant? John?
Speaker 1: I just want to have that handy just in case.
Speaker 1: But we have to listen to it. Make sure there's
Speaker 1: no there's no potty mouth stuff there that people are
Speaker 1: yelling about how CNN suck. One of the the music to
Speaker 1: my ears. I think I'm gonna you know, if we
Speaker 1: were still in an era of of ring tones, I
Speaker 1: think I have to make that ring That'd be great
Speaker 1: every time I get a phone call see you on
Speaker 1: sucks Uh, good times, good times. I think for your
Speaker 1: new show intro, we should we should probably put it
Speaker 1: and then let me think about that. That that that's
Speaker 1: a bold that's a bold move, producer Mike to open
Speaker 1: the show sucks. I don't think they're gonna have me
Speaker 1: over there again anytime soon for a for a segment.
Speaker 1: I think you are going anyway, yeah, I will see
Speaker 1: the last time. The last time I was over there,
Speaker 1: a very very prominent get An executive looked at me
Speaker 1: like what and this was gosh, I don't even know.
Speaker 1: This is over a year ago. What are you doing here?
Speaker 1: I was like, WHOA, what is that? I was invited?
Speaker 1: What do you mean? What am I doing here? You
Speaker 1: guys asked me to come on this thing. This is
Speaker 1: before Trump, but that was before Trump won. So the
Speaker 1: whole different world now whole different world. But then Manaphort trial,
Speaker 1: the guy is, you know, hiding money offshore allegedly right,
Speaker 1: it hasn't been proven yet, but it doesn't look good
Speaker 1: for him. He's hiding money off shore and you know
Speaker 1: he's he's using it too. He's using that untaxed money
Speaker 1: to pay for things to support his lifestyle. Here it's
Speaker 1: a it's a pretty straightforward tax fraud case. And they're
Speaker 1: gonna really uh, they're gonna really nail him. And this
Speaker 1: is what they're going By the way, here's what Trump
Speaker 1: tweeted out. Um. Trump tweeted out that Paul Manafort this
Speaker 1: was earlier today. Paul Manafort worked for Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole,
Speaker 1: and many other highly prominent and respected political leaders. He
Speaker 1: worked for me for a very short time. Why didn't
Speaker 1: government tell me that he was under investigation? These old
Speaker 1: charges have nothing to do with collusion, a hoax, that's true.
Speaker 1: The fascination folks with menaphort is they've just they've created
Speaker 1: this narrative in people's minds that somehow there's something Manafort
Speaker 1: Russia putin Facebook bought related that any day now is
Speaker 1: gonna come out. I'm telling you that's not gonna happen.
Speaker 1: You already know that's not gonna happen. But I'm just
Speaker 1: reaffirming no way, no way. But this is really an
Speaker 1: extension of Trump' arrangement syndrome. And in fact, not not
Speaker 1: to get all all weepy and and Acosta like here,
Speaker 1: but I think it's really unseemly to see so many
Speaker 1: people reacting with glee to the fact that a a
Speaker 1: an American for the crime of hiding taxes from the
Speaker 1: hiding money from the government it's gonna spend the rest
Speaker 1: of his He's probably gonna die in prison. Now, he's
Speaker 1: gonna spend the rest of his life in prison if
Speaker 1: he's convicted on all this. You know, he's got a family,
Speaker 1: you know, man of Ford probably probably has a dog,
Speaker 1: probably loves his dog. He's got a family, loves his family.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, he's he's a person, and they're
Speaker 1: just they want this guy crushed. And it really reminds
Speaker 1: me of what happened with Scooter Libby in that sense.
Speaker 1: They hated Scooter Libby. Oh my gods, They're calling him
Speaker 1: a traitor and all this terrible stuff, and it was
Speaker 1: just he became the target of the rage that had
Speaker 1: built up against the Bush administration. And MANA. Ford is
Speaker 1: now a target of the anti Trump rage. And I'm
Speaker 1: not saying Manafort. You know, with Libby, they just they
Speaker 1: just did him dirty. That's a whole different thing. But
Speaker 1: with with man of Fort, Okay, so the guy cheated
Speaker 1: on his taxes allegedly. I mean, it looks looks like
Speaker 1: you probably did. But that's what they're saying, cheating on
Speaker 1: those taxes. You know, if I told you that somebody
Speaker 1: cheated on their taxes and you were sitting down and
Speaker 1: we're all having lunch, and he was sitting there with us,
Speaker 1: would you get up and leave? No, you probably say okay,
Speaker 1: that sucks. You know, you might you might say that sucks.
Speaker 1: You got caught, But you'd probably say, all right, you know,
Speaker 1: you pay your debt to society. You know, Okay, it
Speaker 1: doesn't make it like a terrible person. It's a crime.
Speaker 1: You gotta you gotta answer for it. Fine, but not
Speaker 1: that big a deal in the grand scheme of things.
Speaker 1: And like the cosmic existential why are we here? You know,
Speaker 1: the the millions of dollars that Manaford didn't pay to
Speaker 1: the the U. S. Treasury makes zero difference to anyone, folks.
Speaker 1: I'm not justifying. I'm not saying you don't go to
Speaker 1: prison for it, but I'm just saying it really doesn't.
Speaker 1: You know, the victim here is the United States Treasury.
Speaker 1: And if you were to aggregate this out or not
Speaker 1: or disaggregate this, I mean you'd see that. You know,
Speaker 1: Paul Manaford probably stole the equivalent of point zero zero
Speaker 1: zero zero zero one pennies from you or something, so
Speaker 1: I know he's gonna pay his debt to society, but
Speaker 1: it looks like he's gonna go to prison for a
Speaker 1: very very long time. I just find it unseemly and
Speaker 1: unnerving that people are celebrating this so much, like, yeah,
Speaker 1: we got him, all right, so he's a dirty tax
Speaker 1: cheat that really made Does this really make people feel
Speaker 1: better about themselves at night? That this guy got nailed
Speaker 1: because he was foolish enough. And I've seen this with
Speaker 1: other people that got you know, they got close. It's
Speaker 1: kind of the Icarus effect, right, those of you who
Speaker 1: are Greek mythology fans, remember Icarus built the wings, got
Speaker 1: too close to the melted the wax, and the wings
Speaker 1: felled the sea. I wish do more Greek mythology on
Speaker 1: the show Man. That's one thing we haven't worked in
Speaker 1: a while. But I've got my handsful now that I've
Speaker 1: committed to doing uh the Siege of Malta official Shields
Speaker 1: Shields High podcast, so that and and this month. I've
Speaker 1: committed to it, but cannot tell alive once he commits
Speaker 1: he has to do it. I just don't think this
Speaker 1: Man of Foord thing is is nearly as interesting as
Speaker 1: so many of my my media colleagues do. But that's
Speaker 1: because they view this as Manaford is getting the you know,
Speaker 1: the the two minutes hate from the mainstream media about Trump.
Speaker 1: He's become the vessel for the scapegoat for anti Trump
Speaker 1: is um. And the fact that they've gone through everything.
Speaker 1: I mean, they rated his apartment, you know, the early
Speaker 1: raid in the morning, they got they used a key.
Speaker 1: They don't even know they got the key. I think
Speaker 1: that came up today. Uh, you know, the fact they
Speaker 1: did all this stuff, they went after him so hard,
Speaker 1: and they still haven't out on any Russia collusion. I
Speaker 1: think that tells you what you really need to know here.
Speaker 1: I think that tells you that there's no Russia collusion
Speaker 1: to speak of. I don't have time to get into
Speaker 1: the collusion is is or is not a crime thing
Speaker 1: today because we did that yesterday. And I'm noticing that
Speaker 1: there's this shift, just mark my words on this. They're
Speaker 1: now saying, well, conspiracies a crime, and they're gonna try
Speaker 1: to play this game of collusion is a political offense
Speaker 1: and conspiracies their criminal offense, and they're gonna they're moving
Speaker 1: the goalpost. So when they don't get conspiracy charges, they're
Speaker 1: gonna say, well, collusion is a political charge, and that's
Speaker 1: what we've proven, not in a court of law, but
Speaker 1: in the court of public opinion, as can only be
Speaker 1: shown in a mid term election. That they will say
Speaker 1: is a referendum on Trump and that if they win
Speaker 1: the House, they will then impeach him. Right, that's the
Speaker 1: whole playbook. I just took you through the Democrats playbook
Speaker 1: going into this midterm election, and that's what I reallys
Speaker 1: the happening here. But you know, one thing that's come
Speaker 1: up a lot is the FBI's disparate treatment of threats
Speaker 1: to the Trump campaign versus threats to other campaigns. Why
Speaker 1: didn't they, as Trump pointed out, they didn't let him
Speaker 1: know that they were going after his campaign? Why is
Speaker 1: that the case? But in other cases they have the
Speaker 1: FBI did step it, notably with Hillary Clinton. We've actually
Speaker 1: got John Solomon, who's my colleague here at the Hill,
Speaker 1: who's got a piece up on this. We're gonna discuss
Speaker 1: it with him now, burning up the charts, and everyone's
Speaker 1: reading this one said, WHOA, what's going on here? Why
Speaker 1: does Hillary get protected by the FBI when it comes
Speaker 1: to any Russian agent of influence? But agents of influence
Speaker 1: were encouraged almost it seems, by the FBI to penetrate
Speaker 1: Trump's campaign. We will get into that and uh much
Speaker 1: more coming up, teams, So stay with me. I don't
Speaker 1: know about you, but I end up checking way too
Speaker 1: many times to see is my door locked? Did I
Speaker 1: leave the gas on? Did did I leave a window open?
Speaker 1: And I'm I'm gone a little paranoid about that stuff.
Speaker 1: But you know what's better than being paranoid, folks, having
Speaker 1: a home security system that you know, you can trust,
Speaker 1: that you can check in on while you're away. You
Speaker 1: don't have to call a neighbor and say, can you
Speaker 1: look in safe and broke? No, no, no, no no no.
Speaker 1: You can download the simply Safe app and you can
Speaker 1: monitor all the different systems in your home via the app.
Speaker 1: I have the app on my phone. I have a
Speaker 1: simply Safe security system at home. This is all you're
Speaker 1: gonna need. Simply Safe protects over two million people. And that's,
Speaker 1: by the way, why it's become a billion dollar company.
Speaker 1: All right, Order your simply Safe system now. My listeners
Speaker 1: get free shipping and free returns. Visit simply safe dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck that's simply Safe dot com slash buck
Speaker 1: to protect your home today was simply safe. Simply safe
Speaker 1: s I m p l I Safe dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: Hey everybody, welcome back. So you know we have a
Speaker 1: piece here by John Solomon, who runs Digital at the Hill.
Speaker 1: He's also a well known investigative journalists. You see him
Speaker 1: a lot on Hannity Show on Fox News. He's actually
Speaker 1: with me in studio. The piece is the real Maria
Speaker 1: Bouccina scandal. FBI could have prevented it. John, thanks so
Speaker 1: much for joining. Glad to be here. All right, so John,
Speaker 1: tell us what happened here. We've got a tale of
Speaker 1: two Russian Russian agents as you start out here, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's exactly right. So when people look and say has
Speaker 1: there been disparate treatment in the FBI, bias or just
Speaker 1: playing different approaches, I think this is one that's going
Speaker 1: to stand out to people. In Tourni eleven, there was
Speaker 1: a Russian spy ring led by a woman named Anna
Speaker 1: Chapman and uh as soon as she activated, she was
Speaker 1: a sleeper selling as soon as she activated, and one
Speaker 1: of her agents, UH, Cynthia Murphy was her American name,
Speaker 1: went to try to get to towards Hillary Clinton and
Speaker 1: get some political connections. A donor, Allan Patrick off close
Speaker 1: to Hillary Clinton. The FBI rolled up the whole ring.
Speaker 1: They took no chances, they didn't want any compromising of
Speaker 1: US officials. So that's that's the That was the gold
Speaker 1: standard of how the FBI dealt with Russian spies or
Speaker 1: Russian influence agents. Now, as fast forward to two weeks ago,
Speaker 1: when the FBI suddenly arrested a woman named Maria Bettina.
Speaker 1: What I reported this column is that the FBI knew
Speaker 1: since and maybe even earlier, that she was a Russian
Speaker 1: agent of influence, that she was trying to make inroads
Speaker 1: with conservative politicians, that she was having access to people
Speaker 1: who had security clearances, governors, members of Congress, former national
Speaker 1: security advisors, former ambassadors. And yet, unlike the Anna Chapman
Speaker 1: scenario when they were going after conservatives, the Russians weren't
Speaker 1: rolled up. Maria Bettina had free access for basically four
Speaker 1: years UH to to make influence and and UH access
Speaker 1: to the conservative network of money donors, big big presidential candidates,
Speaker 1: even President Trump, and they didn't roll her up. And
Speaker 1: people are asking the question, well, why do you roll
Speaker 1: up one when they get close to Hillary Clinton, and
Speaker 1: you don't roll up the other one when they get
Speaker 1: close to conservatives, and uh, the FBI doesn't have a
Speaker 1: good answer for that. Yeah, it seems to echo what
Speaker 1: Trump has said about how if there were problems with
Speaker 1: the Russians trying to penetrate his campaign, why was he
Speaker 1: as a presidential contender, Why wasn't his campaign informed of it.
Speaker 1: It seems like there's a double standard or john for
Speaker 1: what constitutes an actionable national security threat versus what the
Speaker 1: bureau decides to let slide or or let play out. Well,
Speaker 1: I say in here that one of the interesting things
Speaker 1: that this these two cases happened under two separate FBI directors.
Speaker 1: Bob Mueller rolled up the Anna Chapman ring, and Bob
Speaker 1: Muller was a product of post nine eleven. He was
Speaker 1: the first FBI director after nine eleven, and he preached
Speaker 1: that he was going to change the FBI right. He
Speaker 1: was going to make sure that on counter terrorism and
Speaker 1: counter intelligence they stopped worrying about prosecutions and they worried
Speaker 1: about preemption and prevention. You probably remember some of this
Speaker 1: when you were at the CIA, Buck that that the
Speaker 1: FBI was trying to transform itself. James Coby comes in,
Speaker 1: and I think he brings back to the FBI the
Speaker 1: old pre nine eleven sentiment. Uh, prosecution is the way
Speaker 1: we go. We get headlines, we get glory, we can
Speaker 1: pat ourselves on the black. And the difference is that uh,
Speaker 1: Bob Mueller's team rolled up an agent as soon as
Speaker 1: they posed a threat to Hillary Clinton, and Maria Bettina
Speaker 1: has left to just run wild in America for four years.
Speaker 1: In fact, the government gives her a student visa after
Speaker 1: the evidence is gathered. The FBI sits on her for
Speaker 1: eighteen months and watch what she does in secret surveillance. Uh.
Speaker 1: They allow the embassy in Moscow to take two congressmen
Speaker 1: to meet her in um in St. Petersburg, even though
Speaker 1: they have all of this open source intelligence of what
Speaker 1: she's doing. I think if you're Donald Trump and a conservative,
Speaker 1: you're gonna feel disserved when you compare it to the
Speaker 1: way Hillary Clinton's team got treated. And that that's the
Speaker 1: real question. Then the question becomes why is it incompetence
Speaker 1: a change of philosophy, or was somebody in the FBI
Speaker 1: having a bias and hoping he could develop a case
Speaker 1: that one day would embarrass the Republicans. We don't know
Speaker 1: the answer. Why, you know, speaking of of the wire,
Speaker 1: why is the Boutina case not under the mull umbrella
Speaker 1: people that Yeah, absolutely. I think even Maria Bettina his
Speaker 1: lawyers are wonder that allowed in court. I think that
Speaker 1: is a good question, which is if Bob Mueller's uh
Speaker 1: investigating a collusion in Russia efforts to influence the election.
Speaker 1: This is a woman that in sixteen had access to
Speaker 1: the president, his son, and numerous Now there's anything a
Speaker 1: llegs wrong by them, but numerous political leaders, numerous presidential candidates,
Speaker 1: Santorum and Governor Walker Uh. And yet through all that
Speaker 1: there's no warning. And then afterwards it doesn't appear that
Speaker 1: the guy who's supposed to be looking at Russian election
Speaker 1: interference thinks it's a big deal, so he kicks it
Speaker 1: or allows it to go to the Washington U. S.
Speaker 1: Attorney's office. There's two theories of thought and people have
Speaker 1: talked to. One is he doesn't think she was a
Speaker 1: big deal, that this was sort of a low level,
Speaker 1: influenced peddaling scheme. Or two he sees some fault in
Speaker 1: the FBI that he used to preach preemption too. And
Speaker 1: now they let this one go all the way through
Speaker 1: until they can make a great prosecution case, and he
Speaker 1: just doesn't want to be near it. But it's pretty clear,
Speaker 1: at least at this point, Bob Muler wants nothing to
Speaker 1: do with this case. The pieces up on Hill Dot TV,
Speaker 1: so folks can read it there the real Maria Bucina scandal.
Speaker 1: FBI could have prevented it. Also. I managed to get
Speaker 1: in a question about this to Devin Newness, which we
Speaker 1: have linked into the piece you can see to give
Speaker 1: you a little additional context. John, before we let you go, Uh,
Speaker 1: what do you make of the referral to the Southern
Speaker 1: District of New York that Mueller's team made about some lawyers,
Speaker 1: but not just lawyers. The reporter on this in the
Speaker 1: little Sketchy one had been a counsel to Obama in
Speaker 1: the White House. These are very prominent, very connected. We
Speaker 1: have very connected Democrat lawyers to Pesto, you know. And
Speaker 1: there's a possible Foreign Agent Registration Act violation tied to this.
Speaker 1: What's going on there? I think that uh, Special Counsel
Speaker 1: Mauler is trying to keep his investigation as narrow as possible.
Speaker 1: It's not going to be a kitchen sink. He is
Speaker 1: signaling it's not going to be a kitchen seink. He
Speaker 1: kicks Maria Bettin there, right. He kicks Michael Cohen to
Speaker 1: the New York District, a southern just go New York,
Speaker 1: even though clearly Cohen might have some relevant information. He
Speaker 1: kicks these other lawyers who were working in concert with
Speaker 1: or had something to do with Ukraine at the same
Speaker 1: time as Paul Manafort. So he's clearly signaling, Listen, I
Speaker 1: got a very narrow mandate and I'm sticking to it.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna get poked for expanding my mandate. I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna be Janet Reno and Ken Starr or Lawrence
Speaker 1: Walsh in the Reagan years. Uh this, I'm gonna get
Speaker 1: my job done as quickly and get out of dodge
Speaker 1: as quickly as I can. That's the what my reporting
Speaker 1: indicates from inside his shop. And uh and so anything
Speaker 1: that's answllary that doesn't directly relate to his question. Uh,
Speaker 1: you can see. And today there's another development, right, the
Speaker 1: president's lawyers got information about exactly what Bob Mueller wants
Speaker 1: to ask about. It's not about collusion, it's about obstruction.
Speaker 1: They only want to ask about the firing of James Combe.
Speaker 1: It appears that gives us a lot of guidance that
Speaker 1: Bob Mueller is narrowing down and maybe even winding down
Speaker 1: where he's at Hill dot TV. Everybody to check it out,
Speaker 1: the real Maria Bettina scandal. FBI could have prevented it.
Speaker 1: John Solomon is the author. John, thank you for joining
Speaker 1: to be with you back. The team will be right back.
Speaker 1: He's holding the line for America. Buck sex in his
Speaker 1: back and when not going to be reduced to their
Speaker 1: vision of America. We're not going to be reduced to
Speaker 1: their selfishness and their isolation and their division. That is
Speaker 1: not who we are. We're not going backwards. We're gonna
Speaker 1: go forward. We're gonna stand, and we're gonna rise, and
Speaker 1: we're gonna resist this administration. We will not be diminished,
Speaker 1: we will not be demeaned. We're gonna fight back. But
Speaker 1: we are right and they are long. We're gonna protect
Speaker 1: our health care system. It's the best in the nation.
Speaker 1: And we're gonna treat one another with the love, indignity,
Speaker 1: love and dignity. We're gonna protect our healthcare. We're gonna
Speaker 1: make sure that we only yeoll, because when we yell,
Speaker 1: we get a point across, and our faith New York
Speaker 1: accent comes across even more strong. Cuomo out. You know, healthcare, folks,
Speaker 1: is something that everyone's gonna be talking about now for
Speaker 1: the first time in a while going into the mid germs.
Speaker 1: That and I'm gonna say it, I think Republicans have
Speaker 1: done a a poor job um on on healthcare going
Speaker 1: into the mid germs in terms of the messaging. You know,
Speaker 1: we had a poll last month year at the Hill
Speaker 1: a pull that healthcare was a top issue for voters,
Speaker 1: and healthcare is going to continue to be a top
Speaker 1: issue for voters. So, you know, here's the here's the
Speaker 1: bottom line, folks. Obamacare is a failure. Obamacare is not
Speaker 1: what was promised, is not what they said it would be.
Speaker 1: And then they had to try and protect us from
Speaker 1: some of the crappier parts of the law at least
Speaker 1: to extend us extended out longer, so we would take
Speaker 1: longer to figure out what was going on. Um But
Speaker 1: I don't think you know, if I asked you right now,
Speaker 1: what are the Republicans, what are the Republicans offering when
Speaker 1: it comes to uh, healthcare. You know, it's not enough
Speaker 1: just to say, well, single payer is idiotic and we
Speaker 1: can't do that and it's too expensive anything else. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that that's true. That is true, But we have to
Speaker 1: offer an alternative to that. You Now, we have to
Speaker 1: do something that's more than just point out that. Uh.
Speaker 1: You know, there are there are a lot of Democrats
Speaker 1: out there who don't know the first thing about anything.
Speaker 1: So you know, there are some areas where I'd really
Speaker 1: like to see Republicans take the lead. And this is
Speaker 1: one of them. Insurers there something that's gonna be double
Speaker 1: digit increases folks in premiums. Uh, So you're you're gonna
Speaker 1: have a big premium hike. And you know, if we're
Speaker 1: if we're counting on people to remember what Obamacare did
Speaker 1: and how it drives premiums up and how it's terrible
Speaker 1: for the health care system, I think we may be
Speaker 1: very disappointed when the votes are finally tallied up in
Speaker 1: the midterm election. So you know, this, this is a problem. Uh.
Speaker 1: And there's some other areas of this. You know, Medicare party,
Speaker 1: which people say is great, but it's also really expensive.
Speaker 1: We probably want to rain some of that in and
Speaker 1: figure out how to bring down costs. And oh, I
Speaker 1: had on Senator Ron Johnson today we talked about the
Speaker 1: right to try legislation. So that'll mean that now, if
Speaker 1: you really, really really want a drug that hasn't gotten
Speaker 1: all the way through f d A approval, you can
Speaker 1: do it if you can afford it. You've mind, some
Speaker 1: of these drugs cost several hundred thousand dollars. But you know,
Speaker 1: I just I wish there was a more cohesive message
Speaker 1: because remember, they did not repeal Obamacare. They didn't even
Speaker 1: skinny repeal Obamacare, and that leaves open territory for Democrats
Speaker 1: to come up with a counter narrative about what's going
Speaker 1: on here, leaves open territory for people like Cuomo to
Speaker 1: be like, we love our healthcare system. When I go
Speaker 1: into a doctor, he puts the shiny metal thing on
Speaker 1: my chest and it is a little cold, but it
Speaker 1: allows him to hear my heartbeat, which is good because
Speaker 1: if my heart was not beating, I believe I would
Speaker 1: have a serious medical problem. So that's what they offer you.
Speaker 1: You know, the other side has no has no solutions
Speaker 1: other than to pretend that gonna get you a single
Speaker 1: payer system, which would be absolutely ruinous. Um, but that
Speaker 1: leaves because the Republicans haven't established a cohesive narrative on
Speaker 1: this one. You might have Democrats you start playing games with, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm actually for your more choice in hospitals
Speaker 1: and blah blah, and you know, we'll work within the
Speaker 1: system and you know, doing doing a little sort of dance,
Speaker 1: a little shuffle in the middle between the issues. And
Speaker 1: you know, every every election is local, right, folks. This
Speaker 1: is when you get the Connor Lamb effect. This guy
Speaker 1: in Pennsylvania who if you look at me talking to
Speaker 1: me like it sounds like guy might be Republican. Then
Speaker 1: he goes, well, I'm you know, I'm pro choice and
Speaker 1: pro union and pro Obamacare, and you're going down the
Speaker 1: whole list, you know, pro legal alien, the whole thing.
Speaker 1: So if they can pull that stuff off, you know,
Speaker 1: I I don't even know what is the what is
Speaker 1: the healthcare healthcare pitch from the Republicans right now? They
Speaker 1: did not manage to repeal Obamacare, and I think that
Speaker 1: that is a that's a a big miss, and they
Speaker 1: don't have a clear plan They've gone with people, so
Speaker 1: that's one area of vulnerability. I've got to be honest
Speaker 1: with you, it's an area of vulnerability I think going
Speaker 1: into the midterms. It creates concerns for me um and
Speaker 1: and it could resulting because you know what happens if
Speaker 1: they take the House. This turns into impeachment central. That's
Speaker 1: what ends up happening in d C. We're just gonna
Speaker 1: talking impeachment all the time, and everyone's gonna go into
Speaker 1: their corner and we're gonna spend essentially the next two
Speaker 1: years in a protracted presidential re election battle. Congress is
Speaker 1: gonna be largely irrelevant. Nothing is gonna get done, and
Speaker 1: that's why it's so important that the Republicans keep the
Speaker 1: House and keep the Senate. You know, I'd also like
Speaker 1: to see them take some bigger risks on the legislation
Speaker 1: they're putting forward, But you know, I don't know these days.
Speaker 1: You know, you've got the Mitch mcconnells, the Paul Ryan's
Speaker 1: calling the shots, not not non occuraging. I we got
Speaker 1: other stuff that I want to hit, So stay right there, team.
Speaker 1: So far, the Democrats haven't given us any votes, and
Speaker 1: that's because they will do anything they can to not
Speaker 1: help the Trump agenda. Brett Kavanaugh, highest education, best grades,
Speaker 1: best test best everything. They thought fifteen years ago he
Speaker 1: was going to be a Supreme Court judge. Look at
Speaker 1: Justice Gorsuch. How good is he? Not allowing these great
Speaker 1: people to serve that country. It's a disgrace. So Trump
Speaker 1: making a case for Cavanal last night, it is a disgrace.
Speaker 1: And the people who are opposing Cavanaugh just always end
Speaker 1: up looking one of my favorite words recently, un serious. Right,
Speaker 1: they look buffoonish, clownish. What's the problem? Oh? The the
Speaker 1: the currently serving judge on the DC Court of Appeals,
Speaker 1: which is considered the stepping stone to the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: by most of who watch these things closely. And the
Speaker 1: guy who has the best legal pedigree you could possibly have,
Speaker 1: who everyone says is fair minded and decent and kind
Speaker 1: and good and brilliant, who Elena Kagan hired when she
Speaker 1: was dean of Harvard Law School. That person is somehow
Speaker 1: unqualified for I mean, I I saw this video today,
Speaker 1: and I try not to be nasty, even about politicians.
Speaker 1: And I know I don't get personal, but I try
Speaker 1: not to be too full of ridicule and snark. Although
Speaker 1: sometimes I fail and you get Kirsten. By the way,
Speaker 1: can we John, should the name be Kirsten or Kristen?
Speaker 1: I think we can only have one. I think no, no,
Speaker 1: I'm not saying what is her name? It's it's she's Kirsten. Uh, Jilip,
Speaker 1: Wait is it? I just messed myself up as a Kurston.
Speaker 1: It's the only execute failure exactly exactly. Uh but anyway, No,
Speaker 1: it's it's gosh. The point I'm trying to make here, John,
Speaker 1: is that there should only be one name because they're
Speaker 1: too close together and people get them wrong. It's Kirsten,
Speaker 1: Gil Gillibrand, Alright, but we can only have one of
Speaker 1: these names. It can't be Kirsten or Kristen or Yearston
Speaker 1: because like there's kids Yeerston, Nielsen or whatever. It gets
Speaker 1: very confusing. Alright. Anyway, Jilah Brand, who is a Cenator
Speaker 1: from New York my home state, I guess not anymore
Speaker 1: now my home states. Technically this I'm I'm a technically
Speaker 1: a swamped while I was terrible, good for access, good
Speaker 1: for the show, but so swampy. But here's what Gillibrand
Speaker 1: said today. Just you know, I had to get into
Speaker 1: talking points, let it rip. Help all of you stands
Speaker 1: up against having first step in actually overturning Robi Wayne,
Speaker 1: the first step in making sure women don't have reproductive
Speaker 1: rights in this country, the first step in making sure
Speaker 1: that women don't have basic civil rights and civil liberties.
Speaker 1: This is a moment where we all have to fight back.
Speaker 1: All of us have to be organized, We have to
Speaker 1: make sure we are hard. We have to reach out
Speaker 1: to all our friends and everyone we care about in
Speaker 1: all things the States. This has to be something that
Speaker 1: we all stand together and fight against. Dutch Kavanaugh will
Speaker 1: be horrible for women's basic civil rights and civil liberties,
Speaker 1: and against what the heck is she talking about, folks,
Speaker 1: that's a sitting senator. Some people talk about her as
Speaker 1: a a possible presidential contender, although that's that's a joke.
Speaker 1: Can you can you imagine Trump against her in a debate?
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just not nonstarter. And I really mean
Speaker 1: that she strikes me as a deeply unimpressive person. From
Speaker 1: all the things, all the speeches, all the interviews, everything
Speaker 1: I've seen this, I don't know what what there is
Speaker 1: here to get excited about. For for for Democrats, I'm
Speaker 1: even talking about how I disagree with her, but you
Speaker 1: hear the things that she says there, and this all
Speaker 1: ties in, you know why they don't want Kavanaugh? Why
Speaker 1: then Kavana is not the guy here the way reproductive rights?
Speaker 1: This is a an Orwellian term in the truest sentiment.
Speaker 1: What what does this even mean? Why can't they just
Speaker 1: say abortion? If abortion is fine? Why can't you just
Speaker 1: say abortion if abortion is as I believe you can
Speaker 1: make a very clear case the single most important right
Speaker 1: to the modern Democratic Party, and the thing that they
Speaker 1: the thing that really defines the Democratic Party is that
Speaker 1: there's no room for pro life or is the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party anymore none? Uh. People say, well, I'm personally pro life,
Speaker 1: as in a lot of ways, that's even worse to
Speaker 1: be personally pro life, so you know what what's ethical
Speaker 1: and what's not. Apparently, but then in your public life
Speaker 1: vote alongside the Nancy Pelosi's and the the abortion on
Speaker 1: demand all nine all nine months of her pregnancy crowd,
Speaker 1: this is what his issues where, you know, folks, abortion
Speaker 1: is there's not there's not a there's not a two
Speaker 1: ways about it. There's not a you know, there's not
Speaker 1: some Oh, you know, it's it's this is just complicated.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, it is a right and wrong issue.
Speaker 1: But but you'll notice the way she talks about it,
Speaker 1: and it's as part of her opposition to Kavanaugh. She's saying, oh,
Speaker 1: reproductive rights, civil rights, What civil rights does Kavana want
Speaker 1: to take away from women? And a lot of us
Speaker 1: sit here and say, I don't even believe that it's
Speaker 1: the I don't even believe that it's the role of
Speaker 1: judges to to do the things that Democrats are worried about,
Speaker 1: meaning that they're supposed to rule the constitutionality of laws.
Speaker 1: They're not supposed to come up with new laws just
Speaker 1: because they like something or don't like something. So I also,
Speaker 1: you know that their fears in a sense give you
Speaker 1: an idea of how Democrats view the Supreme Court. Their
Speaker 1: fears give you a sense of what what they would
Speaker 1: like to have and what they would have if they
Speaker 1: got one of their people in the White House. So
Speaker 1: I'm sorry the well in the way that's true, but
Speaker 1: also on on the Supreme Court, on the on the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court, So you know, I see this stuff about
Speaker 1: the capital is gonna get through, folks. I'm pretty confident
Speaker 1: about it. And you know, Democrats, I think have already
Speaker 1: they've spent themselves to sugree or they're still so focused
Speaker 1: on anti trump Ism that all that rage and all
Speaker 1: that angst and anger and victory, all that they would
Speaker 1: normally ordinarily try to mobilize for the purposes of stopping
Speaker 1: a Supreme Court pick, that is, they don't have it
Speaker 1: because they're they're still all focused on Trump and Mueller
Speaker 1: and Russia and all this stuff. That's where they are
Speaker 1: on this one. That's the the problem as I as
Speaker 1: I see it, um, you know, and then there's there's
Speaker 1: one other thing, by the way, and I have to
Speaker 1: do it with Kagan. I mentioned her before. The Daily
Speaker 1: Caller reported on this earlier in the week that Justice
Speaker 1: Kagan fears politicized confirmations are destroying faith in public courts.
Speaker 1: I saw this tweet and I thought to myself, you know,
Speaker 1: this reminds me of the way the media views They
Speaker 1: never understand that you don't get to just pick the
Speaker 1: date when all consciousness begins, or you don't get to
Speaker 1: artificially say, well, I'm worried about what's happened in the
Speaker 1: last six months, and then the rest of us say,
Speaker 1: what about the last six years? And this notion of
Speaker 1: a politicized confirmation battle first a lot of stretches back
Speaker 1: for decades, but it only really became an issue when
Speaker 1: liberals on the court started writing lass and then it
Speaker 1: was clear that progressivism in this country and the American
Speaker 1: left viewed the role of the Supreme Court as a
Speaker 1: super legislature. And then it became an arms race to
Speaker 1: try and get conservatives or liberals on the court. But
Speaker 1: liberals politicized at first, and this notion of a swing
Speaker 1: vote as kind of the the balance. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is just this is a band aid on the overall problem.
Speaker 1: We shouldn't be we shouldn't be thinking about conservatives or
Speaker 1: liberals in the Supreme Court. We should be thinking about
Speaker 1: good judges who interpreted the law. And I have an
Speaker 1: understanding of the Constitution and some deference to pressident, but
Speaker 1: also understanding that the ultimately this is about upholding and
Speaker 1: defending the Constitution via the law. And I just think
Speaker 1: it's fascinating that now that the political fights around the
Speaker 1: open over the Supreme Court, there's some liberals expressing regret
Speaker 1: about it. It's just because they're about to lose, folks.
Speaker 1: That's why they have regrets about it. That's the problem.
Speaker 1: And just like with with the media's I was saying,
Speaker 1: they they don't like all these attacks on the media
Speaker 1: and everything else. That well, when they had a monopoly
Speaker 1: on the national conversation, which they did for many decades
Speaker 1: via the media, at least I'm not playing the media conversation.
Speaker 1: You know that that was fine. Now that's gone, and
Speaker 1: now they're worried about people not trusting the media. Okay, well,
Speaker 1: that lack of trust didn't come out of nowhere, just
Speaker 1: like our concerns about politicization of the Supreme Court didn't
Speaker 1: come out of nowhere. But you know, this is our
Speaker 1: liberalcy of the world. We've got a big hour three
Speaker 1: coming up. Talk about immigration a little bit, and uh
Speaker 1: talk about the whether the wall is gonna get built
Speaker 1: or not, the shutdown fight that is looming. We've got
Speaker 1: a lot of things to discuss, my friends, So please
Speaker 1: do plan on staying around for that eight four four
Speaker 1: n eight to five. Buck if you care to call in.
Speaker 1: Also Facebook dot com slash buck sex and if you
Speaker 1: want to send me a message, we'll be right back.
Speaker 1: I've got long days, you've got long days, right, my
Speaker 1: alarm comes off at five AM. I gotta then go
Speaker 1: and get after it worked, just like you do. Or
Speaker 1: I've got to make sure that I take care of
Speaker 1: things on the home front, just like do you need
Speaker 1: energy to do it? Folks? And if you're getting beaten
Speaker 1: down from really long days or if you're putting in
Speaker 1: too many hours now where you need a little boost,
Speaker 1: strike Force Energy has got your back. Strike Force is
Speaker 1: a veteran owned, American made energy liquid. It will fuel
Speaker 1: the fight that each of us have every day. All right,
Speaker 1: you want to check this out. It comes in four flavors,
Speaker 1: zero sugar, zero calories. I have become a stripe Forced user,
Speaker 1: especially the afternoons. Gives me that little extra edge to
Speaker 1: get things going. I just add that stripe Force Liquid
Speaker 1: to a little bit of water. I take the water,
Speaker 1: but you can put it in lemonade, yogurt, tia, whatever
Speaker 1: you want. Also, right now, if you go to strike
Speaker 1: Force Energy dot com and enter discount code bucket checkout.
Speaker 1: For every packet you buy, Strikeforce will donate one to
Speaker 1: military members around the globe. Again strike Force Energy dot
Speaker 1: Com discount code buck buck Sexton Permission decoding the news
Speaker 1: and disseminating information with actionable intelligence magnor mistake. You're a
Speaker 1: great American again. This is the Buck Sexton Show activity
Speaker 1: and will. In the past, politicians ran for office pledging
Speaker 1: to crack down on unfair trade. They never did anything
Speaker 1: about it, only to get elected and they just didn't
Speaker 1: do anything. The United States was allowed to truly get
Speaker 1: ripped off. But We're not gonna let that happen. I'm
Speaker 1: not like other politicians. You've seen what happens. I've kept
Speaker 1: my promises. They're not dumping so much anymore. You notice,
Speaker 1: and if they do, they're paying Tower four attacks. So
Speaker 1: you know what I say to that, dump all you want.
Speaker 1: I hope you dump a lot now. Thanks for our tariffs.
Speaker 1: Are steel workers are back on the job America and
Speaker 1: steel mills are back open for business. Trump quite a
Speaker 1: rally last night in Florida, quite a rally. We we look.
Speaker 1: We've been talking about it, the dynamics between Trump and
Speaker 1: the press, but now people are getting a little bit
Speaker 1: more nervous about the possibility of a of a broadened
Speaker 1: trade war with China. Two billion dollars of Chinese imports,
Speaker 1: they're saying now, and this could start to bite just
Speaker 1: in time for the mid term elections, which I have
Speaker 1: to say is it is a risk. You know, one
Speaker 1: thing though that you'll notice and and I believe a
Speaker 1: lot of people that have seen this Trump wave coming
Speaker 1: have understood this from the beginning, and it's it's at
Speaker 1: odds with much of the stuff you hear about politicians
Speaker 1: and how they should act and how they should be.
Speaker 1: Leadership isn't supposed to be a process of when we're
Speaker 1: talking about press sinential leadership trying to trying to establish
Speaker 1: a real change in direction on important issues to the country.
Speaker 1: It's it's not about getting consensus and and polling in
Speaker 1: the media on your side. I mean, you you get
Speaker 1: consensus from as many of the American people as you
Speaker 1: can in order to become president. But once you're in
Speaker 1: that seat, leadership is not supposed to be putting your
Speaker 1: finger up in the air and deciding which way the
Speaker 1: wind is blowing and go with that. And on this
Speaker 1: issue of trade, uh, you know, my thinking has come
Speaker 1: much more around to the Trump point of view on this,
Speaker 1: which is everyone agrees there's problems, especially with China. Every
Speaker 1: trade expert I say I talked to says there's problems
Speaker 1: with China. Everyone that I know who follows this issue,
Speaker 1: or even even in a every man sets right just
Speaker 1: from reading the newspapers, everyone understands China's problem for US
Speaker 1: UH and trade with China has caused problems in our economy.
Speaker 1: I mean, if nothing else, the rip off of our
Speaker 1: intellectual property and some of the other things they're doing
Speaker 1: a really, really bad but no one does anything about it.
Speaker 1: No one does anything about it. And then Trump comes
Speaker 1: along and says, you know, we're actually gonna stop this.
Speaker 1: We're gonna hold the Chinese accountable for this. We are
Speaker 1: going to take action that will hopefully get a change
Speaker 1: in behavior from China. And they're not gonna like it.
Speaker 1: And there could be some pain in the short term
Speaker 1: for US economically, and this is gonna be some rough seas.
Speaker 1: That's leadership, though understanding there's a problem, being willing to
Speaker 1: bear the costs of addressing the problem and giving yourself
Speaker 1: a real shot of fixing the problem. If it were obvious, folks,
Speaker 1: and I know you know this, and a lot of
Speaker 1: you are listening to the show, saw what was going
Speaker 1: on with Trump before I did so. I I approached
Speaker 1: this with with some degree of humility because I've I
Speaker 1: have now seen I am I am a true believer
Speaker 1: through facts. I'm a true believer through reality on the ground,
Speaker 1: meaning that as I've seen what Trump has been able
Speaker 1: to do from the beginning, you know, and I've told
Speaker 1: this to friends and family mine, I'm like with every month,
Speaker 1: I'm like, Trump is even doing a better. Trump's even
Speaker 1: better than I thought. And now we're going on eight
Speaker 1: months of that, so you can imagine around like, oh,
Speaker 1: Trump is even better than I thought. You know. I
Speaker 1: started out with all let's see where he goes. You know,
Speaker 1: it's amazing he beat Hillary and and I voted for him,
Speaker 1: and I told others to vote for him, and all right,
Speaker 1: I'm on, I'm on the Trump train. Let's see where
Speaker 1: it can take us. And now I'm like up in
Speaker 1: the front of the Trump train with the engineers like
Speaker 1: choo choo baby, like a freight train choo cho you know,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm saying, let's go because I I see what
Speaker 1: is not just possible for him to achieve, but also
Speaker 1: who's against him and the lengths they're willing to go
Speaker 1: to look at how much we have to talk about
Speaker 1: the Mother probe and all this other stuff, and then
Speaker 1: on an issue like trade, my eyes have been opened.
Speaker 1: You know, what do smart people say? Quote smart people, right,
Speaker 1: what do they say when when they're asked about trade,
Speaker 1: I'm a free trader. I like free trade. That's like saying,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm i'm pro I'm pro liberty. Oh what
Speaker 1: does that mean? You know? You yeah, I'm pro liberty.
Speaker 1: Your pro liberty. But that's not the answer to any
Speaker 1: question about liberty. That's not the answer to you know,
Speaker 1: should you be able to grow weed in your backyard? Well,
Speaker 1: i'm pro liberty. I mean, well that that's not enough.
Speaker 1: By the way. I think the answer that's probably yes,
Speaker 1: you should be able to grow weed in your backyard.
Speaker 1: But that's a whole other discussion. I don't On trade.
Speaker 1: You just had this answer that was offered you, I'm
Speaker 1: I'm I'm pro free trade, you know, and that's what
Speaker 1: all the everyone looks around. Oh yeah, Trump comes along,
Speaker 1: They said, oh, he doesn't know anything, he doesn't understand.
Speaker 1: This is too complicated for him. And he's saying, well, no, actually,
Speaker 1: free trade is not free right now. There are a
Speaker 1: lot of restrictions, there are a lot of tariffs, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of games the other side plays. I've been
Speaker 1: telling you about this, right, there's there's not there. There's quotas,
Speaker 1: there's percentages of the overall goods brought into the country.
Speaker 1: They're specific item tariffs where it's a percentage of you know,
Speaker 1: you pay a cost based on the on on the
Speaker 1: price of the goods. I mean, there's all these different
Speaker 1: there's slowdown that they intentionally institute to give domestic production
Speaker 1: and advantage all kinds of stuff, and not just China's.
Speaker 1: China is doing it, but Canada's doing, the EU is
Speaker 1: doing a lot of people are doing it. So he
Speaker 1: comes here to shake things up. And I feel like
Speaker 1: some people, especially in the GOLP, they don't understand that
Speaker 1: Yees shaking things up is uncomfortable at first. There is
Speaker 1: an adjustment period, there's there's a necessary adaptation that has
Speaker 1: to occur. And there's also the embracing of risk. Trump
Speaker 1: is embracing risk of there no question, and it might
Speaker 1: not work. We might get slammed in the mid terms.
Speaker 1: You know, if tariffs send up being a a big
Speaker 1: loser force in the short term and the economy terms.
Speaker 1: You know, this is not no one's offering guarantees here, folks.
Speaker 1: The only guarantee is if you don't try to deal
Speaker 1: with China on trade, if you don't take the approach,
Speaker 1: if we've got to fix this, this is the status
Speaker 1: quo is not acceptable, then you'll be in a place
Speaker 1: where you're suffering the same problems you have. This Nothing
Speaker 1: gets better, that is, that's for sure, right Because if
Speaker 1: if you're letting somebody steal from you and ring this
Speaker 1: ring the game, they're gonna keep doing that. That's the
Speaker 1: only thing you're If you try to stop them, you
Speaker 1: might not be successful, but if you do nothing, they're
Speaker 1: definitely gonna keep doing it to you. And I see
Speaker 1: how Trump has changed this changed this discussion such that
Speaker 1: now the so called smart sets like, well, I mean, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, there's you're trying to as a problem and
Speaker 1: it's pretty bad, and you know, maybe there's something that
Speaker 1: could be done here. So I just think that, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm not a it sound like I'm not like a
Speaker 1: trade expert like Ocasio Quartet style. I'm not like the
Speaker 1: expert on that thing or this other thing. But like
Speaker 1: I totally like want socialism, uh no, but really I'm
Speaker 1: not somebody spends all days sitting or sitting down reading
Speaker 1: long trade agreements. There are people who do that work it,
Speaker 1: various government agencies and probably some think tanks in the
Speaker 1: economic wing and everything else. That's not what I do.
Speaker 1: But I see the argument he's making, and I think
Speaker 1: he deserves at this point, given the four point one
Speaker 1: percent GDP growth we've just had, given how well the
Speaker 1: economy is doing, giving that, given that wages UH have,
Speaker 1: wages as a percentage are up more now than they've
Speaker 1: been at any times since two thousand and eight, I
Speaker 1: think that he's bought himself the leeway to try this
Speaker 1: out and have our support as he does it. And
Speaker 1: and as I said before, it's also he doesn't He's
Speaker 1: not taking a PLEBIS site here. This is not Oh guys,
Speaker 1: before I do this, I want to show hands. Do
Speaker 1: you think I should take on China and trade? He
Speaker 1: told us what the platform was, he told us what
Speaker 1: the agenda was, and those just voted for him and said,
Speaker 1: all right, let's go for it. Let's see what you
Speaker 1: got um and on this issue, I think he will
Speaker 1: surprise a lot of folks, just like I think he's
Speaker 1: gonna surprise people in North Korea. Although I've seen some
Speaker 1: of the troubling stuff in last twenty four hours about
Speaker 1: them still building missiles. I'm not blind to it, neither
Speaker 1: of you. But let's see where it goes on this
Speaker 1: trade war. I hope that the timing of it is
Speaker 1: not the problem because the timing could affect the mid terms,
Speaker 1: but we will see. Let's talk about the border wall
Speaker 1: and the shutdown. I got some more on that, stay
Speaker 1: with me. Is the funding of the border wall going
Speaker 1: to wait until after the mid term elections? Probably, and
Speaker 1: that's something we do have a disagreement on. And the
Speaker 1: homeland security won't get funded before the mid term probably
Speaker 1: not um but most of the government will be covered,
Speaker 1: and then at the end of the year, if we
Speaker 1: can't reach an agreement on that, we'll do what's called
Speaker 1: a continuing resolution for that little portion of the government
Speaker 1: spending that's left unpassed in individual bills. So you're not
Speaker 1: worried about the government shutdown because I have heard this theory.
Speaker 1: I happen to think it's a good thing politically. I'm
Speaker 1: not doing good for politics. I'm doing it because it's
Speaker 1: the right thing to do. So I'm not looking at politics,
Speaker 1: but I happen to think that border security would be
Speaker 1: a good thing before the election. But there are many
Speaker 1: people within our party that are good, good people that
Speaker 1: like you, that agree with you on everything you say,
Speaker 1: but they'd rather do it after. They don't agree on
Speaker 1: on doing it before. And I accept their you know,
Speaker 1: their opinion, but I happen to think it would be
Speaker 1: a good thing to do before. I actually think we'd
Speaker 1: get more and they'd be more pressure on the other
Speaker 1: side because we're doing it because the Democrats are not
Speaker 1: giving us the votes. So the shutdown decision is going
Speaker 1: to come pretty soon here, and you're you know, you
Speaker 1: heard there that the two different sides that if you
Speaker 1: got one to get McConnell majority leader Merciable Cornell, and
Speaker 1: he's out there saying that that this absolutely, there absolutely
Speaker 1: should not be a shutdown. Not keep in mind, you know,
Speaker 1: Mitch is not he's not worried about his position, is
Speaker 1: not worried about his job, and you know he's a
Speaker 1: guy who is risk averse on these things. Now. To
Speaker 1: be fair, Mitch is also he's he managed to hold
Speaker 1: you know, I gotta give there got some credit. I
Speaker 1: know a lot of people go and talk radio, they
Speaker 1: bash the majority leader because it's really easy to just Republicans. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Republicans let us down on a lot of stuff, but
Speaker 1: on some things, like, for example, not caving and doing
Speaker 1: the whole Merrick Garland thing. You know, Mitch McConnell held
Speaker 1: his people together. There weren't the defections that could have
Speaker 1: gotten the Mitch Garland thing going. I mean Mitch Garland. Gosh,
Speaker 1: Merrick Garland. The uh Mitch Garland is somebody else, I guess,
Speaker 1: Americ Garland. And and as a result, we're gonna have
Speaker 1: Kavana on and I think Misch McConnell's gonna get having
Speaker 1: all through pretty quickly. So so we give him credit,
Speaker 1: all right. Fun, But you know, there's I think a
Speaker 1: bit of amnesia here, folks, there's a bit of amnesia
Speaker 1: about what happened, uh this past January with the the
Speaker 1: Schumer shutdown. You guys remember that you remember the Schumer shutdown. Uh, well,
Speaker 1: here's here's a little bit of background. Uh. Mr Schumer
Speaker 1: should have remembered this from the Waltston Journal that at
Speaker 1: least in the short run, whoever caused the shutdown loses
Speaker 1: in Republicans. Senator Ted Cruz convence the GOLP House, it
Speaker 1: could defond Obamacare, etcetera, etcetera. Or Republicans picked up nine
Speaker 1: senten seas in thirteen House seats in mid terms. The
Speaker 1: games were despite the shutdown, not because of it. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, he here's the problem with all this. I understand,
Speaker 1: this is the conventional wisdom, right, I understand this, But
Speaker 1: you know Schumer and those guys, they were threatening to
Speaker 1: shut down the government because they thought that they had
Speaker 1: the upper hand and we're told, oh, well, they they
Speaker 1: would have been blamed for it, so they stayed away
Speaker 1: from it, right. But I think that maybe it was
Speaker 1: because it was on the issue of immigration and people
Speaker 1: don't want amnesty. They don't want the government shutdown for amnesty,
Speaker 1: and Trump was the x factor at all this. I
Speaker 1: think this can actually work through our advantage. You know,
Speaker 1: what is going to get people to turn out in
Speaker 1: the mid terms in competitive states. What's an issue that
Speaker 1: could really show where the Democrats stand versus where the
Speaker 1: Republicans stand. I have to say, I think it is
Speaker 1: this issue. I don't think there's another issue that comes
Speaker 1: uh close to this. And that's why Trump is going
Speaker 1: around saying things about the border specifically play clip three.
Speaker 1: The evangelicals have been so amazing to us. They came
Speaker 1: out and they voted and double and triple the numbers
Speaker 1: that ever voted an election before. We love the evangelical
Speaker 1: for instance, if you want safety, if you want orders,
Speaker 1: if you want to have a country, then you need
Speaker 1: to go out and vote Republicans. That's right. There needs
Speaker 1: to be a reason. People have to be told why
Speaker 1: they should take their time, why they should show up,
Speaker 1: and and and I don't believe that you know this.
Speaker 1: The whose fault is the shutdown? Is the question they
Speaker 1: always asked. They always say it's going to be the
Speaker 1: Republicans fault. But on this issue, I think if we
Speaker 1: say that it's about funding homeland security and getting a wall,
Speaker 1: and and falling through a presidential promise when you have
Speaker 1: a majority in the House, majority of the Senate, the
Speaker 1: Democrats being obstructuredist on this one, I think that well,
Speaker 1: you know, look, folks, we're not gonna get a wall
Speaker 1: if it waits after the mid terms. I really think
Speaker 1: that that's the case. And especially if the Democrats take
Speaker 1: the House, which all the numbers are said, it's going
Speaker 1: to happen. So fortune favors the bold. We can either
Speaker 1: try something here. We've had Trump be so disruptive, managed
Speaker 1: to beat the conventional wisdom on all this stuff time
Speaker 1: and again, and now the conventional wisdom is saying, oh
Speaker 1: no, no no, this time, this time, we're this time, We're
Speaker 1: really gonna get it. We understand this political moment. Don't
Speaker 1: fall into this trap, don't make this mistake. And one,
Speaker 1: I think the media doesn't have the power that it
Speaker 1: has had in the past to assign blame over a shutdown. Uh.
Speaker 1: And too, I think that if Trump makes the case
Speaker 1: about why he is unwilling to remember, you know, he's
Speaker 1: unwilling to be a part of the Democrats doing business
Speaker 1: as usual, all this stuff, I think you could work.
Speaker 1: But you know, if I'm a betting man, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: bet that they're just gonna go along. And I think
Speaker 1: that they're not gonna do the shutdown, and we're just
Speaker 1: gonna go into the mid terms and we're gonna lose
Speaker 1: the House. And you know what they're gonna say if
Speaker 1: we lose the House, Folks, you know this right now.
Speaker 1: And I don't mean to be pessimistic about this one.
Speaker 1: I'm just trying to be honest. But at the moment
Speaker 1: they lose the House, what they're gonna say is, well,
Speaker 1: you know, now we can't do it because we gotta
Speaker 1: work with the Democrats, and that window that we had
Speaker 1: to try and get a border wall will be gone.
Speaker 1: I one thing and I'm absolutely certain of is that
Speaker 1: a wall would be effective. And then Democrats if we
Speaker 1: ever got a wall built, Democrats what spen all this
Speaker 1: time talking about how you know they never opposed the
Speaker 1: wall really or the wall isn't isn't as effective as promised.
Speaker 1: They've told us as a joke, right that there's nothing
Speaker 1: that the wall will do. I meanwhile, anyone who's been
Speaker 1: to the border says, well, if you make it harder
Speaker 1: to get across the border, less, people will get across
Speaker 1: the border illegally. Um. They don't want to hear it.
Speaker 1: They don't want to hear it. I'm I think there
Speaker 1: should be a wall, folks. This was what we were promised.
Speaker 1: Build the wall, was the chant. We don't have any
Speaker 1: of the audio right now, but you know we can
Speaker 1: find it very easily. It's all over the place. Build
Speaker 1: the wall, Build the wall. That's what they were saying.
Speaker 1: A an establishment of sovereignty and a decision to break
Speaker 1: with the political consensus of the past few decades that
Speaker 1: we should just rely on members of Congress to get
Speaker 1: tougher when it comes to the enforcement of the very
Speaker 1: laws that they leave on the books that government for government,
Speaker 1: Republican and Democrat have been unwilling to enforce. You know,
Speaker 1: I think we forget now that it was really the
Speaker 1: George W. Bush Karl Rove approach to be very soft
Speaker 1: on immigration issues, to not do very much at all
Speaker 1: about illegal immigration, and a huge number of legal immigrants
Speaker 1: crossed during the Bush years. The Bushes were not good
Speaker 1: on the border, folks. This is something that you don't
Speaker 1: often hear about. Not good on the southern border, not
Speaker 1: good on border security, and it became this article of
Speaker 1: faith that for the GOP to be competitive in the future,
Speaker 1: they had to win over Hispanics. One reality, what they've
Speaker 1: done is just created a bigger constituency for the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party to leverage against Republicans on every issue, but specifically
Speaker 1: on the issue of immigration. I mean, you know, California
Speaker 1: is lost to the GOP forever or at least for
Speaker 1: you know, for for my lifetime, unless some dramatic things
Speaker 1: change because of a legal immigration. Other states will follow.
Speaker 1: This is a political conquest and the Democrats know that right.
Speaker 1: This is taking territory for the Democrat Party by changing
Speaker 1: the demographics through a process of lawlessness. A wall would
Speaker 1: re establish some degree of law and order on the border.
Speaker 1: And I think that it's worth I think it's worth
Speaker 1: a fight. But it's a gamble. We'll see if Republicans
Speaker 1: willing to roll the dice. Here's betting they won't agreet
Speaker 1: that liberty, truth, and great hair. The buck Sexton Show
Speaker 1: is back. I wanted to take a moment here to
Speaker 1: say happy thirty years of first in class, first in
Speaker 1: the nation broadcasting to Mr Rush Limbaugh. I know he's uh,
Speaker 1: he's today at at the thirtieth year mark. I actually
Speaker 1: was uh fortuitous enough to hear that there was gonna
Speaker 1: be the President called. Then I saw on Twitter and
Speaker 1: I've managed to turn it on and here President Trump
Speaker 1: calling into a Russia lum balls show and thirty years
Speaker 1: of broadcasting. That's that's pretty incredible. You know, I'm there
Speaker 1: are a few people in the business who I have
Speaker 1: to say I always have and and will owe a
Speaker 1: debt of gratitude too, and certainly, I've got to put
Speaker 1: Glenn in there. Glenn back for hiring me, for preventing
Speaker 1: me from taking on a couple of hundred thousand dollars
Speaker 1: of loans to go to uh graduate school instead of
Speaker 1: hiring me as a as. I was hired as an
Speaker 1: assistant editor for technology and national security at the Blaze
Speaker 1: dot com. And that was seven years ago. Um so yeah,
Speaker 1: assistant editor for for no, assistant editor for intelligence and technology.
Speaker 1: So the intelligence part I got, but the technology part
Speaker 1: I did not. Anyway, Uh So Glenn hire me. That
Speaker 1: was a really obviously a milestone and I had never
Speaker 1: even thought of working in media really before that. But
Speaker 1: there was among the biggest breaks I got in my
Speaker 1: in my career, um was when I got the call
Speaker 1: from Russia Limball years ago now, gosh, it must have
Speaker 1: been four four years ago, at least maybe five. I
Speaker 1: got the call from It was five, right, John, thank you?
Speaker 1: Five might have been six, I don't at least five
Speaker 1: years ago now. But I got the call from from
Speaker 1: Kid Carson, and it is the only time and you know,
Speaker 1: Kick Carson rest in peace, unfortunately lost the battle with
Speaker 1: cancer a couple of years back. But but Kid called
Speaker 1: me up, and I it was the only time I
Speaker 1: thought somebody was messing with me because he was like
Speaker 1: Kid Carson from the Rush Limball Show. How'd you like
Speaker 1: to fill in for Rush? I mean just just like that?
Speaker 1: I mean just know I was how like that fill
Speaker 1: in for Rush? You know, following the in the footsteps
Speaker 1: of Mr Sean Hannity for example, who also not only
Speaker 1: is the biggest you know, Sean is the biggest show
Speaker 1: not on Fox News, not on Cable news on cable
Speaker 1: last month, which is just you know, that's astonishing. So
Speaker 1: congrats to Seawan and his whole team. I will say
Speaker 1: I miss I miss Sean and his and his team.
Speaker 1: That's the one of the downsides of being a swamp dweller,
Speaker 1: as I don't get to hang out in New York
Speaker 1: and see Sean and and and his He's got this
Speaker 1: amazing squad around him in New York City of really
Speaker 1: really great folks, and I don't get to hang out
Speaker 1: with him as much. So that's kind of a bummer anyway, Yeah, Sean.
Speaker 1: Sean actually told me that the first time he filled
Speaker 1: in for Rush, uh, the microphone fell down and like
Speaker 1: fell out of the holder at the very start of
Speaker 1: the show, which is so classic. That's stuff like that
Speaker 1: has happened to me too. One of the times I
Speaker 1: filled in for Glenn, I remember, I I don't I
Speaker 1: don't know if John, but I don't think John was
Speaker 1: there for this one. Producer, John, I don't think you're
Speaker 1: you're running the board on this one. But I knocked
Speaker 1: over a venty Comi coffee Starbucks. Yeah, it was Sarah
Speaker 1: all over the place, man, I mean just and they
Speaker 1: had to run in the engineers because it was seeping
Speaker 1: over the top of the desk and it was gonna
Speaker 1: get all in a very expensive gear. Uh. You know,
Speaker 1: Glenn had a beautiful studio in New York. Obviously Soda
Speaker 1: Soda Russian Sean. But anyway, back to Mr Lindball here, Uh,
Speaker 1: there is no one else like him. I've never met
Speaker 1: Rush to this day. I've never talked to him, never
Speaker 1: met him. Um, I know his team well, and you know,
Speaker 1: Rush letting me sit in for him was was a
Speaker 1: total game changer. It got me heard by folks across
Speaker 1: the country. I had somebody I did the Greg Gutfeld
Speaker 1: Show a couple of weeks ago, and I had people
Speaker 1: come up me outside and you know what. Two of
Speaker 1: them said, not just two of them just came with
Speaker 1: me said, I've really liked you ever since I heard
Speaker 1: you fill in for Rush, And yeah, I think I
Speaker 1: did a pretty good job feeling for Rush but also
Speaker 1: getting the l rush boat stamp of approval was it
Speaker 1: was like, it's the radio equivalent of getting accepted to
Speaker 1: Harvard early admission. I mean, it doesn't get any better
Speaker 1: than that. So, uh, Mr Rush, thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Happy thirty years of being the best. There'll never be
Speaker 1: anyone else like you, and you've changed a lot of
Speaker 1: folks lives, including mine. We got roll call coming up. Hey,
Speaker 1: team Buck, it's time for roll call. All right, let's
Speaker 1: get to it with some roll call we have. And
Speaker 1: by the way, if you want to be a part
Speaker 1: of the action Facebook dot com slash Buck Sexton best
Speaker 1: way to do it, Let's get to it. James writes
Speaker 1: young Guns. I assume that James is referring to a
Speaker 1: movie quote from earlier in the week, and yes, in fact,
Speaker 1: you are correct. I did make a reference to young Guns,
Speaker 1: and here it is. But you can't be any geek
Speaker 1: off the street. I gotta be handy with the steel
Speaker 1: if you know what I mean, or any keep Indeed,
Speaker 1: Charlie from Young Guns, you cannot be any geek off
Speaker 1: the street, our buddy, Aries writes in buck Very Powerful
Speaker 1: opening to the Monday podcast. Looking up the definition of
Speaker 1: treason in the dictionary, it says the crime of betraying
Speaker 1: one's country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the
Speaker 1: sovereign or government. So how is the attempt entities like
Speaker 1: the Koch brothers and Democrats were trying to overthrow the
Speaker 1: sovereign authority of American people by intentionally replacing us with
Speaker 1: four nationals not treason, one of the lesser of two evils,
Speaker 1: because they only want to replace us out of greed.
Speaker 1: Uh and he wants Yeah, I mean, Aries, Look, I
Speaker 1: get it, I get it, my friend. It is a
Speaker 1: It is a frustration that there's so many who are
Speaker 1: working to overturn the election results one way or another.
Speaker 1: Bomb is next up here movie quote was from Tuesday
Speaker 1: night was die Hard again Shields High. All right, Bob,
Speaker 1: all right, you got me. That's right. It was die Hard.
Speaker 1: Although I think I've said this now on the air,
Speaker 1: but nonetheless you're correct. Uh, here we go. Next up
Speaker 1: we have William who's still on this taekwondo kick? Hey man,
Speaker 1: just watch some of the greatest UFC fights. You'll see
Speaker 1: folks getting high kick to the forehead. You'll see a
Speaker 1: champion wrestler and champion jiu jitsu guy jab and kick
Speaker 1: for five rounds. Stop this in taekwondo. It's another tool
Speaker 1: in the toolbag. I spend good money on. My kids
Speaker 1: learned taekwondo. One thing is for sure. They might lose
Speaker 1: a street fight, but it won't be because they were
Speaker 1: afraid to fight. In our school, we're taught fancy kicks
Speaker 1: are for sparring. My kids learned elbows, knees, joint locks,
Speaker 1: and submission. Okay, William, I'm I don't know any taekwondo.
Speaker 1: I I take your word for it, buddy, I just
Speaker 1: read somebody. But let's be clear. Earlier the week, somebody
Speaker 1: else wrote in to say they don't think taekwondo is effective.
Speaker 1: That's that's not on me. I'm just, you know, take
Speaker 1: that up with the other dude. I don't know. And
Speaker 1: then William writes, asked Joe Rogan of taekwondo is ineffective.
Speaker 1: I'd be happy to ask Joe Rogan that if you
Speaker 1: ever had the chance to sit down with him on
Speaker 1: his podcast, that'd be great. So there you have it. Virginia.
Speaker 1: Greetings Buck, longtime Democrat, woke up with Trump and I
Speaker 1: really enjoy your show. Well, thank you, Virginia. I really
Speaker 1: like having a former Democrats listening. I even like having
Speaker 1: current Democrats listening, because that's a listening to me. At
Speaker 1: least there's hope, you know, at least that maybe they
Speaker 1: they see where I'm coming from on some of this stuff,
Speaker 1: and they're willing to be They're willing to hear the
Speaker 1: other side, which is a good thing. Bill writes, check
Speaker 1: out Sabotan for some cool, newer pump up music. They
Speaker 1: make songs about historic battles with an upbeat, heavy metal feel.
Speaker 1: I personally like winged Hussars shields high. Bill. I have
Speaker 1: never heard of Sabotan, so I will have to. I'll
Speaker 1: have to give that one a listen. That's that's new
Speaker 1: to me. Uh. Monica writes, where are My Detonators is
Speaker 1: a Hans Gruber quote from die Hard? Yes, correct, you
Speaker 1: know what guys? All right, all right, I get it.
Speaker 1: You've been hurt on this one. You now you want
Speaker 1: tougher action movie quotes. This is it's too low level
Speaker 1: for you when I work them into the conversation from
Speaker 1: the most well known action movies. So I'm gonna start
Speaker 1: giving you some some curveballs, and you know what I'm
Speaker 1: gonna do to make it really the real deal. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna I'm gonna work in quotes. I'm not even gonna
Speaker 1: say that's an action movie quote. And we'll see who
Speaker 1: can get the secret action movie quote that I worked
Speaker 1: into the show and just say it at some point
Speaker 1: in this show. We'll see if you you guys want
Speaker 1: to strap on the big boy pants out there and
Speaker 1: team Bucklin on action movie quotes. You know you want
Speaker 1: to wear the belt? I always got confused. But in
Speaker 1: karate is the red belt of the black belt higher? Right?
Speaker 1: The red belt is right before black belt? Right? But
Speaker 1: then isn't there a black belt with gold stripes on it?
Speaker 1: Or you know all these different belts. I think Bruce
Speaker 1: Lee once said belts are for holding up your pants,
Speaker 1: and but work in those action movie quotes. Angie RT's
Speaker 1: love the show. Another word we need to bring back
Speaker 1: is Tom Foolery shield Hie. You know what I agree
Speaker 1: with you? I would very much like to bring back
Speaker 1: Tom Foolery. Um, I you know, I think that's a
Speaker 1: good word. I think that's something that we could work,
Speaker 1: we could get going into the conversation. So thank you
Speaker 1: so much, Angie for that one. Patrick writes, here's a
Speaker 1: Spotify list with workout songs. Patrick, you are a scholar
Speaker 1: and a gentleman. Thank you for sharing that one. And uh,
Speaker 1: I will let you know. I'll give you my my
Speaker 1: review of your workout Spotify list A S A P.
Speaker 1: I should probably post, you know what I'll do on
Speaker 1: on Facebook. Maybe I'll post my Spotify workout playlist for
Speaker 1: all you guys, those of you who are on Spotify.
Speaker 1: That would be a fun idea. You can tell me
Speaker 1: what you think and don't give me any guph because
Speaker 1: there's some you know, I don't know T Swift on
Speaker 1: there or something, and I try to mix it up, folks.
Speaker 1: T Swift is very talented, very very talented. That's all
Speaker 1: I'm saying. Let's see what we got next here, Hold
Speaker 1: on a second, it's coming up. And the thing Jason
Speaker 1: Rights isn't amazing how the Party of Science and Evolution
Speaker 1: has completely abandoned both with both the issues of transgenderism
Speaker 1: and toxic male masculinity and the world of beta maile democrats.
Speaker 1: We see a complete rejection of survival of the fittest um. Interesting,
Speaker 1: I never thought of it that way. Um evolution, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, they they're they're always trying to redefine merit
Speaker 1: and excellence and and bend this. Look, this is there's
Speaker 1: an obsession on the left with collectivism and with equality.
Speaker 1: But those are the those are the the central beliefs
Speaker 1: I think of of leftism and atheism at some level too,
Speaker 1: But now I'm really getting down to the rabbit hole.
Speaker 1: But there's a central obsession with collectivism and equality, and
Speaker 1: equality is an impossible goal. I mean, there is no
Speaker 1: such thing as as absolute equality, and so context is
Speaker 1: always necessary for any dis question of a discussion of equality,
Speaker 1: just like there's no such thing as absolute liberty. Folks,
Speaker 1: we know that no one thinks that liberty means do
Speaker 1: whatever you want, whatever you want, right, Well, equality just
Speaker 1: means equality in the nation state context, in the in
Speaker 1: the context of a polity, of a political organization of
Speaker 1: human beings. It means equality before the law. That's really
Speaker 1: the best that we can hope for. All these other
Speaker 1: efforts to make us the same are doomed to failure
Speaker 1: because we are not the same. You are trying to
Speaker 1: square a circle. It does not work. Uh. And in
Speaker 1: a life is unfair. This is something else that I
Speaker 1: think a lot of liberals need to need to hear.
Speaker 1: And well, I guess that they all they do is
Speaker 1: talk about alan fair it is, but it's never gonna
Speaker 1: not be unfair. I guess as part of the part
Speaker 1: of the discussion here, it's it's never going to be
Speaker 1: something that they can make go away. And so agitation
Speaker 1: under the guise of absolute equality is something you need
Speaker 1: to be on on guard against because it's it's not
Speaker 1: going to lead two good outcomes. H. So there you
Speaker 1: have it, Paul writes, Hey, buck love the show. I
Speaker 1: listened daily. Don't always agree, but that's okay. Well, Paul, absolutely,
Speaker 1: you know. I don't expect people always agree. I feel
Speaker 1: you're honest and understand the world we have a deal
Speaker 1: with today. I'm not all right, nor am I a leftist.
Speaker 1: I guess I'm somewhere in between right leaning. Uh. And
Speaker 1: then he wrote, I have a question, And Paul, by
Speaker 1: the way, I'm really glad uh that you are able
Speaker 1: to listen to the show. You like the show and
Speaker 1: appreciate that, you know, I just want people listening. Anybody
Speaker 1: who has a mind for facts, knowledge and entertainment, I
Speaker 1: would hope would give this show a shot. I do
Speaker 1: a tremendous amount of research and reading every day before
Speaker 1: I come on air, and I try to make the
Speaker 1: best use of the time we have together. And and
Speaker 1: then this is this is my life's work right now.
Speaker 1: Is this show that you're hearing. So thank you for
Speaker 1: listening to it. Thankful to be a part of it.
Speaker 1: I know you wrote I have a question, but I
Speaker 1: don't see a question here, so please get back to
Speaker 1: me with your question. I'll answered as soon as I can.
Speaker 1: Sean writes, Hey, Buck Shields time. I love the show
Speaker 1: and have listen to you since you were on The Blaze.
Speaker 1: I'm always a day behind on your show, but I
Speaker 1: want to say Adam's over Jefferson any day, simplify from Sean.
Speaker 1: Interesting somebody was willing to say they actually prefer Adams
Speaker 1: over Jefferson. I feel like that's a rarity. I feel
Speaker 1: like you usually don't get that. People don't make that call.
Speaker 1: Michael right, Uh, you need to start using blaflom regularly. Huh,
Speaker 1: I've actually never heard of blaslom. I don't. I don't
Speaker 1: even I'm assuming that's like piffle or you know, it's malarkey.
Speaker 1: Maybe I don't know anything about that, so I gotta
Speaker 1: look that word up, Donald buck Something not enough people
Speaker 1: point out about free healthcare. How many countries are there? Um,
Speaker 1: were you would die from an illness that might bankrupt
Speaker 1: you here, what would you rather be dead or in debt? Well,
Speaker 1: you know, William, I'm sorry, Donald, Uh. This is one
Speaker 1: of these things where we can live in the real
Speaker 1: world that we can live in fantasy world. And the
Speaker 1: truth is that you're better off in America than pretty
Speaker 1: much any other country in the world if you have
Speaker 1: a life threatening illness. And that's I mean, maybe Switzerland.
Speaker 1: There's a few places people say, well, you know, they've
Speaker 1: got really advanced, But this is where you want to be.
Speaker 1: And in part it's because we have incredibly hard working
Speaker 1: and next level brilliant surgeons and doctors and people in
Speaker 1: the medical field who are well compensated folks. Yes, that's
Speaker 1: a part of this. I want hard surgeons to make
Speaker 1: a million, two million, three million doll hours here. I
Speaker 1: want them to make that because I want you know,
Speaker 1: when it's when it's you know, my relative that's getting
Speaker 1: open heart surgery. I don't want somebody who was you know,
Speaker 1: middle of the class in in in high school and
Speaker 1: third tier in grad school. No, I want somebody who
Speaker 1: is top of their game. And yeah, that's gonna be
Speaker 1: difficult to pay for. Sometimes it's gonna be costs literally
Speaker 1: costs associated with that. But isn't isn't that what you
Speaker 1: what's the alternative? It's all about incentives, folks. This is
Speaker 1: what collective is. The leftist don't understand is that individual
Speaker 1: interest self interest is a constant. It is a reality
Speaker 1: of our day to day lives. There's no way around it.
Speaker 1: And to try to either eliminate it from the way
Speaker 1: that you're setting up laws and and setting up society,
Speaker 1: or think that you can somehow just pretend it's not there,
Speaker 1: that that is again doomed to failure. And I think
Speaker 1: that when I bring this up, and I know it
Speaker 1: sounds maybe a little I don't know, as a territ
Speaker 1: or in the weeds or something, but this is that,
Speaker 1: this is what separates the mind of a conservative from
Speaker 1: the mind of a liberal These very basic concepts of
Speaker 1: the collective versus the individual, of you know, liberty versus equality.
Speaker 1: I mean, these are the this is why we approach
Speaker 1: the world differently than they do. So I think it
Speaker 1: is important to spend some time on all that. Thank
Speaker 1: you for being your team. It's been a pleasure and
Speaker 1: honor as always, great to have you hanging out with
Speaker 1: me in the Freedom Hunt. We're gonna have a Raheem
Speaker 1: Kasam joining which can be a lot of fun on
Speaker 1: the Freedom Hunt podcast later on this week, so get
Speaker 1: excited for that. It's on iTunes, also on Stitcher or
Speaker 1: the I Heart app. Until next time, Team shields High.
Speaker 1: Have you ever heard of how announcer prevention is worth
Speaker 1: a pound of cure? It's true, right, sounds a little
Speaker 1: trite sometimes, but you've got insurance on your home, right,
Speaker 1: You've got different insurance products probably for your car too,
Speaker 1: I'm hoping, Well, guess what you need? Something that protects
Speaker 1: your home for m title theft. Okay, the FBI calls
Speaker 1: home title theft one of the fastest growing crimes out there.
Speaker 1: And I've had my credit card sol and that stinks, right,
Speaker 1: Imagine that times ten or times a hundred. It's way
Speaker 1: worse if an identity thief takes control of your home's title.
Speaker 1: It's not hard to do, folks. I've seen how this
Speaker 1: can be done through a demonstration that home title Lock
Speaker 1: put on. They get all the information online. You will
Speaker 1: only find out about this when you start getting the
Speaker 1: bills for the loans that somebody else took out against
Speaker 1: your home, and all they've needed is internet access to
Speaker 1: get there for just pennies a day. Though, home title
Speaker 1: Lock can protect you because it protects my most viable asset,
Speaker 1: my home. Register now for a free analysis and discovery
Speaker 1: if you're a home's title has been compromised, that's a
Speaker 1: sixty dollar value free. Visit home title lock dot com
Speaker 1: home title lock dot com