Speaker 1: M you are entering the freedom Hunt. Late breaking bombshell. Today,
Speaker 1: President Trump says that journalists broke off the record, a
Speaker 1: cardinal rule of journalism, in order to get at him
Speaker 1: when it comes to his negotiations with Canada. Will dive
Speaker 1: into that, and also Sean Spice, or former White House
Speaker 1: Press secretary, joins to talk about his book. I'll ask
Speaker 1: him all the important questions like is the White House
Speaker 1: actually in trouble? And what was it like being me?
Speaker 1: Fun up on SNL added more coming up. This is
Speaker 1: the buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is
Speaker 1: to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make no
Speaker 1: mistake American, Great, You're a great American Again the buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show begins. Analysts, remember the MYVD buck sexty. No,
Speaker 1: but I gave a totally off the record. You saw it.
Speaker 1: It said off the record, and I said something strong,
Speaker 1: but it's my belief, and they violated it and they
Speaker 1: said they were violating it. It's unbelievable what's happening with
Speaker 1: the fake news. It's unbelievable. When you say off the record,
Speaker 1: that's a very it's not a legal term, but it's
Speaker 1: a term of honor. So when I say, off the record,
Speaker 1: here's the story, in order really to save time. I
Speaker 1: don't want to waste a lot of time. And then
Speaker 1: they say they actually printed my off the record. They
Speaker 1: said President Trump said off the record, and then they
Speaker 1: go onto this. I said, there's as the first, these
Speaker 1: are very dishonorable people. But I said, in the end,
Speaker 1: it's okay because at least Canada knows how I feel.
Speaker 1: So it's fine, folks, welcome to the Bucks Action Show.
Speaker 1: I've I've been telling you this was going to happen
Speaker 1: for a long time, that journalists would begin to journalists
Speaker 1: would just dispense with some of the the most well
Speaker 1: they would say, most sacred tenants of journalism, um, that
Speaker 1: journalists would break off the record, and more specifically, I
Speaker 1: have said that journalists would blow sources in order to
Speaker 1: get at and you've already seen that happen in some instances,
Speaker 1: not not quite super high level just yet, but we've
Speaker 1: had journalists lie about sources recently to get at Trump
Speaker 1: at CNN, where they said that somebody was not a
Speaker 1: source when he was the source. So that's pretty bad.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you they're going to blow sources just to
Speaker 1: get at Trump. At some point somebody will speak to them,
Speaker 1: and then when it's in their interest to do so,
Speaker 1: they'll say the person who told us this is they
Speaker 1: will blow their own source. If it hurts Trump, that's coming.
Speaker 1: According the asn't we already have a violation of off
Speaker 1: the record principle. Now off the record, as the President stated,
Speaker 1: there is not a legally binding thing. It is, as
Speaker 1: he said, a term of honor. It is about ethics
Speaker 1: and journalism. Journalism as a profession only has a few things.
Speaker 1: No plagiarism, protect sources, and you know, off the record.
Speaker 1: I mean, there there are some things that that they
Speaker 1: all agree to. Although there's no licensing for journalism. As
Speaker 1: I've pointed out, it's it's really just what's that in
Speaker 1: Pirates of the Caribbean. It's not a rule, it's more
Speaker 1: like a guideline, the thing I says. And that that's
Speaker 1: certainly true for anything involving journalism, where you have a
Speaker 1: lot of, especially at the top echelons of the mainstream media,
Speaker 1: a lot of very slimy, dishonest people. And here's what
Speaker 1: end up happening. Bloomberg had an interview with Trump in
Speaker 1: the and I believe in the Oval Office, and he
Speaker 1: was talking to them about his negotiations. Is very important
Speaker 1: economic negotiations that are going on right now over trade
Speaker 1: with our Canadian brothers and sisters to the north. Now,
Speaker 1: as much as we all love Canadians and we do,
Speaker 1: they are a different country and we do have some
Speaker 1: issues of trade to speed with them. But you know,
Speaker 1: it's within the family. But we gotta straighten this out.
Speaker 1: And Trump spoke honestly, perhaps too honestly, to Bloomberg about this,
Speaker 1: and sure enough, the off the record comments about his
Speaker 1: negotiations with Canada got published. Here's what The Toronto Star
Speaker 1: writes writes about this and comments Trump wanted to be
Speaker 1: off the record. The U s u s. President told
Speaker 1: Bloomberg News reporters on Thursday that he is not making
Speaker 1: any compromise at all in the talks with Canada, but
Speaker 1: that he cannot say this publicly because quote, it's going
Speaker 1: to be so insulting. They're not going to be able
Speaker 1: to make a deal. The president went on, here's the problem.
Speaker 1: If I say no, the answers no. If I say no,
Speaker 1: then you're going to put that and it's going to
Speaker 1: be so insulting. They're not going to be able to
Speaker 1: make a deal. I can't kill these people, Trump said
Speaker 1: of the Canadian government off the record, Canada's working their
Speaker 1: ass off. And every time we have a problem with
Speaker 1: a point, I just put up a picture of a
Speaker 1: Chevrolet Impaula, Trump said. The impala is A is produced
Speaker 1: at the General Motors plant in Ontario. Trump is saying
Speaker 1: they violated off the record in order to hit at him. Now,
Speaker 1: journal a lot of journalists are scrambling. Now I see
Speaker 1: this in social media. Oh no, no, there they wouldn't do.
Speaker 1: There must be some mistake. There must be some mistake.
Speaker 1: I don't know. Doesn't sound like a mistake to me, folks.
Speaker 1: And this is why this is so important, because this
Speaker 1: is all Remember, we're in the process of an evolution
Speaker 1: of how we think about how we discussed the media
Speaker 1: in this country because Trump is breaking down the barriers
Speaker 1: to the truth. Trump is actually forcing them to have
Speaker 1: to stand and make their case to the American public
Speaker 1: without the usual echo chamber effect. And you know somebody
Speaker 1: who will fight back. It's not a one way street.
Speaker 1: It's not just offense all the time for the media. Now,
Speaker 1: the media sometimes has to play defense. But they hate
Speaker 1: Trump as you know. And they not only have dropped
Speaker 1: the pretense of objectivity when covering this presidency, now they're
Speaker 1: going even beyond partisan coverage to dropping the foundational rules
Speaker 1: of journalism to attack this president. Now that alone, you
Speaker 1: may say, Buck, that's not really you know, I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't expect any more from them, the journalists or
Speaker 1: a bunch of a bunch of frauds anyway. And and
Speaker 1: that's true. I can't argue with you there. But here's
Speaker 1: another part of this that is important for all of
Speaker 1: us to keep in mind. They we're willing not just
Speaker 1: to dispense with essential central principles of journalism here to
Speaker 1: hit Trump, they also were willing to harm us national
Speaker 1: sovereign economic interest to do so. That's right, folks. This
Speaker 1: is a great example of how our own journals are
Speaker 1: willing to undercut our own president when it comes to
Speaker 1: negotiations that are going to help the American economy, the
Speaker 1: American work or the American producer out there, and whether
Speaker 1: it's dairy or you know, any number of these issues
Speaker 1: that are being negotiated right now between them. This is
Speaker 1: the economic equivalent of when Democrats were rooting against us
Speaker 1: in the Iraq war and in Afghanistan too. You're gonna
Speaker 1: see more of this. You're going to see efforts in
Speaker 1: the media to try to strengthen China's hand. We'll talk
Speaker 1: later about where the whole China trade war is right now.
Speaker 1: That's come up later in the show. But you'll see
Speaker 1: the media trying to make efforts to to bolster the
Speaker 1: Chinese case. Anything. They will take the side of anyone
Speaker 1: against this president. They don't care, and they will break
Speaker 1: any rule. They will do anything in order to get
Speaker 1: at this president. They just don't care about anything else.
Speaker 1: This is because they have a problem, my friends, they
Speaker 1: have a derangement. There is a very serious issue in
Speaker 1: journalism overall right now with a form of anti Trump psychosis.
Speaker 1: It's really taken over people. I've been talking to friends
Speaker 1: about it in journalism this week. They say it's very real.
Speaker 1: They know people that just cannot be objective anymore. They
Speaker 1: they they are caught off in all these lies and conspiracies,
Speaker 1: and they're spreading these lines of conspiracies in ways that
Speaker 1: are completely reckless, unjustifiable. But you know, this is uh,
Speaker 1: this is a quite a day. You know, the president,
Speaker 1: not what the president is gonna figure this out. It's
Speaker 1: not it's not not the end of the world. Well
Speaker 1: it's not. You know, we're not about to lose a
Speaker 1: war because of this. But here's what Trump said about
Speaker 1: the deal with Canada. Play nineteen and this week we're
Speaker 1: working on Canada. We're working on a lot of different things.
Speaker 1: Last week it was Mexico and this week it's Canada.
Speaker 1: And if we don't make a deal with Canada, it's
Speaker 1: just fine. But we'll see how it all works out.
Speaker 1: I say, affectionately, we'll just have to teariff those cars
Speaker 1: coming in. That's a lot of money coming into the
Speaker 1: Conference of the United States. Oh, he's saying. Look, well,
Speaker 1: we'll figure it out one way or another. I mean,
Speaker 1: Trump is rolling with it. But I want you to
Speaker 1: really remember this. You know this. This is a cardinal
Speaker 1: rule of journalism. This is this is central. You do
Speaker 1: not break off the record unless you have a really compelling,
Speaker 1: you know, really compelling reason to do so. And I
Speaker 1: don't know how this could be anything other than these
Speaker 1: journalists like the story is too good, too too good
Speaker 1: to sit on. We're gonna we're gonna quote the president.
Speaker 1: Remember Bloomberg's American news media organization they're gonna quote the
Speaker 1: President United States against his wishes, trust with him, and
Speaker 1: assist the other side of the table in a negotiation
Speaker 1: that that affects the United States economy and American workers.
Speaker 1: That is what we are dealing with, folks. That is
Speaker 1: our own media. They are so quick to dispense with
Speaker 1: any any obligations to the American people and to patriotism,
Speaker 1: and then you know, tomorrow will be all the First Amendment.
Speaker 1: We're on the We're on the front lines of defending
Speaker 1: the First Amendment. Bull are on the front lines of
Speaker 1: being a bunch of preening cry babies who have one
Speaker 1: concern of one concern only, and that is themselves. Let's
Speaker 1: talk about who I think is running against the against
Speaker 1: Trump and that that's coming up. Stay with me, folks.
Speaker 1: I I know it sounds a little a little out
Speaker 1: there right now. I know people they have scoffed at
Speaker 1: me with my whole The Democrats ultimate master plan here
Speaker 1: is to run Hillary again. I know you. I know
Speaker 1: people think I'm crazy, but it makes sense. Look they're
Speaker 1: gonna say that, you know, think about it this way.
Speaker 1: It'll be a Hillary uh Kamala Harris ticket. The idea
Speaker 1: of being that, you know, Hillary brings the gravity, toss
Speaker 1: and the experience. All of the Hillary Clinton hacks and
Speaker 1: hangers on would then get into the positions in government
Speaker 1: that they think are duly owed to them and that
Speaker 1: Trump stole from them like that will be the way
Speaker 1: that they view it, and and then there'll be essentially
Speaker 1: a handover. Hillary doesn't have to do it for eight years,
Speaker 1: just has to do it for four and then she
Speaker 1: writes the whole Clinton dynasty. She will have right to
Speaker 1: the great wrong of Trump's victory over her in when
Speaker 1: the election was stolen by the Rusks. I know it
Speaker 1: sounds out there, but Hill Are and Kamala Harris together
Speaker 1: I think that that right now is the most likely
Speaker 1: Democrat ticket. And for those of you who are are
Speaker 1: looking at me right now or listen to me right now,
Speaker 1: but looking up at the sky saying, wow, Buck must
Speaker 1: be he must have weekend itis right now. He just
Speaker 1: wants to get out in party. He doesn't want to
Speaker 1: those you think that I've lost it. John Kerry, John
Speaker 1: Kerry uh would not. In a recent or rather in
Speaker 1: an upcoming Face the Nation interview with Margaret Brennan was
Speaker 1: unwilling to rule out a White House run. John Kerry,
Speaker 1: he thinks he's gonna get in the game again, folks,
Speaker 1: he does. You have to remember, we're not dealing with normal,
Speaker 1: rational people here, okay. We are dealing with people who
Speaker 1: are obsessed with their own brand. They're obsessed with how
Speaker 1: important they are, how necessary they are for government. You
Speaker 1: know how much they've they've contributed to America and how
Speaker 1: and they really think that America needs them. They convinced
Speaker 1: themselves of this because if they had to actually look
Speaker 1: at the way that they approach uh their office otherwise,
Speaker 1: that it would be clear that it really benefits them
Speaker 1: more than anything else. And this is really all about them.
Speaker 1: This is an an exercise in extreme solipsism. Remember, solipsism
Speaker 1: is when you are the center of the universe in
Speaker 1: your own mind, and that's certainly true of John Kerry.
Speaker 1: I I think Hillary she's there's a reason she's gonna
Speaker 1: be out there. She's gonna be fundraising for Democrats. There's
Speaker 1: nobody else to fill the void, folks, nobody. I don't
Speaker 1: really think Michelle Obama wants to step in, and I
Speaker 1: think she's perfectly happy to be treated like a rock star.
Speaker 1: And the closest thing in America to royalty for the
Speaker 1: rest of her days. The Obamas have a very among Democrats.
Speaker 1: Circles are very powerful and and still revered, not even
Speaker 1: just respected, revered political brand. Hillary resents the crap out
Speaker 1: of that whole thing. And if she can just get
Speaker 1: Bill to not stare at Ariana Grande's grand day, if
Speaker 1: you know what I mean. I mean, I don't know
Speaker 1: if you saw today, but Bill, Bill was at the funeral,
Speaker 1: and sure enough Ariana Grande was performing, and there's a
Speaker 1: whole shot of Bill Clinton and he's he's really enjoying
Speaker 1: listening and looking at Ms Grande. Man, he is he
Speaker 1: can he can't. He can't help himself. Folks, you got
Speaker 1: like a compulsion. But if she can keep Bill off,
Speaker 1: Hillary Hollow can keep Bill from being super creepy and
Speaker 1: being a political liability for her. I I really think
Speaker 1: that there's a I understand it's a long shot, folks,
Speaker 1: And you know, so don't don't play this interview back
Speaker 1: for me in a year when sure enough, you know,
Speaker 1: you get Elizabeth Warren or somebody who's gonna be running. Uh.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying, if I could put you know, you know,
Speaker 1: and if you're gonna place a bet if I could
Speaker 1: bet on the horse right now that has twenty to
Speaker 1: one odds that I think actually would be worth it.
Speaker 1: I think Hillary. I think Hillary is better than a
Speaker 1: twenty one shot. I think Hillary is more like a
Speaker 1: one in five that she runs, which when you think
Speaker 1: about what's going on in American politics, you think about her,
Speaker 1: She's run twice, hasn't won, and all the baggage that
Speaker 1: she brings along, it just goes to tell you that
Speaker 1: that's how entrenched the establishment is. That's how much the
Speaker 1: deep state of even the the elected Democrats and the
Speaker 1: all the different people that they bring along with them.
Speaker 1: You know, that's how immovable they are. I know, I know, John,
Speaker 1: do you think there's a crazy idea? Maybe maybe I'm
Speaker 1: a little crazy. I could see I could see this
Speaker 1: happening though, you know they how well, let me see
Speaker 1: how how old this Hillary? Hillary? I think she's seventy
Speaker 1: Clinton age. She yeah, she's seventy. She could so in
Speaker 1: she would be gosh, math on the fly here seventy two,
Speaker 1: they say, yeah, she's like Reagan age basically, seventy two
Speaker 1: to seventy six. I'm sure we're talking. Look at what
Speaker 1: they say about folks, look at Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Democrats
Speaker 1: have convinced themselves that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is like some
Speaker 1: kind of Olympic you know, triathlete or something. You know.
Speaker 1: They take photos, They've fallen over photos of her doing planks.
Speaker 1: I'm worried she's gonna pass out there there. They they've
Speaker 1: created this whole I mean, how old is Ginsburg. Let
Speaker 1: me just check this Ginsburg age. She is eighty five, folks,
Speaker 1: Ginsburg is eighty five years old. Hillary Clinton's only seventy.
Speaker 1: And they're hoping that Ginsburg is gonna make it at
Speaker 1: least another three years before or something like that, at
Speaker 1: least the three years before she would retire. Let's say
Speaker 1: they want Ginsburg to stay as the Supreme Court just
Speaker 1: until she's basically ninety. You don't think that they would
Speaker 1: hope that Hillary will extend the clock so that she
Speaker 1: I I don't know, I'm just really I really think
Speaker 1: this is gonna happen, and it would. I would Can
Speaker 1: you imagine or replay a rematch of Trump Hillary in
Speaker 1: It's It's a crazy idea. And I know people will
Speaker 1: make fun of me for this in the future, but
Speaker 1: right now, I don't know, it's somehow it kind of
Speaker 1: makes sense to me, somehow at all it all sticks together. Um,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm getting I'm just getting a weird feeling about it.
Speaker 1: There's just nobody else in the Democrat field right now.
Speaker 1: I mean, in the end, they're saying Elizabeth Warren Biden.
Speaker 1: I mean, how old is how old is Joe Biden?
Speaker 1: He's got to be He's got to be up there too.
Speaker 1: Seventy five people are talking about Biden running again. He's
Speaker 1: seventy five. Hillary is only seventy. How can explain this
Speaker 1: to me? Riddle me this? How is it that Joe
Speaker 1: Biden is being talked about? Is the kind of default
Speaker 1: Democrat candidate going into right now for the president? Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders seven when he six, they're talking about him running
Speaker 1: for president? And people can tell me that Hillary is what?
Speaker 1: Hillary is too old? Elizabeth Warren's the same age, she's
Speaker 1: sixty nine. Donald Trump is seventy two. So you know,
Speaker 1: I just I I think it's gonna be Hillary again.
Speaker 1: Just give me this, folks. If I'm right, this will
Speaker 1: be one of the greatest predictions you've ever heard on
Speaker 1: talk radio. If I end up being right, So just
Speaker 1: just mark this day down and then put it away
Speaker 1: for posterity, because we're all gonna forget about this if
Speaker 1: sure enough, Kamala Harris or some other you know, it's
Speaker 1: kind of mainstream Democrat ends up winning the nomination. But
Speaker 1: I'm telling you right now, if I had, if I
Speaker 1: had to put a bet down, I would bet Hillary
Speaker 1: with Kamala Harris below her on the ticket. That is
Speaker 1: what the Democrats run. He's holding the line for America.
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton is back. Oh, by the way, if they
Speaker 1: write tomorrow. The enthusiasm in the room was wanting, you know,
Speaker 1: they're like wanting. So you have to understand, I have
Speaker 1: a better education than they do, from a much better school.
Speaker 1: But the elite, they're the elite. They're the elite. I
Speaker 1: went to better schools, I went to better everything. And
Speaker 1: by the way, by the way, you're ready for this,
Speaker 1: and I'm president and they're not the most remarkable thing
Speaker 1: about the modern Democrat Party is how truly undemocratic they
Speaker 1: really have become. Right, the so called resistance is bad
Speaker 1: because their ideas have been rejected by the American people.
Speaker 1: And we're really reach that we're getting rid of those
Speaker 1: bad ideas one by one, so fair, and it is
Speaker 1: driving them crazy. They're the old and corrupt globalist ruling
Speaker 1: class that squandered trillions of dollars on foreign adventures. The
Speaker 1: whole world is watching, and the whole world gets it,
Speaker 1: and the whole world understands exactly what's going on. That's right, folks.
Speaker 1: Trump last night in Indiana, he was he was in
Speaker 1: in Trump form, baby, he was doing his thing. And
Speaker 1: you know, people, people love it. They love to hear
Speaker 1: when he just he tears into this notion of the elites.
Speaker 1: By the way, he's the read. One of the reasons
Speaker 1: journalists hate him so much. There's a lot, but because
Speaker 1: overwhelmingly journalists are people who think of themselves as that
Speaker 1: the the very upper echelon of society. They're they're concert
Speaker 1: insructing a narrative of of our lives and with our
Speaker 1: every move and every day. And then what we also
Speaker 1: find is that a lot of journalists tend to go
Speaker 1: to I mean, not not that I'm I don't think
Speaker 1: that school snobbery is founded. I don't think it's true.
Speaker 1: I don't think it's important, But a lot of journalists
Speaker 1: they think it's really important. You know, they'll tell you
Speaker 1: very quickly. They went to Columbia Journalism School, which who
Speaker 1: who even cares? No one, No one should ever go
Speaker 1: to journalism school. It's a giant waste of time. But
Speaker 1: the Columbia Journalism School as an Ivy League university. But
Speaker 1: generally speaking, and this is Trump, he knows where to
Speaker 1: how to push their buttons. You know, journalists are people
Speaker 1: that they don't they don't make as much money as
Speaker 1: the people they cover, but they want to have as
Speaker 1: much power as the people they cover and influence. And
Speaker 1: they generally went to second or third tier schools and
Speaker 1: have a chip on their shoulder about it. It's true,
Speaker 1: it's true. Look, I know a lot of journalists, so
Speaker 1: when Trump pokes them on this one man, it just
Speaker 1: gets them so angry. Uh. And that you know that
Speaker 1: that globalism is being rejected by people, and the old
Speaker 1: and corrupt globalist ruling class he says, is being rejected.
Speaker 1: That's another part of this that really upsets journalists, because
Speaker 1: you know who they all work for, folks. They all
Speaker 1: work for the American equivalent of oligarch's or in some
Speaker 1: cases foreign oligarchs who just happened to own like Carlos
Speaker 1: slim Mexican oligarch who owns a big piece of the
Speaker 1: New York Times, but domestically even like Jeff Bezos with
Speaker 1: the Washington Post. And you go down the line and
Speaker 1: you look at at who controls what in the media,
Speaker 1: and these guys, all the the the elites in the media,
Speaker 1: the mainsime media, all work for what you could basically say,
Speaker 1: there's our equivalent of an oligarch. And Trump didn't stop
Speaker 1: there like I said he was. He was doing. He
Speaker 1: was just talking about some great stuff last night. He
Speaker 1: spoke specifically about and I love what he does that
Speaker 1: the Sarcasm't think he spoke about what he's done for women,
Speaker 1: because we keep hearing it. And I know the polls
Speaker 1: show Trump's numbers with women not fantastic, but I think
Speaker 1: it's going to get better. But here's what he said
Speaker 1: about a plate too. All right, women, this is not good.
Speaker 1: So African American, historic, Asian, American, Hispanic and all historic. Right, Sorry, women,
Speaker 1: I let you down again. Women's unemployment rate recently reached
Speaker 1: only the lowest rate in sixty five years. I let
Speaker 1: you down. I'm sorry sixty five years, folks. Feels feels
Speaker 1: like that would be a pretty important data point. I
Speaker 1: feel like if that had been the case in the
Speaker 1: Obama administration, you would have heard it a lot. But
Speaker 1: then again, comparisons to anything uh related to Obama that
Speaker 1: are unfavorable when it comes to Trump in a while
Speaker 1: being compared, that's something that really upsets the That's the
Speaker 1: media and the elimination because remember that a lot of
Speaker 1: the media, a lot of the journals had a big
Speaker 1: investment in Obama's legacy because they constructed it. They created
Speaker 1: that whole narrative of Obama, right, I mean he yes,
Speaker 1: he gave them the two the two autobiographies. Mind you guys,
Speaker 1: wasn't even fifty years old. He'd written to autobiographies. Wow,
Speaker 1: has a very high opinion on himself. But they took
Speaker 1: it and ran with it. And can remember Axel Rod
Speaker 1: as a journalist. I mean, the whole Obama as a
Speaker 1: political figure was was a construct. But Trump is erasing
Speaker 1: obama Ism and when it comes to policy and the
Speaker 1: and the Obama legacies within the government and perhaps more
Speaker 1: clearly on the environment than anywhere else. As he said,
Speaker 1: as Trump said last night play three, we are canceling
Speaker 1: President Obama's illegal anti call so called clean power plan.
Speaker 1: You know, there's an example. It's such a beautiful name,
Speaker 1: clean power, clean power. Right. They want to have windmills
Speaker 1: all over the place when the wind doesn't blow, what
Speaker 1: do we do? We got problems. The environmentalists, we like
Speaker 1: windmills are really what about the thousands of birds they're killing.
Speaker 1: Try going to the bottom of a windmill someday. It's
Speaker 1: not a pretty picture. The house is staring at a windmill.
Speaker 1: Not good. When you hear that noise going round and
Speaker 1: round and round and you're living with it, and then
Speaker 1: you go crazy after a couple of years. Not good.
Speaker 1: And the environmentalists they always new wonderful again, take a reasonable,
Speaker 1: rational person approach to these things. That it all starts
Speaker 1: to make sense, doesn't it. That's all the Trump is doing.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's notion that we're gonna have all these windmills. Windmills.
Speaker 1: Windmills stink. I don't mean they actually smell, but windmills
Speaker 1: are are generally speaking, and eye sore. They are queas
Speaker 1: and arts for migratory foul. That's right. They buzzed them up.
Speaker 1: You get the picture. And Trump pointed that out. And
Speaker 1: if Obama's ideas in the environment were so good, he
Speaker 1: should have managed to get legislation through to pass it.
Speaker 1: If Obama really had a compelling argument about how we
Speaker 1: need to change the way that we uh the way
Speaker 1: that we use energy in our economy, he should have
Speaker 1: just made the case. He shouldn't have decided to use
Speaker 1: executive orders and then have the media cover for him
Speaker 1: on those orders. You know that that that's not what
Speaker 1: should have happened, but it is. You know what that
Speaker 1: means though, folks, means Trump can get rid of it.
Speaker 1: It means that Trump is getting rid of it and
Speaker 1: they hate it and they can't stop it. Right now.
Speaker 1: You know that the House of Representatives is in the
Speaker 1: balance this fall. I know that. But no matter what
Speaker 1: they got to deal with Trump on the executive side,
Speaker 1: he is just putting tons of great constitutionalist judges in
Speaker 1: the on the federal bench. Kavanaugh, Baby Kavanaugh was going
Speaker 1: to get through. So there's a lot to look forward
Speaker 1: to in this whole process. Now, let's talk more about
Speaker 1: the Mueller probe in just a moment. All I can
Speaker 1: say this, our Justice Department and our FBI at the
Speaker 1: top of each because inside they have incredible people. But
Speaker 1: our Justice Department and our FBI have to start doing
Speaker 1: their job and doing it right, and doing it now,
Speaker 1: because people are angry. People are angry. What's happening is
Speaker 1: a disgrace, and at some point I wanted to stay out,
Speaker 1: but at some point, if it doesn't straighten out properly,
Speaker 1: I want them to do their job, I will get involved,
Speaker 1: and I'll get in there by half to that's right, baby,
Speaker 1: Commander in chief may step in the chief executive United
Speaker 1: States government. He may say, you don't want enough to enough,
Speaker 1: and we're gonna have to actually clean house here. I
Speaker 1: think it's law. It's long past time for the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice. I like this this thing that I'm hearing
Speaker 1: that m Rudy Giuliani, who is out there and and
Speaker 1: is a staunch defender of the president on all these issues.
Speaker 1: They're putting together a quote counter report according to Daily Beast.
Speaker 1: Here that's gonna just go to the very legitimacy of
Speaker 1: Mueller's investigation. The folks is important. This is a political fight.
Speaker 1: Let's not fool ourselves for one second. This is all
Speaker 1: about politics. It has been from the start. This is
Speaker 1: a The whole rationale behind this investigation is not about
Speaker 1: does anyone even care about the Russian inference anymore? No,
Speaker 1: what are we doing about it? Nothing? It was a joke.
Speaker 1: Russian interference was a drop in not just the bucket,
Speaker 1: a drop in the ocean. Didn't change the election, change anything.
Speaker 1: That was just a pretext to get this whole thing going.
Speaker 1: And here's what we know is going to happen. Mueller
Speaker 1: is gonna release this whole big report and no matter
Speaker 1: what it says at this point, just because they've prosecuted
Speaker 1: a bunch of different administration tied officials are formerly tried
Speaker 1: the administration, Uh, they're gonna say that there's so much
Speaker 1: corruption around Trump. It's gonna be the the the way
Speaker 1: the Democrats position this. They're gonna say there's so much
Speaker 1: Trump corruption that even if they don't find anything, they
Speaker 1: will um they will say it needs to be there
Speaker 1: needs to be impeachment. So even if nothing really new
Speaker 1: or nothing additional comes out of this, they're gonna say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: there's there's enough already. I mean, they're going for impeachment
Speaker 1: no matter what. That's really the bottom line. They're going
Speaker 1: for impeachment, no matter what the end result of them
Speaker 1: all the approbriated. So why not get ahead of this
Speaker 1: and make the case that this whole thing is a joke,
Speaker 1: because it is, you know, Trump should be on offenses.
Speaker 1: People should be on offense of this one, and they
Speaker 1: are on offense. All right. This is a political hack move,
Speaker 1: uh And that's what it's been from the very beginning.
Speaker 1: You know, they've got this uh Manafort associate Sam Patton
Speaker 1: that they charged today. He has pleaded guilty in a
Speaker 1: case that is referred by Muller and you know, federal
Speaker 1: prosecutors uh nailed this guy, all right, So what do
Speaker 1: they get him on, by the way, failure to register
Speaker 1: as a foreign agent, folks, or I'm sorry, acting as
Speaker 1: an agent of a foreign principle. Um. He pleaded guilty
Speaker 1: to acting as an agent of a foreign principle. So yeah,
Speaker 1: and yeah, no, it's I'm sorry, it is failure register.
Speaker 1: This is a fairer violation. Phases up to five years
Speaker 1: in prison for this one. Five years in prison, a
Speaker 1: fine about the two and fifty thousand dollars because he
Speaker 1: bought because he does work in Ukraine with you know,
Speaker 1: he was tied to man of four. He bought uh
Speaker 1: four tickets to the inauguration, paid fifty dollars for four
Speaker 1: tickets inauguration, uh, for a Ukrainian oligarch, so and the
Speaker 1: and he hid that he did it through a straw
Speaker 1: purchase or something, so it wasn't reported properly. Who the
Speaker 1: heck cares? I mean, Okay, this is technically illegal, but
Speaker 1: a lot of things are technically illegal, folks, like storing
Speaker 1: classified information on your home Brew server in your basement
Speaker 1: when you're secretary of state. That's illegal. To a lot
Speaker 1: of things are illegal. You know that the prosecutor's office
Speaker 1: always has to take into account the ultimate aim of justice.
Speaker 1: It's not just about oh, well, we can find a
Speaker 1: way to make this or to talk about this in
Speaker 1: such a way that it's that it's illegal. Uh. To
Speaker 1: construe this as illegal what with Trump? Anything they can do, anyone,
Speaker 1: they can flip, anybody, they can bring into the the
Speaker 1: fold here as part of the anti Trump resistance. And
Speaker 1: that's why they've gone after this. Gun fair they're gonna
Speaker 1: have this is another name, another guy, another nobody who
Speaker 1: is gonna have it. Has has his life upended and
Speaker 1: ruined because sure enough they want to get at Trump.
Speaker 1: I also thought this is intering that you had an
Speaker 1: According to CNN here you had two prosecutors leave uh
Speaker 1: Special Council Muller's office. They're relatively junior um, but they
Speaker 1: had been with Mueller for a while. I wonder if
Speaker 1: some of them realize early on here that or not
Speaker 1: early on, but in advance, that this is not gonna
Speaker 1: end up. There's not gonna end well for the Muller probe. Actually,
Speaker 1: I think people are going to look back on the
Speaker 1: entire Muller Fiasca. People are honest about it. I mean,
Speaker 1: they're the anti Trump partisans. They like it. There are people,
Speaker 1: I want to be very clear, there are people right
Speaker 1: now in this country, lots of them, and they a
Speaker 1: lot of them work at CNN. There are people in
Speaker 1: the media and the Democratic already who if there was
Speaker 1: unconscionable bias that was exposed from Mueller, even beyond what
Speaker 1: we already know. But I mean, if they had Mueller
Speaker 1: on tape saying, you know, we were we gotta get Trump,
Speaker 1: no matter what we have to do, if if we
Speaker 1: have to fabricate evidence will stop him, to borrow from
Speaker 1: Peter Struck, and if that audio that you know, hypothetical
Speaker 1: audio was made public, they would still be very thankful
Speaker 1: and happy to Muller because of all the damage he's
Speaker 1: done to Trump's presidency already. It's not about justice, it's
Speaker 1: not about the truth. It is about destroying this administration.
Speaker 1: That's the primary motivation, or that's what has been pushing
Speaker 1: them all along. And so I like that they're being proactive.
Speaker 1: I like the Giuliani's out there making the case and
Speaker 1: the Trump is saying, all right, d O j R.
Speaker 1: And by the way, he's putting them on notice too.
Speaker 1: Trump's let them not just because the Mueller probe, you know,
Speaker 1: the Muller probe ends, there's still people who are out
Speaker 1: there working at the d O j uh and and
Speaker 1: then it's gonna be timed to dig into it. There
Speaker 1: are people, remember that as part of this as well.
Speaker 1: There are people who they may find themselves being investigated
Speaker 1: when they no longer have the shield of the ongoing
Speaker 1: Muller probe. You gotta remember right now, anything Trump does
Speaker 1: that can be construed as in any way affecting the
Speaker 1: Muller probe, Interfering with the Muller probe is politically toxic.
Speaker 1: So that creates some degree of invulnerability at least temporary
Speaker 1: and vulnerability for the folks at DJ and FBI who
Speaker 1: may have been playing dirty here all along. Once the
Speaker 1: Mueller probe ends, and if Republicans managed to hold the House,
Speaker 1: that's another big part of this. Once the Muller probe ends,
Speaker 1: that stops, then we can start to really have the
Speaker 1: GOP dig into just what exactly happened here. Why is
Speaker 1: Bruce Or only testifying behind closed doors? For example? What
Speaker 1: was that all about? I want to know what Bruce
Speaker 1: Or was doing. When the American people have a right
Speaker 1: to know there is a pre is it n see
Speaker 1: at stake? It's no longer acceptable to say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know, we need to we need to respect the
Speaker 1: the institutional you know, institutional prerogatives that are at stake here. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: the presidency is at stake. I think that this means,
Speaker 1: you know, talking about the president as being norm busting,
Speaker 1: he needs to bust some norms on this thing. So
Speaker 1: I like that. By the way, Roger Stone has also
Speaker 1: said that he expects Mueller to charge him. I think
Speaker 1: that's just Stone, another guy that I've interviewed this summer.
Speaker 1: I think that's just Stone honestly trying to get attention.
Speaker 1: I don't think he really believes that Mueller is going
Speaker 1: to charge him. I think that Stone realizes he wants
Speaker 1: to be in the center of the story. He wants
Speaker 1: people to be taking photos of him and his uh
Speaker 1: very let's say, idiosyncratically tailored suits. I think that's his plan. Um,
Speaker 1: apparently Stone is quite the snappy dresser. I don't think
Speaker 1: that he's actually gonna get charged, but we'll see. I
Speaker 1: don't think it's gonna be a or bombshell today, but
Speaker 1: hopefully while I'm on air here the bombshell doesn't drop,
Speaker 1: because then I'll look like I was wrong, which I
Speaker 1: don't like. I've got much more coming up. Team, stay
Speaker 1: with me. The fbion calls home title theft one of
Speaker 1: the fastest growing crimes. Brace yourselves, folks. Having your credit
Speaker 1: card stolen is nothing compared to the hell you're in
Speaker 1: for once an identity thief takes control of your home's title.
Speaker 1: I can't stress it enough. It's so easy for the
Speaker 1: bad guys to do this, and I know that we
Speaker 1: all have this sense of everybody around us. There's so
Speaker 1: many people. This isn't gonna happen to me. It does
Speaker 1: happen to people all the time, and if it happens
Speaker 1: to you, by the time you figure it out, it's
Speaker 1: too late. All the bad guys have to do is
Speaker 1: take you off your home's title, replace it with an alias,
Speaker 1: and then borrow every penny they can against your home's equity.
Speaker 1: You only find out when the bank starts saying, hey,
Speaker 1: where are those payments you ow us? Okay for just
Speaker 1: pennies a day. Home title Lock protects my most viable asset,
Speaker 1: my family's home. Register now for a free analysis discover
Speaker 1: if your home's title has been compromised. That's a sixty
Speaker 1: value you for free. Visit home title lock dot com Again,
Speaker 1: that's home title lock dot com. This includes a commitment
Speaker 1: to universal healthcare, universal healthcare, the promise of universal healthcare.
Speaker 1: Health care is a human right and not a privilege.
Speaker 1: This human right we can ensure all of our people
Speaker 1: Medicare for all is actually much more, is actually much
Speaker 1: cheaper than the current system that we pay right now,
Speaker 1: universal right, folks, Universal health care is a is a
Speaker 1: universal right. I mean, this is a This isn't a
Speaker 1: window into the soul of the Democratic Party right now. Um,
Speaker 1: but keep in mind that health care is the number
Speaker 1: one issue for voters according to a number of polls
Speaker 1: that I've seen in the last month. So health care
Speaker 1: really matters. And this is where I think that I'll
Speaker 1: be honestly, I think that Trump is not making enough
Speaker 1: of a case on this when yes, Obamacare stinks, but
Speaker 1: we haven't really fully replaced Obamacare. I'm not gonna say
Speaker 1: anything about a certain senator right now and how he
Speaker 1: voted on that whole issue, but you know, there are
Speaker 1: some people that decided they weren't going to play ball
Speaker 1: with the rest of of Team GOP on that. But
Speaker 1: we haven't gotten the full repeal and replace. And we
Speaker 1: know that people are really concerned about healthcare. In fact,
Speaker 1: here according to Forbes, because I talked about this with
Speaker 1: with some frequency, when people say that they're really concerned
Speaker 1: about healthcare, the number one problem they have is prescription prices.
Speaker 1: And then the number two concerned is single payer coverage.
Speaker 1: So that and then we've got Medicare funding, Medicaid funding,
Speaker 1: And when you look at this, what you see, folks,
Speaker 1: is that people are worried about their prescription drugs. They
Speaker 1: have been convinced that single payer is a good thing,
Speaker 1: and they want the government to be paying for their healthcare.
Speaker 1: This is troubling. This. If there's one thing I can
Speaker 1: point to that makes me worried for the mid terms,
Speaker 1: it's that the Republican messaging on healthcare right now is
Speaker 1: almost non existent. Yes, the economy is really good, but
Speaker 1: healthcare is something that has a real uh impact in
Speaker 1: the way voters think about which party is addressing their needs.
Speaker 1: It goes, it goes to people's real concerns. Right to say,
Speaker 1: your your stock portfolio, or your your wages or whatever
Speaker 1: is up ten or that's great, But in your back
Speaker 1: of your mind, if you think I can't afford healthcare
Speaker 1: and if I get sick, I'm gonna go bankrupt, that
Speaker 1: affects you a lot more. That's gonna affect the way
Speaker 1: you vote a lot more. But I am concerning that.
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders, their healthcare is the universal right. Um. I
Speaker 1: think that almost sounded like Cuomo, but it's Bernie. We're
Speaker 1: not doing a good enough job on this one. We
Speaker 1: we the the GOP needs to flood the air waves
Speaker 1: with why single payor is going to be a disaster,
Speaker 1: why single payer is destined to be an economic catastrophe
Speaker 1: and also won't be good care. You know, I've run
Speaker 1: this experiment in my own life. I've been doing doctor's
Speaker 1: office when I had crappy healthcare, a specialist and it
Speaker 1: was hard to get an appointment. I had to wait forever,
Speaker 1: and I had a doctor that I didn't like, and
Speaker 1: then I didn't think it was doing a very good job.
Speaker 1: They rushed me in and out, and that that was
Speaker 1: my healthcare. I've also been to a doctor where I said,
Speaker 1: I am writing a check, how much does this cost?
Speaker 1: And let me tell you something. That doctor saw me
Speaker 1: right on time, spent a lot of time with me,
Speaker 1: no bs, no fuss, no muss, got exactly the care
Speaker 1: that I was promised, and it was delivered in a
Speaker 1: timely and efficient fashion. The market still matters. People need
Speaker 1: to be made aware of this. We if we do
Speaker 1: not have the economic incentives for we're not just more
Speaker 1: efficient coverage, but more healthcare delivered to more people. If
Speaker 1: we don't have greater delivery mechanisms for healthcare. If we're not,
Speaker 1: if doctors feel like, you know what, it's not worth
Speaker 1: it anymore, we're gonna have big problems here, folks. What
Speaker 1: we do have though, on on our side of the
Speaker 1: equation in this whole thing because I I am critical
Speaker 1: and I'm concerned as we're going into this holiday week,
Speaker 1: and I'm concerned about the messaging around healthcare, no question
Speaker 1: about it. And I see here, I ask you, what
Speaker 1: do you What is the GOP saying they're going to
Speaker 1: accomplish on healthcare? What are they promising to get done
Speaker 1: on healthcare? I don't even know. You tell me how
Speaker 1: they're approaching this issue, you know, you you tell me
Speaker 1: what they think the messages. Yeah, Obamacare stinks. But guess
Speaker 1: what they're not. They're not pushing for Obamacare anymore anymore, folks.
Speaker 1: The Democrats are saying they want single payer. Forget Obamacare.
Speaker 1: They just want the government to start writing checks for
Speaker 1: everybody's healthcare. And you've got states now that are saying
Speaker 1: they want to do it too. I hope the states
Speaker 1: do it for so that we'll see how disastrous it
Speaker 1: is and maybe that will warn us off from But
Speaker 1: as I said to you, Democrats always have a way
Speaker 1: of saying that the experiment that they that has been run,
Speaker 1: you can't draw any conclusions from it because it didn't
Speaker 1: give the result they wanted. Um. But on our side
Speaker 1: of of the of the fence or what we've got
Speaker 1: going for us in this whole situation is that the
Speaker 1: Democrats all they have to do is not be crazy,
Speaker 1: and they can't do it. They can't do it. Democrats
Speaker 1: are running around saying all sorts of just nonsensical, insane things.
Speaker 1: Here is, for example, Sean Caston of Chicago's six sixth district,
Speaker 1: he's a Democrat. Here's a little little comparison. He threw
Speaker 1: out their play nine in many ways. And this is
Speaker 1: to send the hyperbolical this Trump and a tremendicinetic count
Speaker 1: because they used to to you know, act Trump and
Speaker 1: bin Laden have a lot in common. This This would
Speaker 1: be like saying Mother Teresa and Hitler have a lot
Speaker 1: in common. They're both really charismatic and inspired devoted followings.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's a true statement, but it's a moronic statement.
Speaker 1: Is an idiotic thing to say Trump and bin Laden
Speaker 1: have a lot I mean, first of the Democrats are
Speaker 1: the ones who were always you know, soft pedaling Islamic terrorism.
Speaker 1: By the way, you see that they released a number
Speaker 1: of these people tied to this facility in you that
Speaker 1: we that were tied to this facility out in what
Speaker 1: was it New Mexico. They released them without without charge.
Speaker 1: I couldn't believe it anyway. Um, but but here you
Speaker 1: got a guy who's gonna compare Trump in Midland, and
Speaker 1: clearly he thinks that just by taking such a reckless
Speaker 1: and stupid cheap shot at the pre is it in,
Speaker 1: he's helping himself. This is what I mean. Democrats, all
Speaker 1: they have to do is not be crazy. They can't
Speaker 1: do it. They can't do it. They got Bertie Santis,
Speaker 1: what a little let's go pay for dead and the
Speaker 1: you know, the government's gonna fund all your health kid,
Speaker 1: because it's a universal right to have your health care funded,
Speaker 1: to have your college paid for. Well, no, it's really not.
Speaker 1: It's really not emergency care, life saving care. Yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: we're we're a wealthy enough society that we've got to
Speaker 1: make sure that we're saving lives. But in our healthcare
Speaker 1: covers a huge range of is you know, can I
Speaker 1: get the government to pay for like a massage for
Speaker 1: me twice a week. It's great for my blood pressure
Speaker 1: and it really helps things out. Universal health care? Where
Speaker 1: does that stop and start? Of course, you're gonna have
Speaker 1: government bureaucrats are in charge of this stuff, and they're
Speaker 1: gonna make all these decisions. Oh but but in terms
Speaker 1: of Democrats that don't seem to be staying within the
Speaker 1: bounds of normalcy. Here is Minnesota House candidate Kyle Green
Speaker 1: play clip six. Please hi, I mean neighbor, Kyle Green.
Speaker 1: I'm for just eight state representative. I'm not asking for
Speaker 1: you to vote for me as your leader. I'm asking
Speaker 1: for you to vote for me as your public servant.
Speaker 1: The primary duty of a state representative is to protect
Speaker 1: all the rights of his constituents. I want to be
Speaker 1: your state representative. I want to be your public servant,
Speaker 1: and I want to be your name. Uh he said
Speaker 1: the N word at the end of that, folks. Um.
Speaker 1: So this guy thinks that the way to push his
Speaker 1: campaign to the public and put you know, and reach
Speaker 1: the next level is to throw a racial slur into
Speaker 1: his political ad. Oh he's a Democrat. We know that
Speaker 1: he's a Democrat. Wow. This is why, even though I
Speaker 1: think our healthcare messaging on the GOP sucks right now,
Speaker 1: we might still be able to hold the House because
Speaker 1: the Left is a bunch of loony's. So we got
Speaker 1: that going for us, which is nice. But I want
Speaker 1: to tell you. We've got we've got Sean Spicer joining
Speaker 1: us here and just a little bit spicy. That's right.
Speaker 1: Sean Spicer has got a book out now. He was
Speaker 1: White House Press secretary. I got a chance to meet him.
Speaker 1: He actually came and hung out with me today on
Speaker 1: Rising as well, so we got to chat for it
Speaker 1: for quite a while. And you know, he's a very
Speaker 1: nice guy, I gotta say, And he's he's a he's
Speaker 1: a jovial fellow. It's a little more diminutive than you
Speaker 1: might guess, kind of a little bit on the petite side.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying. I'm just saying, but you know, he's
Speaker 1: I could tell that. You know, he''re in this book
Speaker 1: and he was in the RNC for seven or eight years.
Speaker 1: He's been around the game for quite a long time.
Speaker 1: He's a little, uh, a little politically shell shocked after
Speaker 1: what he went through. So we're I'm gonna really put
Speaker 1: him through his paces, ask him a lot of questions
Speaker 1: about what what's what was really going on in this
Speaker 1: White House? Is a dysfunctional What was it like for
Speaker 1: s and Al to make fun of you? Really? Do
Speaker 1: you like the nickname spicy? You know, we're gonna get
Speaker 1: all that's coming up this hour, folks. So we're gonna
Speaker 1: have Sean Spicer here in the Freedom hut uh. Stay
Speaker 1: with me for that and much more, folks. Our nation's
Speaker 1: capital has its charms, but it also is a place
Speaker 1: where there's plenty of break ins and and plenty of
Speaker 1: petty crimes to worry about. That's why I have a
Speaker 1: simply Safe home security system at my place. Simply Safe
Speaker 1: is all about the details. So whenever I'm out and
Speaker 1: about in this city, I know that I can check
Speaker 1: in on my place via the app that simply Safe
Speaker 1: has set up for me, and I can make sure
Speaker 1: that I am protected against intruders, fires, leaks, and burst pipes.
Speaker 1: Makes me feel like I've got somebody watching my six
Speaker 1: all the time. Simply Safe is there for you. Seven
Speaker 1: monitoring is only fourteen a month. Okay, check it out
Speaker 1: for yourself. There's a reason simply Safe protects over two
Speaker 1: million people and as a company, is worth over a
Speaker 1: billion dollars. Order you're simply safe system. Now my listeners
Speaker 1: get free shipping and returns. Go to simply safe dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck. That's simply safe dot com slash buck again.
Speaker 1: Simply Safe dot com slash buck Well. I just think
Speaker 1: the uh, the volume, and the to me a rationality
Speaker 1: of some of the things he's saying in his tweets
Speaker 1: at least tell me that, you know, the walls are
Speaker 1: kind of crashing in on him. Think what he's trying
Speaker 1: to do, to use a military expression, is prep the
Speaker 1: battlefield for uh, taking some action later and in the
Speaker 1: meantime maximum extent that he can undermining the credibility of
Speaker 1: the investigations. Yeah, that's the former Director National Intelligence. I've
Speaker 1: spoken to him about this whole issue of the Russia
Speaker 1: collusion investigation, and you know, it's so interesting. That was,
Speaker 1: in my in my opinion, a classic case that that's
Speaker 1: just sound. But we played a few of what psychologists
Speaker 1: called projection, because that what what he accused the president
Speaker 1: of doing, which is preparing the battlefield of you know,
Speaker 1: the of public opinion, essentially preparing the battlefield for what's
Speaker 1: going to come. I believe that has been a primary
Speaker 1: motivation for Brennan and Clapper and Hayden all along. Now, look,
Speaker 1: Hayden's in a slightly different category because he wasn't in office,
Speaker 1: and this is an important distinction. He was not serving
Speaker 1: Indi intelligence community during the Russia collusion situation, right during
Speaker 1: during that whole narrative, that whole fairy tale, but Clapper
Speaker 1: and Brennan were comey was these are people who have
Speaker 1: fingerprints all over this thing. And I believe that one
Speaker 1: of the reasons they've decided to just drop the mask
Speaker 1: and run out there and show themselves to be so
Speaker 1: rapidly partisan is that one they want to try and
Speaker 1: shift the Overton window of discussion around Trump and Russia
Speaker 1: collusion in a way that will be more favorable to
Speaker 1: them when the truth comes out. And too, they want
Speaker 1: to make sure they have established because they know how
Speaker 1: powerful it is to have the left wing of America
Speaker 1: come to your defense, to have the media start writing
Speaker 1: all these profiles. I mean that puff piece they wrote
Speaker 1: about Bruce Or, they made it sound like Bruce Or
Speaker 1: was single handedly taken on the Russian mafia. You know,
Speaker 1: it's just like running around like a one man army,
Speaker 1: like like Bruce Or was basically a Dolph Lundgren movie
Speaker 1: in the late eighties. You know, he takes on the
Speaker 1: Russian mob one Ruski at a time. I mean, it
Speaker 1: was Bruce Or is a desk jockey, I mean, just
Speaker 1: like me back in the old CIA days. Right. Actually
Speaker 1: I saw some more zones, but that's a different thing,
Speaker 1: and I'm still doing it, still doing analytic work. But Bruce,
Speaker 1: I don't know if he's ever been in in any
Speaker 1: of the active combat zones. All I know is that
Speaker 1: the guy is not exactly an imposing figure, and he's
Speaker 1: also not the hero that the New York Times is
Speaker 1: making him sound like. He's an ideological zealot. But they
Speaker 1: want to make sure that when push comes to shove,
Speaker 1: they will have of the left wing of the Democratic Party.
Speaker 1: I'm really the Democratic Party overall, because the left wing
Speaker 1: controls the Democratic Party. I mean, the the psychological center
Speaker 1: of the Democratic Party is far left. And they're hoping
Speaker 1: that by establishing they're anti Trump bona fides, they will
Speaker 1: have assistance when we finally get to all the truth.
Speaker 1: And that's why you know this, this Victor Davis Hansen
Speaker 1: piece that's been making the rounds. I've been given v
Speaker 1: d h a lot of love this week. I'm I
Speaker 1: think he's great. I think he's a fantastic writer and
Speaker 1: a very just a very clear minded thinker. And I
Speaker 1: remember I met him out at I met him out
Speaker 1: at the Hoover Institute when I was out there as
Speaker 1: a visiting fellow. Um, what about a year ago, and
Speaker 1: I for said, you know, I read your book A
Speaker 1: War Like no Other, and you know, Victor, it was
Speaker 1: it was so good and I just really appreciate all
Speaker 1: your work and think you do such a good job.
Speaker 1: He's kind of like, Okay, thank you. He was really
Speaker 1: not He's a really low key He's a really low
Speaker 1: key guy. I can say that for sure. He's a
Speaker 1: low key guy. I was like, Oh, I was like,
Speaker 1: I think you're one of the finest editorial writers of
Speaker 1: our of you know, of of my jet or not
Speaker 1: of my generation. But you know, around the scene today,
Speaker 1: that's very nice of you. You know, he's not he's
Speaker 1: not effusive. He's not exactly gonna give you a high
Speaker 1: five and a hug if you see him. But he's
Speaker 1: a great writer's a good dude. And he's just saying
Speaker 1: that Trump needs to declassify, as I've been saying for
Speaker 1: not just weeks but months now. I want Trump too
Speaker 1: deep class f five had enough. I've had enough of
Speaker 1: all of this, and that's that's what needs to happen. Here.
Speaker 1: We need a shock therapy of truth around this whole
Speaker 1: Russia collusion thing. We already know what's coming, folks. That's
Speaker 1: what Clapper saying. The walls are closing in on Trump.
Speaker 1: What do you mean the Muller probe is run Everyone's
Speaker 1: losing patience with the Muller probe. It's running out of steam.
Speaker 1: The walls are closing in on Trump. How they They
Speaker 1: had thirty hours with McGann, the White House counsel, and
Speaker 1: they still have no evidence of illusion. No intelligent person
Speaker 1: could look me in the eye and and say to
Speaker 1: me that if they had real evidence of collusion, we
Speaker 1: would not have heard of it by now. It's just
Speaker 1: not possible. It would have leaked. It would have leaked.
Speaker 1: So that's why they're doing all this other stuff. You know,
Speaker 1: Muller's is kicking, kicking all the tires, turning over all
Speaker 1: the stones. Uh, you know, mix your metaphors, you get
Speaker 1: what I'm saying. That's what's going on here. So you
Speaker 1: can believe me, or you can believe you can believe
Speaker 1: Al Gore, who had this to say about Trump Plate twelve.
Speaker 1: So if he's watching this, what's your message to President
Speaker 1: Trump when it comes to climate. Oh, my only message
Speaker 1: would be resigned. I mean, I don't mean to be
Speaker 1: flipping about it. I don't think he is prepared to
Speaker 1: listen to advise about the importance of clean air and
Speaker 1: clean water. I don't think he is prepared to listen
Speaker 1: to avoth on clean air and clean walloe. So he's
Speaker 1: not telling him to resign over the Mueller probe, even
Speaker 1: he should resign over his environmental policies. According to al Gore, guys,
Speaker 1: you know, it's just a reminder we're always told that
Speaker 1: Trump is is so norm busting, and it's so crazy
Speaker 1: as president. Al Gore won the popular vote in two thousand,
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in These are not
Speaker 1: just unimpressive people, they're clowns. They are clownish, lee unimpressive.
Speaker 1: There's nothing to recommend them. Al Gore is a fraud.
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton is a crook and a thief. And that's
Speaker 1: what the Democrats offer up to us instead. Oh, we're
Speaker 1: we're so foolish because we wanted to give Trump a shot,
Speaker 1: not because I think I don't think Trump is some
Speaker 1: kind of messiah. I just think he's gonna do a
Speaker 1: good job. Can I just can I have somebody in
Speaker 1: office who's doing a good job instead of somebody who's
Speaker 1: you know, transforming the thoughts of the American literati about
Speaker 1: the future of this country and grappling with that's historical
Speaker 1: excesses or whatever. I just want somebody who was like, Yeah,
Speaker 1: let's make things work here, Let's do a good job.
Speaker 1: I don't want a politician that we have to think about.
Speaker 1: In fact, I would prefer in a as Trump's success
Speaker 1: goes on and further and further, other than his battles
Speaker 1: with the media, which are amazing, I just want to
Speaker 1: be able to ignore much of the political squabble and
Speaker 1: focus on other problems, you know. I want to sit
Speaker 1: here and talk about how do we you know, how
Speaker 1: do we as a country come together to deal with
Speaker 1: the opioid epidemic, mean, how do we um deal with
Speaker 1: the problem of mass structural unemployment that may come from
Speaker 1: artificial intelligence and computer learning, and how that will affect
Speaker 1: the workplace and essentially eliminating a lot of a lot
Speaker 1: of jobs. Right, I mean, those are real, those are
Speaker 1: things we should all be thinking about. That that requires
Speaker 1: research and analysis and time and depth of conversation. Instead,
Speaker 1: it's oh my god, Trump's a racist. He's a racist.
Speaker 1: Trump is not a racist. They can keep saying it,
Speaker 1: but they keep saying it because they can actually come
Speaker 1: up with a real repudiation of his policies, because it's
Speaker 1: hard to convince people that success is bad. All right, everybody,
Speaker 1: I got a special treat for you before you head
Speaker 1: off for your Labor Day weekend festivities. Forget about the
Speaker 1: fact that it is a kind of Marxist left wing holiday.
Speaker 1: It's fun. You get a day off, So let's get
Speaker 1: excited about that. I have a Shawn Spicer here with
Speaker 1: me in studio in the Freedom Hut. Shawn Spicer, as
Speaker 1: you all know, was the White House Press secretary. He
Speaker 1: has a new book out, The Briefing, Mr Spicer. Great
Speaker 1: to have you here, Thanks for having me. Alright, so
Speaker 1: the book, tell me a bit about it. Uh So,
Speaker 1: there's there's two people ask me all the time, why
Speaker 1: did I write a book? I left the White House
Speaker 1: and my plan wasn't to do it. But two things
Speaker 1: kind of came to light after I left. I was
Speaker 1: doing a lot of speaking going around the country. One
Speaker 1: is sort of the perception and source of information that
Speaker 1: people had about me, where they'd say I read in
Speaker 1: the New York Times, they're read in Politico that you
Speaker 1: felt thought, and I finally realized when it comes to me,
Speaker 1: if I want to get my story straight, instead of
Speaker 1: relying on a bunch of mainstream media folks, I might
Speaker 1: as well tell my own story as to how I
Speaker 1: got where I got, what was going on at key
Speaker 1: moments in time. And the second important thing, um and
Speaker 1: you and I were talking about this coming in is
Speaker 1: that there was a lot of things going on during
Speaker 1: the campaign in terms of what we were doing it,
Speaker 1: why we were doing it, the use of data are
Speaker 1: ground game things that no one was reporting on at
Speaker 1: the time. And I thought, if I don't put this
Speaker 1: down on paper and talk about what was going on
Speaker 1: behind the scenes, it's gonna get lost to history. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, the mainstream narrative on this stuff is that
Speaker 1: Trump won because Trump and his Twitter account exactly and
Speaker 1: then and and since then, it's because we colluded with
Speaker 1: some Russians, right so, right, But but I mean the
Speaker 1: idea is that there was a real sophisticated use of data.
Speaker 1: We had ground folks, uh grunt, you know, troops around
Speaker 1: the country and key battleground states were matching the data
Speaker 1: with the people, we knew where to go, what to
Speaker 1: what adds to run. I mean there was a level
Speaker 1: of sophistication that no one wanted to take the time
Speaker 1: to look at because they thought, well, Hillary's got a
Speaker 1: thousand people in Brooklyn, you guys have a hundred, she
Speaker 1: must be doing it better. Uh. And sitting back and
Speaker 1: showing people, walking people through the campaign, what we were seeing,
Speaker 1: how many votes we needed, where we thought we could
Speaker 1: pick them up, blah blah blah was to me crucial
Speaker 1: for people who look back on this campaign and really
Speaker 1: want to understand why Trump won. Now, there are some
Speaker 1: questions I gotta ask you, right, There's some that if
Speaker 1: I sat here and didn't ask right handed, right, yeah,
Speaker 1: people would say how could you not not not get
Speaker 1: an answer on this one? For example, Uh, why so
Speaker 1: many departures from this White House? Um? That's a good question,
Speaker 1: because I think there's probably three main reasons. Um. Number one,
Speaker 1: Trump did not come into this office having been a politician,
Speaker 1: so he want if you think about Obama, Bush, Clinton,
Speaker 1: whatever they had been in politics, they had a cadre
Speaker 1: of people in orders that they had worked with for years.
Speaker 1: So you had people to call upon to Phil Key
Speaker 1: roles that you had worked it worked around. Um, he
Speaker 1: didn't have that, So he has this disparate group of folks.
Speaker 1: We didn't have a robust campaign to pull from either.
Speaker 1: So you're pulling people that you know are from business,
Speaker 1: that are recommended to you, and some of them just
Speaker 1: are not good fits. Some of them aren't qualified. And
Speaker 1: then lastly, I think there's a high burnout rate and
Speaker 1: and that's another part of it in your estimation. I
Speaker 1: know you've been out for a while. Again, I mean, look,
Speaker 1: I think that the if if we turn the corner
Speaker 1: a year two, there are a lot of senior folks
Speaker 1: that I would be surprised if they don't leave. I mean,
Speaker 1: the level of intensity that's there never you know, just
Speaker 1: of any White House is crazy, never mind this White House,
Speaker 1: which is running on an exponential factor of that. Never
Speaker 1: mind the fact that something like McGann or others have
Speaker 1: been there through the campaign. So if you think about it,
Speaker 1: it's not just your time in the White House. I
Speaker 1: spent six years at the RNC before seven months of
Speaker 1: the White House, I had spent seven almost seven years
Speaker 1: just a NonStop And when you think about that in
Speaker 1: terms of you know, there's very little downtime. There's very
Speaker 1: little weekends that you get off, and so it's not
Speaker 1: just that. And I mean it gets ramped up in
Speaker 1: the White House to to a level that is even
Speaker 1: crazier than the fits of the final weeks of the
Speaker 1: campaign on a constant basis. But I think something like
Speaker 1: Don has come in and he's done his job, and
Speaker 1: he's basically saying, Okay, it's been two years plus the campaign.
Speaker 1: I need to spend some time with my family now. People,
Speaker 1: even even from from my side of it, and I'm
Speaker 1: supportive of the president. I get to be open about this,
Speaker 1: which is nice. I'm like a lot of journalists who
Speaker 1: say they're just being neutral. I support President Trump. I
Speaker 1: voted for President Trump, and I think on a policy level,
Speaker 1: he's done a great job. Is first now what eighteen
Speaker 1: months or so in office. Uh, And I'm very happy
Speaker 1: with all that. However, I do here and you have
Speaker 1: particular insight into this that the and and when I
Speaker 1: say here it, I I read it, I see it.
Speaker 1: It's being talked about all the time. But this White
Speaker 1: House from a bureaucratic and procedure standpoint, the actual White
Speaker 1: House is dysfunctional, that there are problems with the day
Speaker 1: to day one. Is that true? And if it's true,
Speaker 1: doesn't matter. The second part of your question is the
Speaker 1: key part, because at the end of the day, are
Speaker 1: you looking at style or substance? Are you looking at
Speaker 1: results or not? And I think that if I'm of
Speaker 1: if I'm a citizen and I go, is the economy
Speaker 1: better or more people working on my way is going up?
Speaker 1: Do you really care about the process that got you there? Conversely,
Speaker 1: if the process is running smoothly and yet things aren't
Speaker 1: going well, do you really care how well something's being run? Um,
Speaker 1: I would argue that it's disruptive. The president didn't come in,
Speaker 1: and this dovetails what you asked. The first question is,
Speaker 1: I don't think you're looking at somebody who's looking at
Speaker 1: norms and traditions and procedures and saying we've got to
Speaker 1: follow all these He's looking at getting things done, bringing
Speaker 1: in people that he thinks have unique experiences and abilities
Speaker 1: to get things done. And he's not looking too huge
Speaker 1: tool to how things have been done since you know
Speaker 1: Dwight Eisenhower, it's I'm gonna get it done no matter what.
Speaker 1: And part of I I talked about this in the book.
Speaker 1: One of the things that was fascinating to me right
Speaker 1: off the bat, and if anyone's been involved in a campaign,
Speaker 1: then they'll get this. On election night, we're down on
Speaker 1: the fifth floor of Trump Tower in a small room,
Speaker 1: gathered with the key senior staff, the vice president now
Speaker 1: that then Governor Pence, and we're all looking at results.
Speaker 1: And the President calls down Noel Vankin says where are
Speaker 1: you And she says, we're down in this little room
Speaker 1: kind of the senior team kind of pouring through results,
Speaker 1: doing a little analysis, and and why don't you come down?
Speaker 1: And Trump says, no, come up to twelve what everybody
Speaker 1: was gathered in the middle of the war room. And
Speaker 1: it was interesting to me as someone who's been around
Speaker 1: politics a long time. Normally, they want the principle, the candidate,
Speaker 1: the member wants to be kind of among a small
Speaker 1: team so that they can have frank and you know,
Speaker 1: discussions results coming. Trump wanted to be among the people.
Speaker 1: That was the first real sign to me that this
Speaker 1: was not a guy who was looking to run and
Speaker 1: act like everyone else does in politics. And he's broken
Speaker 1: the mold. Now I'm sure and we're speaking to Sean Spicer.
Speaker 1: By the way, he's got a new book out, The Briefing. Uh. Mostly,
Speaker 1: I think fair to say right about your time as
Speaker 1: White House Press secretary. I think we can all assume
Speaker 1: that when I asked the question, another that must ask, right,
Speaker 1: what was it like to be the press sectory? You say, oh,
Speaker 1: it was great to serve my country and this administration,
Speaker 1: And we can assume all that. Right. You work for
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. It's a great honor you were the White
Speaker 1: House Press secretary. What surprised you about being a White
Speaker 1: House press secretary? I think what surprised me the most
Speaker 1: is how little we we and I prepared for the
Speaker 1: non traditional aspect to this. I looked at the role
Speaker 1: going in. I talked to so many of my predecessors
Speaker 1: on both sides of the aisle. I prepared like a
Speaker 1: normal press secretary. And I don't think that we knowing
Speaker 1: what we did, and it was staring us in the face.
Speaker 1: We should have said, this is not going to be
Speaker 1: like everyone else's White House. This is going to be
Speaker 1: uniquely different and disruptive. And yet I prepared for it
Speaker 1: like I would have prepared for it had it you know,
Speaker 1: had it been in the tradition of every other guy
Speaker 1: that came for me. And I think that's where I
Speaker 1: sort of reflect on this in the book that I
Speaker 1: looked at it traditionally as opposed to disruptively. How could
Speaker 1: you have been a disruptive White House Press secretary? I mean,
Speaker 1: I feel like some people, well, I think that that's
Speaker 1: you're you know, you're supposed to be because you're interacting
Speaker 1: with the media machine. For you to not be fitting
Speaker 1: into that mold but automatically, And I think we tried
Speaker 1: to do that. I talked about this in the book
Speaker 1: that we came in and the first thing that we
Speaker 1: did was shake up sort of who got called on
Speaker 1: and when they got called on. We didn't just focus
Speaker 1: on the mainstream media. We looked at bringing in and
Speaker 1: incorporating a lot of other voices, conservative media, uh folks
Speaker 1: in the quote back of the room instead of just
Speaker 1: the mainstream media, um, and really get some outside perspectives.
Speaker 1: And we brought Skype in. But I think that part
Speaker 1: of it was just to understand that the relationship was
Speaker 1: going to change. It wasn't going to be that same
Speaker 1: relationship with the media that everyone else had. Trump doesn't
Speaker 1: need them in the way that they do, and that's
Speaker 1: the that's the change in the dynamic. Did you feel
Speaker 1: like there was either a a bizarre hostility toward you
Speaker 1: from the press course specifically because of the Trump administration.
Speaker 1: Were you prepared for that aspect of it. No, No,
Speaker 1: I don't. I've been doing this twenty five years. I
Speaker 1: know that there's a bias. I think we all know
Speaker 1: and it's not. It's been proven by every you know,
Speaker 1: tons of study, so it's not. But I've always seen
Speaker 1: the press hide it. This time it was out on
Speaker 1: full display. They've lost all sense of objectivity and they
Speaker 1: don't care about it. I mean, it's fascinating to me
Speaker 1: to see the openness by which many of these people
Speaker 1: are very clear about their their um animosity there uh,
Speaker 1: dislike of this president. They're not They're not even just partisan.
Speaker 1: In my estimation. What I see is is activism, right. No,
Speaker 1: not sometimes many times. I mean, you're right that there
Speaker 1: is the sense of objectivity is gone, yeah, and that
Speaker 1: that's definitely different. And it's one thing that I actually
Speaker 1: like that about the administration because I think that now
Speaker 1: it's harder than ever before for people to keep up
Speaker 1: this pretense. Uh so so, and I know people ask
Speaker 1: about this all the time. I'm curious, uh and you know,
Speaker 1: I have a feeling I know where you might go
Speaker 1: to this, but I'll just put it out there. Do
Speaker 1: you embrace the nickname spicy? And how did you feel
Speaker 1: about whole SNL send up of you with Melissa McCarthy
Speaker 1: and all this stuff. I've been called so many things,
Speaker 1: and if that's what you called me, pretty good with it.
Speaker 1: I um that I take that. That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: I've I've been called a lot of nasty things, so
Speaker 1: I'll take that. I think, Um, I don't think by
Speaker 1: any means, I was ever prepared for that. I mean
Speaker 1: because it was funny. I actually rarely find I rarely
Speaker 1: find SNL sketches funny. Occasionally I do, and one of
Speaker 1: the ones I did with you was actually finn The
Speaker 1: first one was funny, and I agree with that. I
Speaker 1: kind of got to chuckle out of it. I laughed
Speaker 1: at the ones beyond that. It like our discussion with
Speaker 1: the Press Corps, they started to become personal and mean
Speaker 1: and victual as opposed to funny, and I was like, Okay,
Speaker 1: I don't I get what you're doing, but I don't
Speaker 1: think it's funny, and you know, I think that's a
Speaker 1: reflection also. And we saw this with Jimmy Fallon right.
Speaker 1: He tustled, He tustled Trump's hair, and people who are
Speaker 1: just trying to be funny get angry. It was like
Speaker 1: a year later and suddenly now he's apologized for what
Speaker 1: for being funny. The guy's a comic, he's late night
Speaker 1: he is funny, and now suddenly he's having to apologize
Speaker 1: for being funny because he's not you know, he's not considered. Uh,
Speaker 1: he hasn't attacked him as much as he's supposed to.
Speaker 1: According to the Left, The brook is the Briefing. It's
Speaker 1: out now available on Amazon right and where Sean Spicer
Speaker 1: dot com. You can go wherever you want, John Spicer
Speaker 1: dot com, Mr Shawn Spicer. Great to actually beat you
Speaker 1: a person that we gather here today to honor an
Speaker 1: American patriot serve a cause greater than himself. And we
Speaker 1: gather here remembering a man who knew how he wanted
Speaker 1: to be remembered. And so let me say to all
Speaker 1: those gathered and his beloved family, on behalf of a
Speaker 1: grateful nation, we will ever remember that John McCain served
Speaker 1: his country, and John McCain served his country honorably. Thank God,
Speaker 1: bless the memory of John McCain. You know, we've got
Speaker 1: the way that the Republicans, like like Vice President Pence
Speaker 1: talk about John McCain, and look, it is the man's funeral, okay,
Speaker 1: And he did serve his country honorably. I have a
Speaker 1: lot of political disagreements with him, but you know I
Speaker 1: do there there is a need for decorument and respect here,
Speaker 1: and I've tried to show that in all of our
Speaker 1: discussions about the recently departed senator. I mean, there's absolutely
Speaker 1: a need for that. And then there's the way the
Speaker 1: Democrats do things. I have just thought it was so
Speaker 1: gross and so um just so unbecoming to hear Democrats
Speaker 1: who will do this. They're playing the game, they're they're
Speaker 1: so clear about it. Oh, isn't John McCain so great?
Speaker 1: Unlike that Trump guy. Oh isn't John McCain so, you know,
Speaker 1: fantastic in how he served his country, not like Trump,
Speaker 1: who's you know, a chicken hawker. Well, whatever it may be,
Speaker 1: it's very very frustrating, and it's typical. Right, we know
Speaker 1: that this is how the Democrats play the game. We
Speaker 1: know this is how they how they operate. But um, here, here,
Speaker 1: here's the here's an example of Look, Biden had a
Speaker 1: lot of nice things to say about McCain, But how
Speaker 1: about just making about McCain and not have any implied
Speaker 1: political messages placed out it. It wasn't about politics with John.
Speaker 1: He could disagree on substance, those of the underlying values
Speaker 1: that animated everything John did, everything he was could come
Speaker 1: to a different conclusion. But were he parked company with you?
Speaker 1: If you lack the basic values of decency, respect, knowing
Speaker 1: that this project is bigger than yourself. The intolerance for
Speaker 1: the abusive power. He could not stand the abusive power
Speaker 1: wherever he saw it. Why does Joe Biden give a
Speaker 1: speech like this whenever he wants to be taken seriously? Well,
Speaker 1: what Biden? His cadence is very forced and annoying. But
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I know that maybe I'm reading a little
Speaker 1: too much between the lines here, but I see this
Speaker 1: as uh, this notion of the intolerance of the abuse
Speaker 1: of power. I mean, that's a pretty I think that's
Speaker 1: a pretty clear swipe at at Trump. I've never heard
Speaker 1: of John when else in his life, as John McCain
Speaker 1: made some big in his political life, made some big
Speaker 1: uh statement about intolerance for the abuse of power. Now,
Speaker 1: I think that that's clearly Joe Biden trying to make
Speaker 1: this all about Trump. And they were doing it all week, folks.
Speaker 1: You know, whether it was Jake Tapper over at ten
Speaker 1: and saying, you know, unlike you know, he made the
Speaker 1: whole comparison. I forget exactly how he said it. He
Speaker 1: made the comparison, and it's uh, you know, it's a
Speaker 1: very it's a very annoying habit the Democrats are in
Speaker 1: to pretend that, to pretend that they are just being
Speaker 1: patriotic and respectful, when really they are trying to use
Speaker 1: their use that as a political weapon. It's they're never
Speaker 1: able to put it aside. But this is what you
Speaker 1: should I suspect expect even more of going forward now
Speaker 1: because they've politicized everything. Nothing can be a political uh,
Speaker 1: nothing is sacred or beyond the reach of leftist politics.
Speaker 1: And and including the way that many prominent Democrats are
Speaker 1: talking about what's gone on at the you know what,
Speaker 1: what the reality is here of the relationship between Trump
Speaker 1: and uh. The recently departed senator from Arizona. I don't know, guys,
Speaker 1: you you reached this point. Oh, there's another funeral that
Speaker 1: happened to la. I read the Franklin's funeral and and
Speaker 1: there's more politicization going on at this one. Play sixteen,
Speaker 1: you know, the Sunday on my show, I misspelled respect,
Speaker 1: and a lot of y'all, a lot of y'all corrected me.
Speaker 1: Now I want you all to help me correct President Trump,
Speaker 1: to teach him what it means. A pretty good turn
Speaker 1: of turn of phrase there, I guess from that. Look,
Speaker 1: alf Al Sharpton, don't don't mistake it, you know, don't
Speaker 1: get it twisted. He's got skills. You know, he's a
Speaker 1: he's a Charlattan that he's a he's a talented Charlatan. Uh.
Speaker 1: You know R E. S. P. I. C. T. I
Speaker 1: will never forget that. Uh. But you know he's look
Speaker 1: at Areta Franklin's funeral. He could say whatever he wants.
Speaker 1: And that's that's all. But but I'm just saying that
Speaker 1: taking shots at Trump, even when you're at a funeral,
Speaker 1: is is pretty standard operating procedure. Now for Democrats, there's
Speaker 1: nothing they'll do it in church. They'll do it at
Speaker 1: a funeral, you know, they'll they'll do it anywhere they
Speaker 1: can because they can never do it enough. That things
Speaker 1: that came across when I was talking to Listen Milano, really,
Speaker 1: you're you think the media is not hustile enough the
Speaker 1: Trump like are are you? Are you a lunatic? Uh?
Speaker 1: And she said yeah, I mean he's not hustled off
Speaker 1: the Trump, which which was just remarkable, folks, It is
Speaker 1: an utterly remarkable thing that she was saying. We got
Speaker 1: a big hour three here coming up. Stay with me.
Speaker 1: Strike Force Energy veteran owned, American made, and one of
Speaker 1: the hottest energy products on the market. Strikeforce Energy was
Speaker 1: developed by veterans for one simple reason. The fight will
Speaker 1: always follow you, and it waits for no one. Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton here for strike Force. I invite you this summer
Speaker 1: to join us in giving back to America's troops. Over
Speaker 1: the last three years, strike Force Energy has shipped millions
Speaker 1: of packets to our troops both at home and abroad,
Speaker 1: and now we are bringing this battlefield proven liquid directly
Speaker 1: to your door. Strike Force Energy Liquid comes in four flavors,
Speaker 1: has zero sugar, zero calories, made with only the best ingredients, folks,
Speaker 1: for the fuel to power through your toughest fights, simply
Speaker 1: add strike Force to sixteen to twenty ounces of water, tea, lemonade,
Speaker 1: even a nice cold beer to strike Force energy dot
Speaker 1: com and receive fifty percent off. Folks, that's five zero.
Speaker 1: It's a fantastic deal. Fifty percent off, and use the
Speaker 1: promo code b U c K. That's buck at checkout.
Speaker 1: Go to strike Force energy dot com received fifty percent
Speaker 1: off with the promo code b U c K. Well,
Speaker 1: certainly China is not prepared for a long term struggle
Speaker 1: with the United States, and the Chinese know that the
Speaker 1: only way they can win this trade war is if
Speaker 1: they bluff President Trump down. And by the way, it's
Speaker 1: not really a trade war now, it's a chech war,
Speaker 1: because we're talking about teriffs that are imposed under Section
Speaker 1: three or one of the Trade Act of V four
Speaker 1: to remedy China's theft of US intellectual property. That theft
Speaker 1: runs in the hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
Speaker 1: And if you don't like the tariffs, China, you know,
Speaker 1: then just stop stealing our stuff. Our man Gordon Chang.
Speaker 1: They're laying it down other today This is one of
Speaker 1: the stories that gets nowhere near as much attention as
Speaker 1: it should right now. And why is that? Oh? That right?
Speaker 1: Because it's positive for Trump? What us shock? But the
Speaker 1: the so called trade war is already moving in America's favor.
Speaker 1: And what we're finding out is that China has suffered
Speaker 1: a three month export downturn as Donald Trump's tariffs have
Speaker 1: have taken effect against them. And the truth is that
Speaker 1: there's a recognition now that didn't really exist before among
Speaker 1: a lot of people in this country that wait a second,
Speaker 1: why why do we act? And this really this goes
Speaker 1: to the heart of Obamas M I've got a lot
Speaker 1: to say on this one, But why do we act
Speaker 1: like we have a we can what it comes to
Speaker 1: dealing with the Chinese? Why why do we think that
Speaker 1: that that that we if we were to upset China,
Speaker 1: they'd be able to just tank our economy and they
Speaker 1: would be fine. America is number one. We have the
Speaker 1: strongest economy in the world. The Chinese have been engaged
Speaker 1: in some very uh deceptive, dishonest, unfair trade practices for
Speaker 1: a long time. We're just supposed to allow that to happen.
Speaker 1: Where is the sense in that and this is it's
Speaker 1: a revelation, folks. You know, we had for eight years
Speaker 1: of the Obama administration, we had a president whose approach
Speaker 1: to every foreign policy challenge revolved around a few fundamentally
Speaker 1: false ideas like the US is more or less a
Speaker 1: problem in world affairs. We do some good things, but
Speaker 1: on on balance, we create more problems than we fix,
Speaker 1: and we have things to be sorry for. We need
Speaker 1: to be more humble, We need to ask permission and
Speaker 1: ask forgiveness. And that was really the way the Obama
Speaker 1: administration approached a lot of foreign policy problems. And on
Speaker 1: the economy, there was in the background always this thought
Speaker 1: with Obama and his advisors in dealing with any foreign
Speaker 1: policy economic issue, that America had exploited the world in
Speaker 1: some way. Right, that that the same the same idea
Speaker 1: that you know, the fat cats and the rich here
Speaker 1: in America are are to blame for the problems of
Speaker 1: the poor. True leftists in the Obama ideological mold think
Speaker 1: that America's prosperity has come directly at the expense of
Speaker 1: other countries. So really we have to make amends for that,
Speaker 1: We have to make global reparations. And that's what ties
Speaker 1: into are the push the Obama administration had for for example,
Speaker 1: climate change, right, climate change, as the left sees, it
Speaker 1: isn't just about saving the planet. It's also about about
Speaker 1: a massive transfer of wealth from developed first world nations
Speaker 1: to poor or developing nations. And that's essentially us paying
Speaker 1: them and transferring massive amounts of wealth to other countries
Speaker 1: because we've exploited the global environment so much, and you know,
Speaker 1: we we need to essentially, like I said, pay reparations,
Speaker 1: make amends. We need to buy off the rest of
Speaker 1: the developed world. Meanwhile, China and into you're laughing at
Speaker 1: us over this. There's like the guys are idiots, right,
Speaker 1: But but Obama always took that approach. And you saw
Speaker 1: on trade such ossified thinking. It was such an echo chamber.
Speaker 1: And and I remember approaching this with you, and I
Speaker 1: really appreciated that all of you listening to show you
Speaker 1: were willing to even you know, those of you who
Speaker 1: are much much more um economically minded, or much more
Speaker 1: into you know, study the economy that I'm I was
Speaker 1: not an economist by trade or in school. And this
Speaker 1: is really my areas of primary interests or national security
Speaker 1: and politics. The economy is third, but I'm learning as much.
Speaker 1: I'm an autodid act on the economy. I'm learning as
Speaker 1: much as I can. And I just thought, wait, hold
Speaker 1: on a second. When everyone is saying something, I actually
Speaker 1: get a little suspicious when you know, when it comes
Speaker 1: to an issue like the economy or trade eight or something.
Speaker 1: I said, hold on, why are we all saying that?
Speaker 1: You know, it's all we were free traders? What does
Speaker 1: that mean? You know, when people can't answer a question
Speaker 1: without becoming hostile, then you should ask more questions. And Trump,
Speaker 1: because he came at this from the perspective of somebody
Speaker 1: who didn't care what the consensus thought of him or
Speaker 1: his ideas, was able to keep pushing even though there
Speaker 1: were so much headway. And now we're seeing what the Chinese.
Speaker 1: Oh wait a second, if this is a game a chicken,
Speaker 1: they're gonna pull off the road first. Um. And the
Speaker 1: the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, for example, is this is
Speaker 1: according to a political today is actiously watching the tariff
Speaker 1: development in the US. Quote. If the US goes ahead
Speaker 1: with the two billion billion dollar plan, the impact on
Speaker 1: Chinese exports will be material, said the source, who declined
Speaker 1: to be named. The leading export indicator fell into the
Speaker 1: contraction zone from June when the Trump administration announced tariffs
Speaker 1: on fifty billion dollars of Chinese merchandise. You know, one
Speaker 1: of the reasons I like to look at the market
Speaker 1: as an indicator of what's really going on on foreign
Speaker 1: policy is because the market is where people that they
Speaker 1: can't hide what they're really doing or really thinking. Uh.
Speaker 1: The market has its own way of speaking. And if
Speaker 1: if people were really if it wasn't just Trump hatred
Speaker 1: pushing a lot of this oh my gosh, trade war talk,
Speaker 1: you would see that reflected in what people were doing
Speaker 1: with their money. Right, Because I don't care how you know,
Speaker 1: ideologically committed you are as a leftist, you don't want
Speaker 1: to risk your life savings. You don't want to risk
Speaker 1: your four oh one k or or your entire stock portfolio.
Speaker 1: If you really believe that we are heading for a
Speaker 1: massive economic decline because of what Trump is doing, and
Speaker 1: instead of having for massive decline, it seems like the
Speaker 1: sky is the limit for the first time, which when
Speaker 1: you take a true free market capitalist approach, Uh, then
Speaker 1: it also seems to make sense. Why should there be
Speaker 1: an upper limit here? Why shouldn't America just continue to
Speaker 1: get wealthier as we innovate and become more efficient and
Speaker 1: we make more progress in our technology. And you know,
Speaker 1: we should be getting wealthier all the time, and I
Speaker 1: know that's happening, but we have this idea of the
Speaker 1: cyclical nature of wealth creation this country. And I know
Speaker 1: some of your like Buck read the Creature for jack
Speaker 1: Al Island and which is a great book, by the way,
Speaker 1: And you know the fed boom bus cycle. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: know that's all still very real, but that doesn't really,
Speaker 1: that doesn't have to be our reality. It only has
Speaker 1: been our reality because of some monetary policies, because of
Speaker 1: the way the government has been intruding on the market,
Speaker 1: and a whole bunch of other factors. But we could
Speaker 1: be into a we are already or in a period
Speaker 1: of unparalleled economic growth in terms of where the stock
Speaker 1: market is now and and how long it's overall, if
Speaker 1: you go back now for for many years, how long
Speaker 1: it's been going in an upward trajectory. So there's a
Speaker 1: lot of really good stuff here and and on China.
Speaker 1: There was so much I just have to remember there
Speaker 1: was so much fearmongering around this. I mean, there was
Speaker 1: such such a discussion about how Trump was going to
Speaker 1: destroy the global economy and oh, how could he and
Speaker 1: all these terrible things we're gonna happen, And now we're
Speaker 1: hearing more about how do Yeah, China is feeling it.
Speaker 1: And you know what, folks, China could just stop its
Speaker 1: predatory trade practices and we could have normalized free trade
Speaker 1: relations with China and maybe that would al show push
Speaker 1: the Chinese government more towards uh, you know, openness and transparency,
Speaker 1: and there could be even some long term political benefits
Speaker 1: from all of this. Look, I know there can be
Speaker 1: there all There's a thousand ways this whole thing can
Speaker 1: go out there go wrong. I get it. I'm not
Speaker 1: saying there's no risk. There is risk, But we weren't
Speaker 1: told there was risk. We were told there was the
Speaker 1: certainty of catastrophe. And Trump has swatted that aside by
Speaker 1: just taking a common sense approach. Isn't one of the
Speaker 1: great benefits of the Trump administration? Look, the great benefit
Speaker 1: of President Trump himself, for whatever faults and personal flaws
Speaker 1: or idiosyncrasies or whatever you want to talk about, Trump
Speaker 1: is somebody who is finally and how many of us
Speaker 1: have thought this for a long time why can't we
Speaker 1: have somebody who is our president as somebody who's a
Speaker 1: political leader who just uses common sense. It just thinks,
Speaker 1: what would a normal person who approaches this problem think
Speaker 1: about the problem, and how would that person try to
Speaker 1: solve it? Not what do all the smart people say?
Speaker 1: And what do all the different special interests come at
Speaker 1: this with, and what's the history of the social justice
Speaker 1: that surrounds No, what would a normal common sense approach be.
Speaker 1: He's doing that on a whole bunch of issues and
Speaker 1: oh my gosh, like magic, it's working. Is there gonna
Speaker 1: be a trade ward with China? I don't know, but
Speaker 1: so far what we have is trade victory looming when
Speaker 1: it comes to our relationship with China, and nobody was
Speaker 1: calling for that six months ago. You know, it can
Speaker 1: be really frustrating when you're making smart decisions, you're doing
Speaker 1: everything you should for your business, but you can't get
Speaker 1: critical answers back from trusted partners. Right. You need somebody
Speaker 1: doing background investigations for your business. Or if you're a
Speaker 1: property owner, you need somebody who can look into your
Speaker 1: tenants background and make sure you're renting to somebody that
Speaker 1: you can trust. And you need answers fast. You need
Speaker 1: people that are very on the ball and aren't outsourcing
Speaker 1: your information to somebody else. So when you call them,
Speaker 1: they're saying, oh, well, let's get the answers from some
Speaker 1: other party. No, no, no, you want the answers right away.
Speaker 1: Global Verification Network is your answer. They have expert delivery
Speaker 1: of high quality screening services for employers, property managers, and
Speaker 1: financial companies. You should really check them out. They should
Speaker 1: become your first choice, your first option for background investigations.
Speaker 1: Go to my g VN dot com. Again, that's my
Speaker 1: GVN dot com. Or call eight five five nine zero
Speaker 1: five three one eight first. And to walk on the moon,
Speaker 1: that would be something we've chosen. A job so difficult,
Speaker 1: requiring so many technological developments, we're gonna have to start
Speaker 1: from scratching. Only after we master these tasks. Do we
Speaker 1: consider trying to land on the moon, Neil. If this
Speaker 1: flight is successful, you'll go down in history. What kind
Speaker 1: of thoughts do you have about that? We're planning on
Speaker 1: the flight being successful. The vehicle's not safe. You need
Speaker 1: to fail down here so we don't fail up there.
Speaker 1: This isn't just another trip, Neal. Do you say you're
Speaker 1: coming back. There are risks, but we have every intention
Speaker 1: I'm coming back and we go quick y for three two.
Speaker 1: Now there you have the trailer for First Man, which
Speaker 1: automatically feels a little bit like the Patriarchy, Right, I
Speaker 1: mean that kid, of course? Or do I? This is
Speaker 1: a biopic of Neil Armstrong, right man, the first man
Speaker 1: to land on the Moon, And you would think that
Speaker 1: this is the kind of movie that just based on
Speaker 1: the storyline, Come on, it's not gonna be political, right,
Speaker 1: It's gonna be an inspiring film about a great American achievement.
Speaker 1: That's right. This was achieved by the United States of America,
Speaker 1: by a whole lot of people working on the program,
Speaker 1: by the brave astronauts who went up there. But if
Speaker 1: you thought that it would just be a recreation of
Speaker 1: history with some dramatic flair, you would be incorrect, folks.
Speaker 1: That's right. Uh. This movie, which starts Ryan Gosling as
Speaker 1: Neil Armstrong, has a little omission in it. Remember that
Speaker 1: whole thing about the first man on the Moon that
Speaker 1: when you think of it, what what do you picture
Speaker 1: in your mind? Some of your like a sound stage,
Speaker 1: because if they faked it, no, no, stop that they
Speaker 1: did not fake it. How do I know, Well, I
Speaker 1: don't know. Smart people tell me they didn't fake it.
Speaker 1: But no, really, when you think back to it, there's
Speaker 1: the moonscape from the surface of the Moon. There's a
Speaker 1: an astronaut and what else is what else is in
Speaker 1: that photo? Folks? What else is there? All right? A
Speaker 1: big American flag on the moon? You know what they
Speaker 1: decided to take out of this movie in that iconic moment,
Speaker 1: the American flag. That's right, folks. Ryan Gosling, who's a
Speaker 1: Canadian a h he he was asked about this one
Speaker 1: and he said, quote, I think this was widely regarded
Speaker 1: in the end as a human achievement, and that's how
Speaker 1: we chose to view it. I also think Neil was
Speaker 1: extremely humble, as were many of these astronauts, and time
Speaker 1: and time again he deferred the focus from himself to
Speaker 1: the two to four thousand people who made the mission possible.
Speaker 1: He was reminding everyone that he was just the tip
Speaker 1: of the iceberg, and that's not just to be humble.
Speaker 1: That's also true. So I don't think that Neil viewed
Speaker 1: himself as an American hero. From my interviews with his
Speaker 1: family and people, that knew him. It was quite the opposite,
Speaker 1: and and we wanted the film to reflect Neil. I mean,
Speaker 1: give me a break, you know, I don't care what
Speaker 1: his family thinks. You know, this is this is uh
Speaker 1: where where we might have a little bit of a
Speaker 1: of a digression here, or a little bit of a divergence.
Speaker 1: That's the word I was looking for, not a digression,
Speaker 1: pardon me, a little bit of a divergence. Because the
Speaker 1: guy put the American flag on the moon. The whole
Speaker 1: program that he wouldn't have been in a position to
Speaker 1: take the you know, one small step from man and
Speaker 1: you know, he wouldn't even been a position to do
Speaker 1: that if it weren't for the United States of America.
Speaker 1: There was a whole other group of folks that were
Speaker 1: trying to put their flag on the moon first. That's right,
Speaker 1: the Soviet Union. We all, we all know about that
Speaker 1: right now. Out you could say, buck, who cares? Hollywood's
Speaker 1: full of libs, which of course is true. But here's
Speaker 1: why I care. This is something you're going to see
Speaker 1: more of, folks, and it already exists, but now there's
Speaker 1: finally the the means and mechanisms in place for us
Speaker 1: to push back against it because we can do our
Speaker 1: own fact checking. We all have access to the Internet,
Speaker 1: and we are able to fight back against these lies.
Speaker 1: Rewriting of history is something that libs love to do.
Speaker 1: It's really actually very Soviet in nature, speaking of the
Speaker 1: Soviet Union, uh, the rewriting because you're the Soviets and
Speaker 1: fact went to such extreme length that in their archives
Speaker 1: they were known to use razor blades to remove the
Speaker 1: names of people in official documents that they wanted to
Speaker 1: disappear by actually exercising the name. So the Soviets took
Speaker 1: revision of history to a whole, a whole other level,
Speaker 1: and they did keep pretty meticulous documentation and notes. Thing
Speaker 1: that communists and states love is bureaucracy. But the notion
Speaker 1: of rewriting history in general because it's a more appealing
Speaker 1: or useful or socially justice conscious narrative today is happening
Speaker 1: all the time. I think about this with the way
Speaker 1: that they often teach, for example, the uh, the colonization
Speaker 1: period of not just North America, but Central and South
Speaker 1: America as well, and you know, the the Aztecs. I'll
Speaker 1: offer I just finished this great book on the Aztecs
Speaker 1: and and the conquest, the defeat of Montezuma bay her
Speaker 1: Nan Cortez, and they want to talk about how advanced
Speaker 1: some aspects of a civilization where the the Aztecs had.
Speaker 1: What they don't really want to talk about as much
Speaker 1: is that the Aztec Empire was built on a massive
Speaker 1: on a massive pile of skulls from human sacrifice, which
Speaker 1: was a constant ritual and really was the was It
Speaker 1: was central to the religious beliefs of the Aztecs, and
Speaker 1: also incredible slavery and brutality of other people's um But
Speaker 1: that's a other native peoples, you know that that gets
Speaker 1: brushed aside, the same way that when we talk about
Speaker 1: the slave trade today, we all know about the Transatlantic
Speaker 1: American or the slave trade to the Americas. We know
Speaker 1: much less in history about the Islamic slave trade, which
Speaker 1: involved almost entirely the enslavement of Christians, particularly European white Christians,
Speaker 1: by Muslim North African slave traders UH into sexual slavery,
Speaker 1: into horrific uh work in quarries and in other inhumane
Speaker 1: conditions until they died on the on the slave ships,
Speaker 1: where galleys were used in warfare as well as in
Speaker 1: transport people would just be kept at the ore until
Speaker 1: they essentially died of exhaustion. Uh that that's all skipped around,
Speaker 1: and it's because people don't want the real facts. You know.
Speaker 1: The Left has this idea that they are trying to
Speaker 1: promote a utopian society, and in doing so, they're willing
Speaker 1: to rewrite the past in order to write the future.
Speaker 1: And we need to be on guard against this. If
Speaker 1: we're going to study history, if we're going to celebrate
Speaker 1: the past, even in what is loosely based in in truth,
Speaker 1: or even in what is you know, inspired by true events,
Speaker 1: we should be aware of the full story and little
Speaker 1: things like this removing the American flag from a movie
Speaker 1: about the American landing on on the Moon is something
Speaker 1: that's easy to dismiss, but it's part of a of
Speaker 1: a broader mindset, and it's one that we need to
Speaker 1: call out because it's become far too prevalent on the left,
Speaker 1: and in their depiction of things in history, they are
Speaker 1: often rewriting it. And I think that's something that we
Speaker 1: just cannot can't let it stand. You know, do we
Speaker 1: really care about this Ryan Gosling movie? Now? I mean,
Speaker 1: have there been far too many movies, in my opinion,
Speaker 1: already made about you know, going to the Moon and
Speaker 1: all that stuff. Uh. Probably, but we will continue to
Speaker 1: keep an eye on this and watch this because I
Speaker 1: think it's I think it's a yet another case where
Speaker 1: the left is making a conscious decision to try to
Speaker 1: pretend the past was different than it was. We're not
Speaker 1: gonna let him get away with it. Rock and roll,
Speaker 1: fellow patriots. Time to spread some freedom coast to coast.
Speaker 1: It's time for roll call. It's gonna be our last
Speaker 1: roll call before the holiday weekend. As I've been saying,
Speaker 1: don't worry about the Marxist origins of this Labor day weekend,
Speaker 1: Labor Day. Remember if you work for a union and
Speaker 1: our union rep it's labored a like l A b
Speaker 1: U H Labor Day. Uh. That's what I'm from the Northeast.
Speaker 1: I can say stuff like this. So Facebook dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck Sexton. By the way, the Jesse Kelly and
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton and Sean Parnell Freedom Hut Extravaganza, the Freedom
Speaker 1: Hunt Podcast is out. You just have to go on iTunes, folks. Okay,
Speaker 1: go on your Apple iTunes type in the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show and in that feed there with all the all
Speaker 1: of the stuff. The pops up, it'll say freedom Hut,
Speaker 1: and I believe it's uh. Two door Kickers and a
Speaker 1: Desk Ninja is the title of it. They're obviously the
Speaker 1: door kickers and I'm the desk Ninja. That's why I
Speaker 1: do buck slaps um. And I really think you'll enjoy
Speaker 1: even if you're not generally a podcast listener, I think
Speaker 1: you'll really enjoy that show for this weekend. It's about
Speaker 1: thirty minutes. We're just shooting the stuff, man have We
Speaker 1: have a lot of fun. I really like both those
Speaker 1: guys are both real, real talents and great patriots and
Speaker 1: great friends. So I think you'll enjoy it. Just just
Speaker 1: put it on, just give it a shot. It's very
Speaker 1: a little different than what we do in the Freedom Hunt,
Speaker 1: a little more, a little more um what's the word,
Speaker 1: relaxed in tone, a little less in depth philosophy than
Speaker 1: we that I tend to do here on this show.
Speaker 1: So I think you really enjoy it. Again, it's on iTunes.
Speaker 1: It should also be on stitcher dot com, or you
Speaker 1: can listen to it on the I Heart app. Alright,
Speaker 1: we have first up t J buck Listen to your
Speaker 1: show from last night when you talked about your interview
Speaker 1: with Alyssa Milano. I watched the Hill dot TV interview
Speaker 1: and I definitely agree with you that she did not
Speaker 1: know who was interviewing her, especially when she kept saying
Speaker 1: we our and us. I'm pretty sure she was referring
Speaker 1: to Democrats and or Californians and just assume that you
Speaker 1: were one of them. Way to slip under the radar
Speaker 1: and expose her for the left as she is. I
Speaker 1: hope of the interview finalees where you tell her who
Speaker 1: you are and how you filled in for Rush Limbaugh
Speaker 1: before so we could watch her head explode figuratively of course. PS.
Speaker 1: Maybe this interview is why your Wicky page was deleted
Speaker 1: so she and't look you up. God knows that liberal
Speaker 1: won't look past the first page of Google search when
Speaker 1: doing a little pre interview research. You know, I don't
Speaker 1: know why my Wikipedia. I don't know why my Wikipedia
Speaker 1: was deleted. I had a Wikipedia page. Is a nice
Speaker 1: little Wikipedia page is gone now. I don't understand what
Speaker 1: did I do to offend the Wikipedia gods? I mean, TJ.
Speaker 1: Thanks for writing, and Drew writes, I'm a podcast listeners
Speaker 1: but anyways, the movie quote was from black Hawk Down,
Speaker 1: Shields High. Well, look at you, Drew. You are correct, sir.
Speaker 1: Limo is a word in common usage from the very
Speaker 1: early scenes of black Hawk Down where they're discussing a
Speaker 1: scrabble dispute. Black Hawkdown. I think is is it really
Speaker 1: holds up a great a great movie for what it is.
Speaker 1: I really enjoyed it. Seth writes, I really missed the
Speaker 1: Ilissa Milano from Commando in the spirit of Friday, get
Speaker 1: to the Chopper. Yeah, absolutely, Look, I I agree. I'm
Speaker 1: a I'm a big fan of the original Lissa Mulano
Speaker 1: in although that get to the choppers from Predator. Uh
Speaker 1: so we've got to, you know, if we're gonna keep
Speaker 1: it one hundred, get to the choppers for Predator what indeed,
Speaker 1: get to the Chopper. All right, let's get back into
Speaker 1: roll call, folks. I'm sorry to get distracted there. You
Speaker 1: know what happens with the movie quotes. I all of
Speaker 1: a sudden find myself in the midst of reminiscing about
Speaker 1: my youth spent watching, as you know, a lot of
Speaker 1: action movies that maybe we'll bring back action movie quote Friday.
Speaker 1: It's been a while. You know, I kind of faded
Speaker 1: out with it, but I kind of like it. Uh
Speaker 1: Martha writes, I would like to know who's paying for
Speaker 1: the uh five day funeral that the McCain planned for
Speaker 1: months ahead of himself. Um, Martha, I don't know. I
Speaker 1: would assume. I mean, the McCain family is very wealthy.
Speaker 1: I actually have no idea. I couldn't answer that question,
Speaker 1: so apologies for not having the answer on on hand, Um, schmool,
Speaker 1: Right's high buck. This is schmall from Israel. I live
Speaker 1: in Israel and I'm interested, but not passionate about US politics.
Speaker 1: So I'm confused why steal a British national would be
Speaker 1: so desperate to see Trump lose. I can understand why
Speaker 1: an American citizen would be passionate about the election results,
Speaker 1: but a British citizen was he concerned that Trump was
Speaker 1: pro Brexit? Seriously, something smells here. Could it be he
Speaker 1: was desperate because someone Russians or Hillary, we're paying him
Speaker 1: and we're threatening him to get the job done or else.
Speaker 1: I love to hear thoughts on this. Perhaps you can
Speaker 1: run an article about it. Small Hey schmall, good good
Speaker 1: to talk to about a team buck Israel in the house.
Speaker 1: Uh why would steal? No? You know, I think that
Speaker 1: Steel is part of this mentality Schmoll that the the
Speaker 1: kind of global establishment order was threatened by Trump. I
Speaker 1: do think that there are people, especially the elites in
Speaker 1: Western European countries, find that Trump was a political phenomenon
Speaker 1: and Trump is um was one that they thought concerned
Speaker 1: them too, that they had their own worries about, you know,
Speaker 1: how all that was was gonna go. And um that's
Speaker 1: why somebody and now looks steel. It might also have
Speaker 1: been for personal reasons. Maybe he just found Trump very odious.
Speaker 1: I don't think that anyone had anything on Steele to
Speaker 1: push him into this. I just think that in his
Speaker 1: mind he was doing probably not just America but the
Speaker 1: world some great service by trying to uh throw a
Speaker 1: monkey wrench into the Trump campaign. So there you have that.
Speaker 1: Brandon black hawk Down. Yes, black Hawkdown also got the
Speaker 1: movie quote, so you're correct, Brandon. Um. Brandon also wrote
Speaker 1: my buck fifteen black rifle coffee arrived just in time.
Speaker 1: I hope you didn't take offense the other day when
Speaker 1: I said that as a bald guy, I don't like
Speaker 1: to swoop. Brandon nobody has to like the swoop this America.
Speaker 1: So the swoop is a totally up to up to
Speaker 1: you how much you like or don't like it. Ah,
Speaker 1: Rob Rights Hi Buck talk about Mark Rich tomorrow. Bill
Speaker 1: Clinton pardoned him after he fled the country. He hit
Speaker 1: millions of money shields Hime Brother, Well, yeah, Mark Rich.
Speaker 1: Rob was somebody whose wife was a major Democrat donor,
Speaker 1: and he fled justice and was pardoned. That's very rare.
Speaker 1: Usually you have to at least be in the country.
Speaker 1: I don't think. I don't know if that's ever happened before.
Speaker 1: Actually I can't say that it hasn't, But I'm not
Speaker 1: aware of someone being pardoned, uh who had fled the
Speaker 1: country in that way. I mean, maybe the only exception
Speaker 1: that comes to mind is Draft Dodgers and Canada who.
Speaker 1: But that was kind of a group party in and
Speaker 1: that was really a policy more than a pardon. So
Speaker 1: I'm I'm not familiar with the case that's similar Mark Rich.
Speaker 1: Just remember, folks, you know who was involved in the
Speaker 1: Mark Rich pardon. That's right, Eric Holder, everybody. He was
Speaker 1: the one who signed off on it in Clinton's Department
Speaker 1: of Justice. It was in fact, Eric Holder and he
Speaker 1: said he felt badly about it. He said later on,
Speaker 1: but you know, too late. Eric. Uh, let's see. Thomas
Speaker 1: writes Buck, I'm trying to figure out why Rhn de Santis,
Speaker 1: his opponent, would be upset. If you listen closely to
Speaker 1: Rhonda santis Is full response, he's telling the questioner that
Speaker 1: although it appears he will have a good run, the
Speaker 1: Republicans shouldn't take the election when for granted, because his
Speaker 1: opponent is well spoken and charismatic, and the Republicans should
Speaker 1: not take it for granted. Um. The media got it
Speaker 1: totally wrong on this because they didn't hear it. All
Speaker 1: they heard was what they were looking for from Thomas.
Speaker 1: You know, Thomas, I don't think the media got it
Speaker 1: wrong because they didn't hear it. I think the media
Speaker 1: got it wrong and didn't care. I think the media
Speaker 1: saw this as an opportunity to trash a Republican, and
Speaker 1: even though they knew they knew that what they were
Speaker 1: doing was dishonest, they figured it was too good an
Speaker 1: opportunity to pass up. Um. Jim Rights. Uh oh no,
Speaker 1: that's a short, short message, Keith writes Buck. De Santis
Speaker 1: using monkey up is no more racist than if his
Speaker 1: opponents said he's going to crush De Santis like a
Speaker 1: cracker in soup, shields high from Keith. I have never
Speaker 1: heard of crushing a cracker in soup, so I don't
Speaker 1: know what that is, but thanks for writing in, Keith.
Speaker 1: Kyle writes Buck in regards to De Santis, is monkey
Speaker 1: this up quip? If that phrase is supposed to be
Speaker 1: a dog whistle for racist, as many on the left
Speaker 1: are asserting, I can't help but notice that those on
Speaker 1: the left are the ones barking over this. Uh seems
Speaker 1: like an active psychological projection. To me, if you have
Speaker 1: an unhealthy obsession with a person's race, maybe you're the
Speaker 1: racist and not the person who uses a common innocuous
Speaker 1: phrase to describe something. Indeed, Kyle, I I think that
Speaker 1: they got this very wrong. And I think that the
Speaker 1: media loves to play the race card, even when they
Speaker 1: have to be dishonest to do it. And I think
Speaker 1: that's what we I really do think that's what we
Speaker 1: saw here. Team quick quick pause. Here, we're gonna come
Speaker 1: back when more roll call. Stay with me, and then
Speaker 1: we're back with some more roll call where we get
Speaker 1: to hear from all of you don't forget the Freedom
Speaker 1: Hunt podcast. Folks, it's out. It is me Jump Barnell
Speaker 1: and Jesse Kelly. We talked about the greatest Trump memes
Speaker 1: of all time, the best concealed carry weapon of all time,
Speaker 1: what qualifies as meat? And of course we make fun
Speaker 1: of Hollywood Parnell because he's big time now with a
Speaker 1: novel coming out. And we got a big announcement about
Speaker 1: our friend Jesse Kelly and in his career, so you'll
Speaker 1: want to hear that. The two great guys. I think
Speaker 1: it'll be really fun for you to listen to this,
Speaker 1: and please do share with some friends. Uh, it's this
Speaker 1: is something even people don't really care much about politics.
Speaker 1: Uh you know they they will, I think enjoy the
Speaker 1: conversation we had, so spread it around, folks. Bob, it's
Speaker 1: good evening. Buck. Is Gary Heart's boat now considered racist
Speaker 1: since it was called monkey business? Have a great weekend,
Speaker 1: Shields high, Bob. Oh, hey, Bob, I I've never I
Speaker 1: don't know. I don't know about Gary Hart's boat, but
Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure it's not racist. So there you go.
Speaker 1: Let's see. Oh, somebody also told me that there's a song. Well,
Speaker 1: there's a bunch of look monkey business monkeying around. Hey,
Speaker 1: we're the monkeys all that stuff. We know it's not racist.
Speaker 1: So I think our point, I think our point has
Speaker 1: been made to him. I think we all get it
Speaker 1: on that one, Bob writes, stuck in the airport for
Speaker 1: a few hours and I'm watching CNN. This is pure torture.
Speaker 1: I must have seen their promo for the r GB
Speaker 1: film a hundred times. They're also fawning over Joe Biden's
Speaker 1: speech at McCain's funeral, almost like they're getting ready to
Speaker 1: endorse him for president. Well, Bob, let me say this
Speaker 1: about the cult of RBG. It's just weird, man, it's
Speaker 1: just weird. I mean, I'm not trying to be me,
Speaker 1: but she's a little old lady, you know, and they're
Speaker 1: trying to make it seem like she's some kind of
Speaker 1: folk hero who can do hundreds of push ups or something.
Speaker 1: You know. It's just I mean, I don't get it.
Speaker 1: I really don't. You know, I don't find Ruth Bader
Speaker 1: like I'm gonna stop talking about with bitter Ginsburg. The
Speaker 1: cult of RBG is weird, though, r g B, that's RBG. Sorry,
Speaker 1: r g B is is weird? Is wait? No, are
Speaker 1: rb G you wrote r G B Bob. You're confusing
Speaker 1: me here. I'm getting getting my letters all mixed up.
Speaker 1: Uh al rights ESPN. Great x of the double standard, O,
Speaker 1: great example of the double standard squared. Um. I guess
Speaker 1: so Mud also knows. Matthew writes, love the show and
Speaker 1: your view on the weaponization and politicization of McCain's death.
Speaker 1: Trotting out his patriotism just to beat Trump over the
Speaker 1: head with it is to stick a bole. Tell you
Speaker 1: the truth. He was a fly boy with an admiral daddy.
Speaker 1: Pretty sure he had a free ride until he got
Speaker 1: himself shot down. Yes, he stayed with his men in
Speaker 1: the face of further torture, but that's what he was
Speaker 1: supposed to do, just like most vets. We did what
Speaker 1: we signed up for and saw our duty through until
Speaker 1: the end. Then he didn't want Trump to attend his
Speaker 1: funeral and lost all of my respects. So there's that.
Speaker 1: To borrow your hilarious phrase, cheers and shields, Hie, Matthew.
Speaker 1: Matthew appreciate you writing in, and I know people have
Speaker 1: very passionate views about the legacy of McCain. So I
Speaker 1: will let you speak for yourself on that one. Uh,
Speaker 1: Andrew Wrights listening to the show, and I can't agree
Speaker 1: with you more. I make it a point to listen
Speaker 1: to both sides in a while. And I was on
Speaker 1: the road for an hour and a half today I
Speaker 1: listened to NPR. I was blown away by how uh
Speaker 1: political they made Senator John McCain's death. It was constant
Speaker 1: and every chance they got they would bash Trump. I
Speaker 1: don't understand how they think their stories were unbiased. Yeah, folks,
Speaker 1: the media fawning over McCain is something that they like
Speaker 1: to do to hit Republicans with. That's what they That's
Speaker 1: why they like talking about McCain, and that's why they
Speaker 1: like talking about Trump, Trump versus McCain, all this stuff.
Speaker 1: It's a weapon against Republicans. So we should be very
Speaker 1: clear on that. And and that's just that's what they
Speaker 1: were doing. Um Hey, Buk Sheels. I want to tell
Speaker 1: you an epic journey I just returned home from. It
Speaker 1: took me through for the first time Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: There were two people I had hoped to run into
Speaker 1: so I could give them each a high five for
Speaker 1: a job well done. But sadly my time grew short
Speaker 1: and I was forced to leave the swamp without seeing
Speaker 1: you or Potus. I know to it makes me sad too,
Speaker 1: perhaps next time. Until then, Virtual high five, Virtual high
Speaker 1: five accepted. Tim. Uh, if you happen to see that Donald,
Speaker 1: pass it along, won't you. Also? On the way home
Speaker 1: to Florida, we stopped overnight in Savannah, just a mile
Speaker 1: down the road from nine Line Apparel Black Rifle Coffee. Uh.
Speaker 1: Their their whole facility there where I got myself a
Speaker 1: T shirt and a piping hot cup of silence or smooth.
Speaker 1: Wondering if this is the place you made the personal
Speaker 1: appearance a few months ago. Anyway, I'm an avid pdcast
Speaker 1: listener looking forward to the next Shield's High episode. Congratulations
Speaker 1: on the TV show, Tim, Tim The answers, Yes, that
Speaker 1: is the facility and if any of you are ever
Speaker 1: down there, you should go check it out. The nine
Speaker 1: Line Apparel Black Rifle facility in Savannah, Georgia is quite
Speaker 1: a sight and the people work there are just awesome.
Speaker 1: You'll love getting a chance to chat with them. Coffee
Speaker 1: is delicious, the gear is great uh, and they're really
Speaker 1: it's it's an amazing setup they've got they're doing all
Speaker 1: these designs and all the shirt production and everything else
Speaker 1: in house. The gear production in house, and the coffee
Speaker 1: is absolutely delicious. It's first rate and you'll just like it.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you it's It's worth a stop if you're
Speaker 1: in Savannah. It's about a twenty twenty minute drive from
Speaker 1: downtown Savannah, but go check out there, you know, tell
Speaker 1: him Buck sent you and they'll know. They'll know. I hope,
Speaker 1: I'm just kidding. They'll know. Maybe, Evan writes, Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: enjoying catching up on this show with the Godfather. I'm
Speaker 1: listening to the podcast on on Apple iPhone. Anyway. I
Speaker 1: didn't realize this, but apparently you can adjust a speed
Speaker 1: of play. I bumped it up to one point five
Speaker 1: times the normal rate. It took a second, but I
Speaker 1: realized and then fixed it. Um, however, you can slow
Speaker 1: it down. Have you ever listened to Michael Pelca at
Speaker 1: half the normal speed? It's hilarious. He sounds like a
Speaker 1: really stoned drunk dude. It's extremely funny. You should check
Speaker 1: it out, enjoy your weekend. Well, even I'm not sure
Speaker 1: that the Godfathers sound you know, the only extremely stones
Speaker 1: drunk dude. Give him what you're telling me about Yeo,
Speaker 1: I can like slow down the podcast half speed, double speed.
Speaker 1: I'm just kidding him and we love you. Um so yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm glad you guys enjoyed the Godfather. He's such he's
Speaker 1: always been such a good friend and and he's such
Speaker 1: a good guy, and I just I'm I'm happy that
Speaker 1: you all get a chance to listen to him. That
Speaker 1: he'll take the reins of the show whenever I'm whenever
Speaker 1: I'm gone, and he's able to folks, that's gonna be
Speaker 1: it for the Freedom Hunt for today. Have a great weekend.
Speaker 1: I've got huge plans for us. We come back next week,
Speaker 1: so I will see you then, same time, same place
Speaker 1: here in the Freedom Hut Jill's High. The one constant
Speaker 1: I have everyday, folks, is coffee. I absolutely love it,
Speaker 1: and I keep multiple k cups of Black Rifle Coffee
Speaker 1: on my desk. Oun not just for me, but I
Speaker 1: keep those rounds ready to go so that my colleagues
Speaker 1: at the Hill can make sure they're being fueled with
Speaker 1: the best caffeinated freedom out there. Go to Black Rifle
Speaker 1: Coffee dot com slash buck you'll see that they have
Speaker 1: all of the different flavor profiles and blends you need
Speaker 1: and want. They have the Freedom Roast Coffee there, Freedom
Speaker 1: Blend Coffee rounds. Also, they've got hats, they've got mugs,
Speaker 1: all kinds of cool gear. You will love it. Just
Speaker 1: Black Roast Silence are smooth, uh Blackbeard's Delight Roast which
Speaker 1: is particularly a spicy Go check it out Black Rifle
Speaker 1: Coffee dot com slash buck. You'll get fiftent everything there.
Speaker 1: Make sure you go to my site Black Rifle Coffee
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck and try being a subscriber so
Speaker 1: they just send the coffee to you every month. You'll
Speaker 1: have delicious coffee and never have to think about it
Speaker 1: again