Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Democrat debate was a dud,
Speaker 1: but there was at least one interesting exchange we'll get
Speaker 1: into together. They're all on the far left now, so
Speaker 1: we'll break down some of the policy proposals that the
Speaker 1: Socialist Democrats are putting forward. And of course the impeachment
Speaker 1: managers have been named, the articles are being transmitted headed
Speaker 1: over to the Senate. What's going to happen next? That
Speaker 1: and more coming up? This is the Buck Sexon Show,
Speaker 1: where the mission or mission is to decode what really
Speaker 1: matters with actionable intelligence, magnor mistake America. You're a great American. Again,
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexon Show begins. He's a great guy. Now,
Speaker 1: Welcome the Bucks Extent Show, everybody. Because I am a
Speaker 1: devoted host, because I believe so strongly in spending many,
Speaker 1: many hours of my time to distill the most important information,
Speaker 1: analysis and thoughts. Because I know all of you are
Speaker 1: quite busy with your lives doing things other than hosting
Speaker 1: radio shows. I try to make the best use of
Speaker 1: your time and this day will be no exception to that.
Speaker 1: As I can tell you having sat through the Democrat
Speaker 1: debate last night, there is very little, very little of
Speaker 1: substance to get into. I'm going to save you two
Speaker 1: hours of time right now in case you haven't watched
Speaker 1: it or thinking about it. The Democrats want to take
Speaker 1: more of your money and freedom away to give stuff
Speaker 1: inefficiently to other people who did not earn it through
Speaker 1: corrosion by a government that cannot afford it. That's a
Speaker 1: Democrat debate. Save you two hours. You're welcome, team Buck,
Speaker 1: That's what I'm here for. Help you out be a
Speaker 1: good guy like that. It was. It was quite quite
Speaker 1: a mess up there last night. And I'm sorry, but
Speaker 1: I can't help but get a little bit of a
Speaker 1: chuckle out of the Democrats who have created this wokeness culture,
Speaker 1: cancel culture, hyper political correctness that no one can even
Speaker 1: really define, that changes day to day, and the obsession
Speaker 1: with diversity that pushes so much of it, that is
Speaker 1: such a central part of political correctness. And you had
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of old white Democrats on stage last night. Yes,
Speaker 1: I know Mayor Pete was there, he's not old, but
Speaker 1: the rest of them, it was quite a boring crew.
Speaker 1: And also we have seen that Tom Steier is perhaps
Speaker 1: the world's first billionaire who seems only able to afford
Speaker 1: one tie. This producer mark, this guy was wearing. He
Speaker 1: likes this tartan plaid tie. You know, that's the only
Speaker 1: thing that is gonna apparently get it done for him.
Speaker 1: He wears the same tie at every debate. Maybe that's
Speaker 1: his style, Maybe that's like his signature, his thing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: fair enough, but I feel like he could does he
Speaker 1: have many of the same tie though. That's what Sometimes
Speaker 1: people see me wearing, like a blue shirt or a
Speaker 1: white shirt more than once on TV, and I want
Speaker 1: to tell them. I know, I'm not like, I'm not
Speaker 1: making like the super big Bucks. But the Buck can't
Speaker 1: afford more than one shirt in the same color. I'm
Speaker 1: not just wearing the same blue or white shirt every
Speaker 1: time I go on to you. You know, we'll have
Speaker 1: to I just like the classics. I like the classics.
Speaker 1: I'll get Tom Steyer on, We'll ask him about his ties. Yea.
Speaker 1: Some of you may be saying, wait a second, Buck,
Speaker 1: this isn't a show that I go to where I
Speaker 1: want to hear banter about fashion choices. I'm just trying
Speaker 1: to tell you that's probably the most interesting thing from
Speaker 1: the debate last night. Okay, there's like nothing that is
Speaker 1: worth the time. You've heard much of it before. The
Speaker 1: only part that was interesting. And we set this up
Speaker 1: yesterday our show was called Comrade Warren Versus Comrade Biden.
Speaker 1: And by the way, if you're if you ever want to,
Speaker 1: you should send us. If you send us a great
Speaker 1: show title, we do reserve the right to borrow it
Speaker 1: and name one of our shows after the title you
Speaker 1: give us for something. So if you have some really
Speaker 1: clever impeachment title that you want to share, because we're
Speaker 1: you're talking about impeachment a lot of the days ahead, please,
Speaker 1: by all means, do let us know what that would be.
Speaker 1: We love, we love relying on the genius of team
Speaker 1: Buck to make our show look better than an otherwise would. So, okay,
Speaker 1: what's the most interesting thing from last night? I really do.
Speaker 1: I want to move on to some other things to
Speaker 1: talk maybe a bit about the economy, about the general
Speaker 1: Flynn situation. Looks like he's trying to withdraw formally withdraw
Speaker 1: his plea. And you know, there's a lot more going
Speaker 1: on here that we need to we need to dig
Speaker 1: into than just the socialist Democrats. And I really want
Speaker 1: this to be a change or the way we talk
Speaker 1: about the Democratic Party. There they are a socialist party.
Speaker 1: Now they can say they're not socialists, but they are,
Speaker 1: and I don't think we should allow them to define language.
Speaker 1: One of my big problems with the way that American
Speaker 1: political discourse functions is that those on the right, conservatives,
Speaker 1: we often seed so much ground in the way we
Speaker 1: talk about things, and it might seem small to you.
Speaker 1: In the earliest days of the bucksac And show, I
Speaker 1: used to say that liberals are not in fact, in
Speaker 1: any way liberal or centered or focused on protecting liberty.
Speaker 1: There in fact statusts. They are authoritarians. There are many
Speaker 1: cases aspiring totalitarians, and so why would we give them
Speaker 1: a name that is really the opposite of what they are?
Speaker 1: It dead and reminds me of the doomsday culled the
Speaker 1: Reasonable Lists from the show Parks and Wreck. If you
Speaker 1: call yourselves the reasonable lists, well, then how can you
Speaker 1: be crazy? If you call yourselves liberals, then how could
Speaker 1: you be authoritarians? How could you be fascists? Right, that's
Speaker 1: part of the game they play. And then also the
Speaker 1: blue and red, the colors I've talked to you before
Speaker 1: about the history of this just comes from TV news.
Speaker 1: The Republican Party is read because of election night Democrat
Speaker 1: controlled stations, by the way, I mean stations that were
Speaker 1: left wing deciding, Okay, we're going to make the Democrats
Speaker 1: blue and the Republicans read, when, of course, the Democrats
Speaker 1: are much closer and always have been, to socialists, and
Speaker 1: the color of socialism is red and Republicans should be blue.
Speaker 1: But I won't get too deep into that for right now.
Speaker 1: What's the most interesting part of last night. I just
Speaker 1: wanted to say, I'm going to call them socialists, and
Speaker 1: people challenge me on this, and that's fine. They're wrong.
Speaker 1: They've become a socialist party. A degree of socialism we
Speaker 1: can argue over. But the Democrats are socialists. Okay, just
Speaker 1: remember that, because socialism has also able to destroy no
Speaker 1: matter how wealthy a country is, no matter how successful
Speaker 1: it has been relative to others in the region, socialism
Speaker 1: can destroy It can destroy any country. Central planning, government control,
Speaker 1: cower by committees can destroy any economy, any free society.
Speaker 1: Just remember I'm telling you that now, All right, now,
Speaker 1: let's talk about Bernie and Warren. This was a great one.
Speaker 1: This is fantastic. CNN, which is the worst cable News
Speaker 1: Network in existence. CNN was running this debate last die
Speaker 1: with a des Moines Register and they had to touch
Speaker 1: on this issue because everyone's been talking about it enough.
Speaker 1: Did Bernie Sanders in fact say that a woman can't
Speaker 1: win the presidents now? As a matter of fact, meaning
Speaker 1: that factually speaking, a woman has not been able to
Speaker 1: win the presidency yet. And there is certainly room for
Speaker 1: discussion if we're going to be honest about it, as
Speaker 1: to whether or not it's an advantage or disadvantage to
Speaker 1: run as a woman for the presidency. This is the
Speaker 1: reality of the world we live in. But the allegation
Speaker 1: here is that in a private conversation Bernie said this
Speaker 1: to Elizabeth Warren as they were talking about things really
Speaker 1: as colleagues. I mean, this was the equivalent of sitting
Speaker 1: down having a beer with somebody that you think you're
Speaker 1: on the same team with and then you think you're
Speaker 1: in the trust. Try. Bernie thought he was in the
Speaker 1: trust try he's in the nest. I thought I thought
Speaker 1: it was safe, And it turns out that no. Elizabeth
Speaker 1: Warren decided to use this against him. And so this
Speaker 1: is how CNN frames this exchange. This was the only
Speaker 1: really worthwhile part. We're not going to spend too much
Speaker 1: time on the debate today. I'm not going to go
Speaker 1: through every policy because you know, we'll talk about the
Speaker 1: broad strokes of their socialism, their insanity, their lack of
Speaker 1: understanding of math and markets. But here is what CNN
Speaker 1: did to set this thing up, Played thirteen producer Mark
Speaker 1: Senator Sanders. I do want to be clear here. You're
Speaker 1: saying that you never told Senator Warren that a woman
Speaker 1: could not win the election. The Senator Warren, what did
Speaker 1: you think when Senator Sanders told you a woman could
Speaker 1: not win the election? I disagreed. Bernie is my friend,
Speaker 1: and I am not here to try to fight with Bernie.
Speaker 1: But look, this question about whether or not a woman
Speaker 1: can be president has been raised, and it's time for
Speaker 1: us to attack it head on. And I think the
Speaker 1: best way to talk about who can win is by
Speaker 1: looking at people's winning record. So can a woman beat
Speaker 1: Donald Trump? Look at the men on this stage collectively,
Speaker 1: they have lost ten elections. The only people on this
Speaker 1: stage who have won every single election that they've been
Speaker 1: in are the women. Ah of a feminist girl power
Speaker 1: rallying cry here from Elizaeth Warren. But notice at the
Speaker 1: beginning of that exchange, she and then said, so, Senator Sanders,
Speaker 1: did you in fact say this thing? And he said no,
Speaker 1: And then they went to Eliza's Warren. Since we know
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders said this, why don't you tell us what
Speaker 1: you said in response to him? They're basically calling Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders a liar on National TV. I mean, I don't
Speaker 1: know how else you could how else you could see that?
Speaker 1: What else could you really say about it? And now
Speaker 1: it has come out? And does this surprise anyone? Oh here,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna look, I'm just look at producer Mark you
Speaker 1: can you can mouth the word to me. Who is
Speaker 1: responsible for putting the story out in the media. Who
Speaker 1: is the one that thought maybe people should know that
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders, Yes, Elizabeth Warren. Turns out that Warren leaked
Speaker 1: this herself. Oh what a shock, What a shock. Elizabeth
Speaker 1: Warren wanted people to know that Bernie Sanders is maybe
Speaker 1: kind of a misogynist, but she doesn't really want people
Speaker 1: to know that because she likes him. But just you know,
Speaker 1: stabs him in the back and puts her arm around
Speaker 1: his shoulder right right after she pulls off the maneuver.
Speaker 1: I mean, just classic Elizabeth Warren. Not an honorable move,
Speaker 1: Not an honorable move at all. Does that surprise us
Speaker 1: that somebody who had faked being a Native American for
Speaker 1: decades would then go after somebody in this way. I'm always,
Speaker 1: I will tell you, I always am a little offended,
Speaker 1: and I know I shouldn't be because people think of
Speaker 1: me as a member of the press or even though
Speaker 1: I never would really use that term. I certainly when
Speaker 1: you use the term journalist, because I'm not. But people
Speaker 1: feel like they have to tell me, hey, we're sitting down,
Speaker 1: we're having drinks, especially if it's somebody who's tied to
Speaker 1: the administration or if they're in politics. They say, you know,
Speaker 1: we're off the record, and if we have a personal relationship,
Speaker 1: like if we're friends, which is the case with many
Speaker 1: of them. I understand why they say that, but there's
Speaker 1: a part of me that's like, if you know me,
Speaker 1: you know that I don't I don't do that thing.
Speaker 1: I don't talk to people when they think they're talking
Speaker 1: to buck. And then all of a sudden that that
Speaker 1: story for my own purposes that they thought was being
Speaker 1: shared just between two friends, two colleagues is now going
Speaker 1: to be broadcast, you know, everywhere exactly what. Some journalists,
Speaker 1: by the way, do operate that way, and that's because
Speaker 1: journalists are discussing people worse probably than anyone and anyone
Speaker 1: in any business except actors. But Elizaeth Warren did exactly
Speaker 1: that to Bernie Sanders. Because now is the time there's
Speaker 1: really only going to be one progressive candidate, and there's
Speaker 1: only going to be one main choice for the Democrats.
Speaker 1: Which socialist is going to be the standard bearer? Who
Speaker 1: of the socialist candidates Bernie Sanders, Elizeth Warren and quite
Speaker 1: honestly may Or Pete Boodha judge too, who did it?
Speaker 1: Who did a pretty sound job last night? I mean
Speaker 1: I can't see there, and you know who else does
Speaker 1: a good job? And I make fun of her because
Speaker 1: she eats salad with a comb and has her staff
Speaker 1: like helped groom her in ways that is surprising. Kloba
Speaker 1: Shar Clobashar's not not actually a crazy person. I mean,
Speaker 1: she may be a craven Democrat, but she operates a
Speaker 1: little bit more in the realm of reality than some
Speaker 1: of these other Democrats. I mean, Bernie Sanders, the stuff
Speaker 1: that he's saying is insane. People who think that Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders has any idea how any of this would really
Speaker 1: work and what this would do for people don't know
Speaker 1: what they're talking about. If Bernie Sanders becomes president of
Speaker 1: the United States, you will be poorer and less free.
Speaker 1: I guarantee it. I'm not saying that it'll be mad Max,
Speaker 1: but things are going to get rougher for you in
Speaker 1: ways that matter to you. So at least with someone
Speaker 1: like a Cloba shar or a Biden. Biden is just
Speaker 1: going to do whatever the party apparatus tells him to do.
Speaker 1: The party apparatus of the Democrats has further left and
Speaker 1: it has been at any other time in my lifetime.
Speaker 1: But he's not really an ideologue. He's a Bidenist first
Speaker 1: and foremost. What does Biden have to do to win?
Speaker 1: What does Biden have to do to have nice things
Speaker 1: said and written about him by the elite media? Clobish
Speaker 1: are a little bit more normal, a little bit more reasonable.
Speaker 1: But can any of them win against Trump? I think
Speaker 1: we all know the answer to that. So far, you're
Speaker 1: in the free him. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast,
Speaker 1: and I want to say that's a night for me
Speaker 1: was dispiriting. Different guys got to do better what we
Speaker 1: saw a night. There was nothing I saw at night
Speaker 1: that would be able to take Donald Trump out. And
Speaker 1: I want to see a Democrat in the White House
Speaker 1: as soon as possible. There was nothing to night that.
Speaker 1: If you're looking at this thing, you say, any of
Speaker 1: these people are prepared for what Donal Trump is going
Speaker 1: to do to us. I think Van Jones is wrong
Speaker 1: on policy matters, and I think if I think he's
Speaker 1: an ideological opponent on most things, not all things, but
Speaker 1: he is one of these smarter democrats of the political
Speaker 1: analysts out on the scene. I'll tell you I've worked
Speaker 1: with Van. I know Van a little bit, and he's
Speaker 1: actually some of you will get mad at me. I
Speaker 1: don't care. He's actually a pretty charming guy if you
Speaker 1: if you get to chat with him a little bit,
Speaker 1: and he's completely right here, He's completely right. There was nothing,
Speaker 1: There was nothing. I know. He's far left, radical and
Speaker 1: progressive and all this stuff, and I think that he's
Speaker 1: wrong and all these things. I'm just saying he's a
Speaker 1: smart progressive who sometimes does call it the way it
Speaker 1: is instead of the way the CNN audience wants to
Speaker 1: see it. You know, I think it's important, by the way,
Speaker 1: that you understand we should we should seek as conservatives,
Speaker 1: you should seek out who are the best of the left,
Speaker 1: who's the strong who makes the strongest arguments. I mean, yeah,
Speaker 1: I'd like to see it here. And you know, I
Speaker 1: talk about like Maisie haronos the you know, one of
Speaker 1: the dumbest people I've ever heard, and you know, Biden
Speaker 1: is a dumb ass. And this is important for us
Speaker 1: to talk about because these people want to control aspects
Speaker 1: of our lives and have power over us, and so
Speaker 1: we should be honest about what's going on. But there
Speaker 1: are democrats who are skilled in the use of rhetoric,
Speaker 1: who understand how to manipulate emotions, who are in fact
Speaker 1: knowledgeable about the areas they talk about, and it's him
Speaker 1: coming upon us. And I think there's not enough of
Speaker 1: this in conservative media, by the way, to deal with
Speaker 1: the smart leftists, to defeat their argument, and also to
Speaker 1: elevate leftists on certain topics and issues when they're correct.
Speaker 1: There are real far left journos out there who have
Speaker 1: been some of the most ardent critics of the whole
Speaker 1: Russia collusion nonsense. I mean, you will come across people
Speaker 1: that I think are wrong on ninety percent of things,
Speaker 1: but within that ten percent, they'll be saying that the
Speaker 1: you know, MSNBC and CNN for example, have made mockeries
Speaker 1: of themselves on Russia collusion. We'll get into more of
Speaker 1: that later, but I do this is a bit of
Speaker 1: an aside, but you know, I don't like to just
Speaker 1: play the dumb the dumb Democrats here and just make
Speaker 1: fun of what a clown show most of the Democratic
Speaker 1: parties become because there are there are smart Democrats, and
Speaker 1: they can still win folks. They can still make compelling arguments.
Speaker 1: They can get over fifty one percent of the aggregate
Speaker 1: vote in a presidential election. Do not underestimate our opponents.
Speaker 1: Do not underestimate them. But there was nothing less now
Speaker 1: that I've said that, there was nothing in that debate
Speaker 1: that you could look at and say, oh, that person
Speaker 1: is going to be really challenging for Donald Trump. That
Speaker 1: person is going to be able to defeat the incombent
Speaker 1: president of the United States. I'm not saying that means
Speaker 1: it can't happen, but as a deeply unimpressive field who
Speaker 1: has who has real momentum. Think back to the twenty
Speaker 1: sixteen election. Early on, even Trump was a phenomenon. And
Speaker 1: if we're gonna say this, we're gonna be objective about this,
Speaker 1: you know, I know there's so much I feel like
Speaker 1: these days everyone's just oh this, tell everybody what do
Speaker 1: you think they want to hear. I don't like to
Speaker 1: do that here. I like to tell you what I
Speaker 1: think is true, and you tell me the same. That's
Speaker 1: why some of you, you know, like my impressions. Some
Speaker 1: of you don't. That's fine. But Obama was a phenomenon
Speaker 1: when he was running. Let's just be honest about that.
Speaker 1: Defeated Hillary and everything goes. You know, there was a
Speaker 1: sense that this is a candidate, this is a person
Speaker 1: who has got something. Which are these Democrats? Who among
Speaker 1: the Democrats last time on that stage, has really got something.
Speaker 1: I mean, you have to say at this point it
Speaker 1: might be Bernie And that's in scene. That's absurd. Although
Speaker 1: if you're if you're picking a sort of a dark
Speaker 1: horse candidate, if you're picking somebody to come from behind,
Speaker 1: and I gotta think, if you're asking me to pick
Speaker 1: a long shot right now, who might actually pull it?
Speaker 1: Off among the Democrat primary. I gotta think it's mayor Pete.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to The bus Essen Show podcasts. Remember
Speaker 1: to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app, or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. I sent thirteen years ago.
Speaker 1: It was a mistake to give the president the authority
Speaker 1: to go to war if in fact he couldn't get
Speaker 1: inspectors into Iraq to stop at what's thought to be
Speaker 1: the attempt to get a nuclear weapon. It was a mistake,
Speaker 1: and I acknowledge that, but right out. And the man
Speaker 1: who also argued against that war, Barack Obama, picked me
Speaker 1: to be as vice president and once we be kept will,
Speaker 1: once we were elected president, he turned and vice president,
Speaker 1: he turned to me and asked me to end that war.
Speaker 1: I know what it's like to send and a son
Speaker 1: or daughter, and like our colleague has gone to war
Speaker 1: in Afghanistan, my son for a year in Iraq. And
Speaker 1: that's why I do it, very very reluctantly. That's why
Speaker 1: I led the effort, as you know, Wolf against Surgey
Speaker 1: tens of thousands of Trics in Afghanistan. Biden has a
Speaker 1: remarkable gift, and his gift is to think that a
Speaker 1: very long legacy of being on the wrong side of
Speaker 1: issues and being ineffective and pushing his side is somehow
Speaker 1: evidence of skill and wisdom. Biden, it seems to me,
Speaker 1: is really so dumb that he thinks that his failures
Speaker 1: are evidence of him being smart. And when he talks
Speaker 1: about ending the war in Iraq, for example, that the
Speaker 1: way that that was done, the circumstances under which that
Speaker 1: happened with the Obama administration did lead, I mean directly
Speaker 1: to the rise of the Islamic State, which keep in mind,
Speaker 1: really was a Syrian entity that then swooped into Iraq,
Speaker 1: went through Mosul, and then we had that situation where
Speaker 1: you had the US have to launch airstrikes to prevent
Speaker 1: a continued onslaught into deep into the Kurdish areas of
Speaker 1: Iraq by the Islamic State. That was a disaster, a disaster,
Speaker 1: and Biden points to this like somehow he knows what
Speaker 1: he's talking about, or he is the wise elder statesman
Speaker 1: here that will get things done. What does Joe Biden
Speaker 1: even really stand for. It's not clear to anybody who's
Speaker 1: being honest. Joe Biden is just whatever the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: wants at any point in time, he'll go along with it.
Speaker 1: Which way is the wind blowing right now? And how
Speaker 1: does that affect the prospects of Joe Biden? A deep
Speaker 1: he's just a deeply unimpressive fellow. Oh and by the way,
Speaker 1: you know, you had Mike Pence, who Mike Pence said
Speaker 1: something funny. Mike Pence had a funny last night. Who
Speaker 1: would have thought, here, he's got it, you know, strutting
Speaker 1: stuff a little bit. Here you go, here's here's the
Speaker 1: VP play clip eight. You know, the choice in this
Speaker 1: election couldn't be clear, and the stakes couldn't be higher.
Speaker 1: Today we have a president who loves this country, who
Speaker 1: stands by our military, our workers, and our freedoms. He
Speaker 1: never quits, he never backs down. He believes in you,
Speaker 1: and he fights for you every single day. And then
Speaker 1: you got this group of Democrats running for president and
Speaker 1: I heard they got another debate tonight. If it's anything
Speaker 1: like the other ones, those people are going to be
Speaker 1: standing so far on the left, I think that stage
Speaker 1: is going to tip over. I think he's right. The
Speaker 1: Democratic Party because of the loudest voices within it, or
Speaker 1: the furthest left, the media is so much an appendage
Speaker 1: of the Democratic Party, or maybe the Democratic Party is
Speaker 1: such an appendage of the media that the echo chamber
Speaker 1: of journalists as left wing cheerleaders has really influenced I
Speaker 1: believe the platform that the Democrats now support. And oh,
Speaker 1: by the way, I see here talking about how leftists
Speaker 1: sometimes are right. Michael Moore, who I think is really
Speaker 1: a lot of his positions are odious, and I think
Speaker 1: he's I think he's gross. I don't. I don't think
Speaker 1: he's a fellow who comes at things with good faith
Speaker 1: or good intentions. I mean, I could use much more
Speaker 1: colorful and salty language to describe what I think of
Speaker 1: Michael Moore, but we are on this is a family
Speaker 1: friendly show, so I'll just leave it there. But she
Speaker 1: even I see the headline and Drudge Warren stuck a
Speaker 1: knife in Bernie's back. I mean, everyone knows, that's exactly
Speaker 1: what happened here. You know, everyone knows, And you know,
Speaker 1: I think this is gonna this is gonna go against
Speaker 1: her a little more. They they thought this would be
Speaker 1: the war on women. Remember Mitt Romney Binders full of women.
Speaker 1: That was what they said about him. They took him,
Speaker 1: and they took a a completely understandable phrase he used
Speaker 1: about how much he wants to hire women when he
Speaker 1: was running for presidency and made it sound like he
Speaker 1: was collecting women on sheets of paper and locking them
Speaker 1: in a little canvas folder or something. I mean, it
Speaker 1: was it was just insane, but that became a tali haha,
Speaker 1: binders full of women. It was a talking point that
Speaker 1: they used. And this whole war on women meme because
Speaker 1: Democrats create, i mean, identity politics is so central of them.
Speaker 1: They believe that a person's gender, skin color, ethnicity, religion
Speaker 1: is determinative in many ways of who of what that
Speaker 1: person's politics should be. So the Democrats do make these
Speaker 1: judgments and distinctions based upon superficial characteristics. But here we
Speaker 1: see that Warren thought that she could get the war
Speaker 1: on that, that she could create a war on women
Speaker 1: via Bernie meme, and it did not. It did not
Speaker 1: work out. And it was also it was really a
Speaker 1: Candy Crowley moment between Warren and Bernie. There. The Candy
Speaker 1: Crowley moment you remember was the CNN moderator and between
Speaker 1: Trump and I'm sorry, between Romney and Obama back in
Speaker 1: twenty twelve on Benghazi. They did Obama call it a
Speaker 1: terrorist attack, and no, it was kind of vague in general,
Speaker 1: and you know, down in the speech that he gave
Speaker 1: about Benghazi, it was, you know, these acts of terror,
Speaker 1: but it was generalized and he did not really refer
Speaker 1: to Benghazi as a terrorist attack. But even still, it's
Speaker 1: not the job of Candy Crowley to do the interpretation there.
Speaker 1: But she did exactly what Zucker and the rest of
Speaker 1: the CNN crew would want, which is help Obama. That's
Speaker 1: the point, that's what they're really there to do. They
Speaker 1: go Obama look good. So this seemed like another instance
Speaker 1: of it. Because Bernie's not of the establishment in the
Speaker 1: way that the elites want him to be. I mean,
Speaker 1: I will give him credit for this, some of the
Speaker 1: Bernie bro supporters or lunatics and his ideas, his policy
Speaker 1: ideas are deeply troubling. I mean, here's just one example,
Speaker 1: by the way, and this is Bernie and an Elizabeth Warren.
Speaker 1: They think this is so simple. They're just gonna They're
Speaker 1: just gonna say that prescription drugs cost X. Price controls
Speaker 1: are a destructive mechanism within any market right the moment
Speaker 1: you start saying the price is X, when it's really
Speaker 1: why you create because of that intrusion into the operations
Speaker 1: of the market, you create problems. You create problems, You
Speaker 1: create issues in the supply and demand, You create issues
Speaker 1: of who's going to make this stuff. And pharmaceuticals is
Speaker 1: an excellent, excellent case study of this, because yeah, there
Speaker 1: are some You got this guy, what was his name, Screlly,
Speaker 1: who was buying up different patents for obscure but very important,
Speaker 1: you know, drugs that don't have a lot of usage cases,
Speaker 1: but for those people that need them, they're incredibly important
Speaker 1: and just jacking up the price. And you know, there
Speaker 1: is the same thing you can say about like war profiteering.
Speaker 1: Sometimes times things are more important than than just the
Speaker 1: bottom line. But you've also got to understand, as I
Speaker 1: don't think Bernie and Warren do that the bottom line matters,
Speaker 1: or else you're not going to have the things you want.
Speaker 1: If the government came along and said, hey, it's wartime,
Speaker 1: you guys, you can't charge more than this amount of
Speaker 1: money for ammunition to make, you know, ammunition, you can't
Speaker 1: sell it for more the next amount of dollars. That
Speaker 1: would create problems in the market. They said, all right,
Speaker 1: you're gonna make all you're gonna make this for us,
Speaker 1: and it's gonna be free for the government. Well, those
Speaker 1: places would go out of business right because that you
Speaker 1: can't do that. There's a limit to these what these
Speaker 1: price controls can get away with. With medicines. It costs
Speaker 1: over a billion dollars right now to take a drug
Speaker 1: from the R and D from the origins in the
Speaker 1: R and D phase all the way through to the
Speaker 1: FDA has said you can sell this to people. There
Speaker 1: are some things where they'll have a case if it's
Speaker 1: necessary for you know, pediatric cancer or something that there
Speaker 1: are ways that they will escalate it through the process
Speaker 1: so some people can use it. But until it's really
Speaker 1: available at your pharmers, it's a cost over billion dollars.
Speaker 1: And the fact that other countries don't respect the intellectual
Speaker 1: property rights of these pharmaceutical companies the way that we
Speaker 1: do in this country isn't evidence of how great those
Speaker 1: countries do things. They're getting a free ride off our back.
Speaker 1: Who's going to come up with do you want them me?
Speaker 1: I'm somebody. I want ciliac disease to be cured. I
Speaker 1: want the person who or the company that comes up
Speaker 1: with a cure for ciliac disease. To make billions of dollars,
Speaker 1: the money's going to come from somewhere. And if they're
Speaker 1: not going to make billions of dollars, they're not going
Speaker 1: to spend a billion dollars, especially because the failure rate
Speaker 1: for pharmaceuticals, which we all look. We all want to
Speaker 1: know that there's that drug that when we really need it,
Speaker 1: we've got it. Right when you've got some rare infection
Speaker 1: or some inflammatory condition or something, you you want to
Speaker 1: go to your dock and they've got some little magic
Speaker 1: script that they write out that they give you the
Speaker 1: pill that's going to fix you. Right, we all want that. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: it doesn't always really happen that way. But if you
Speaker 1: listen to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren last night, I
Speaker 1: mean they beat up on arma and the rich people
Speaker 1: and corporations, and of course there are excesses. I'm not
Speaker 1: saying the market functions perfectly. It's not a perfect market.
Speaker 1: It's not entirely it's not even close to a free
Speaker 1: market even right now. And you add in all the
Speaker 1: regulations and government distortions. But who's if you're not going
Speaker 1: to be able to make money doing this and your
Speaker 1: failure rate, which I don't want to give you the
Speaker 1: statistics on because I don't know offhand, but a vast
Speaker 1: majority of drug cases, or rather of drugs that they're
Speaker 1: trying to develop don't work. That's just some cost now,
Speaker 1: just didn't work. Phase two clinical trials come back. Nope, sorry,
Speaker 1: I don't have it. So removing the profit motive from
Speaker 1: these companies or lowering the profit motive because it sounds good,
Speaker 1: we're going to make this drug free now. Look, insulin.
Speaker 1: There are some things that have been around a long
Speaker 1: time that should be off patent that companies play games
Speaker 1: with and they overcharge, and Trump is already trying to
Speaker 1: do that though. See this is what they're not telling you.
Speaker 1: In the places where there are abuses, where we can
Speaker 1: all recognize that something funk is going on, there is
Speaker 1: room for action, but just to say that you're gonna
Speaker 1: with us, you know, the stroke of the pen. The
Speaker 1: drugs are going to cost X. This drug is going
Speaker 1: to be sold for this amount of money. That's what
Speaker 1: they did in Venezuela with consumer products, and that's why
Speaker 1: people are literally waiting in lines and can't get fresh
Speaker 1: milk or toilet paper. I when I was in a
Speaker 1: Ruba a while ago, they said there are people who
Speaker 1: are showing up to Ruba from Venezuela to buy household
Speaker 1: items because they just could not get them in Venezuela,
Speaker 1: and it's very close off the coast. So I know
Speaker 1: it was a little bit of a digression there, But
Speaker 1: this is the problem you have with these individuals who
Speaker 1: don't understand or don't care to understand the workings of
Speaker 1: a free market. And what Bernie Sanders is suggesting is
Speaker 1: disastrous for what would really what would really happen if
Speaker 1: he got if you were to get his way. And
Speaker 1: now you have to take very seriously what the ramifications
Speaker 1: would be, because Warren Sanders, they're looking for areas where
Speaker 1: this just becomes an executive action. They're just gonna say,
Speaker 1: you know, this is Obama's pen and phone routine. Congress
Speaker 1: won't act, so I will you know all you need
Speaker 1: or enough people. And we also don't have a tradition
Speaker 1: of having our ideological side in the judiciary invoking universal
Speaker 1: injunctions against the presidency the way that they do against Trump.
Speaker 1: So our judges go all right, I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe maybe we gotta let this thing play out a
Speaker 1: little bit. You know, it really is executive prerogative, even
Speaker 1: if we think that it might be a bit of
Speaker 1: an excess or you know, this is not something we
Speaker 1: should shove. Their judges, I mean, left wing judges are activists,
Speaker 1: so they'll just say you can't do that. So we
Speaker 1: can't count on that same thing on our side. But
Speaker 1: there was nothing. I see your people saying clobish are
Speaker 1: actually did really well last night. It's not really all
Speaker 1: that surprising. There's nothing to look at here, and few
Speaker 1: as particularly new. We have to see how the shakes
Speaker 1: out in Iowa. I certainly hope that. I don't know,
Speaker 1: there's a part of me that wants Bernie Centers to
Speaker 1: be the nominee. There's a part of me that wants
Speaker 1: Democrats to have to really present and you don't have
Speaker 1: to present and defend this lurch toward this jump towards socialism,
Speaker 1: and that becomes an inescapable national conversation. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: that it's better for us to allow them to evade
Speaker 1: accountability for this. I want them to have to say, yes,
Speaker 1: that's what we're going for. You're in the freedom hunt.
Speaker 1: This is the buck Sexton show podcast. You ever noticed
Speaker 1: what Biden He's always go on the wrong state and
Speaker 1: then you're a great state of Iowa. Iowa, Yes, Iowa.
Speaker 1: Right now it's Wisconsin. Oh I meant Wisconsin. No, I
Speaker 1: didn't know I was in wiscons That's fine. How many
Speaker 1: times has he done that, by the way, lots of
Speaker 1: times he said it's great to be in the state
Speaker 1: of Ohio. No, sir, you're in Florida. Drum's right here.
Speaker 1: And Biden gets away with a lot of the immedia
Speaker 1: just pretends that these are normal mistakes. These are normal mistakes,
Speaker 1: but they're really not. Biden doesn't have it. Biden is
Speaker 1: too old for this. Maybe Democrats refuse to accept that reality.
Speaker 1: Maybe Democrats refuse to deal with the truth of the
Speaker 1: situation and put him forward as their candidate. The guy's
Speaker 1: too old. He simply doesn't. He simply does not have it.
Speaker 1: But yeah, Trump had a rally last night. He had
Speaker 1: some funny lines from it, obviously, as he tends as
Speaker 1: he tends to do. Democrats simply don't have anyone who
Speaker 1: can stand up in front of a crowd of fifteen
Speaker 1: or twenty thousand people and just riff for an hour,
Speaker 1: an hour and a half and get the crowd totally
Speaker 1: fired up and have memorable moments. And no, I mean,
Speaker 1: they just they they don't have somebody who can go
Speaker 1: toe to toe with Trump. And they know that, which
Speaker 1: is why there's such a hesitation right now for there
Speaker 1: to be a real true front runner, even though I
Speaker 1: know Biden's in the polls, but he's the he's the
Speaker 1: default front runner. He's just Okay, I guess it's Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: I guess that's what it's going to be. And then
Speaker 1: he also made some jokes about that, and I you
Speaker 1: guys know that I hate recycling. I mean I legitimately
Speaker 1: and truly think recycling is the most annoying thing. It's
Speaker 1: not It's not nearly as helpful for the environment as
Speaker 1: people are led to believe it is. In fact, there's
Speaker 1: plenty of reason. There are plenty of studies that show
Speaker 1: that a lot of recycling is bad for the environment
Speaker 1: by the time you've actually gone through the whole process.
Speaker 1: But this is this is the reality of when the
Speaker 1: Democrats allow this climate change absurdity to get to a
Speaker 1: certain point, you're just you're just gonna deal with with
Speaker 1: annoying inconveniences in your day to day that are a
Speaker 1: reminder of what these petty little statusts are all about,
Speaker 1: which is making sure that you can't have the light
Speaker 1: that you really want because they think they're saving the planet.
Speaker 1: Play play clips six here. But I'm also approving new
Speaker 1: dishwashes that give you more water so you can actually
Speaker 1: wash and rich your dishes without having to do it
Speaker 1: ten times, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten. Anybody
Speaker 1: have a new dishwasher. I'm sorry for that. I'm sorry
Speaker 1: for that. It's worthless. They give you so little water.
Speaker 1: You ever see it, air comes out so little water.
Speaker 1: So what happens You end up using it ten times
Speaker 1: and the plates that you take them out and do
Speaker 1: them the old fashion way. Right, Just think about what's
Speaker 1: going on in say California, where now you have per
Speaker 1: person limitations on water usage in households in a place that,
Speaker 1: as a as a function of its geography and its
Speaker 1: natural resources, is among the most blessed corners of the
Speaker 1: entire earth. But they've got idiot liberals running the state
Speaker 1: without any opposition of any real kind from Republicans, and
Speaker 1: things just keep getting worse. You know, it takes a while.
Speaker 1: You know, if you take over, whether you're talking about
Speaker 1: a state or a company, really bad leadership will destroy anything.
Speaker 1: I mean, libs can ruin any city or any state,
Speaker 1: but it takes a while. We're finally seeing that play
Speaker 1: out in California. And that's why someone like Trump comes
Speaker 1: in and says, you know what, I want you to
Speaker 1: be able to wash your dishes because I'm a normal
Speaker 1: person and understand things. Thanks for listening to The Bus
Speaker 1: Sesson Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast, the
Speaker 1: iHeart Radio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Do
Speaker 1: you guys all remember when Michael Avanadi was a hero
Speaker 1: of the resistance. I do. I remember there was a
Speaker 1: time when you couldn't turn on CNN or MSNBC without
Speaker 1: seeing his very you know, aggressive ball a theatrics on television, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, he was just constantly a presence on the
Speaker 1: cable news circuit. I think he was on CNN more
Speaker 1: than any non contracted or contractually obligated contracted that's different,
Speaker 1: contractually obligated guest for a period of a month or two.
Speaker 1: Michael Avanati was so beloved because he was just vicious
Speaker 1: and nasty about the president and really was willing to
Speaker 1: go deep into the gutter to go after this president.
Speaker 1: He was so beloved by libs, by leftists, you know.
Speaker 1: Anderson Cooper used to have Michael Avonati on his show
Speaker 1: all the time. The serious news people over at CNN,
Speaker 1: Jake Tapper took him very seriously. Oh, Michael Avanati, He's
Speaker 1: a lawyer who's really worthy of putting on television all
Speaker 1: these different Rachel Matt Avanati was something of a folk
Speaker 1: hero to leftists. He was the Robin Hood of the
Speaker 1: hashtag resistance for a while. And it turns out that
Speaker 1: he is, according to federal authorities, one of the scummiest
Speaker 1: lawyers you could find anywhere. But we all already knew that,
Speaker 1: right Why would we already know that without even getting
Speaker 1: into the specifics of these charges, which I will in
Speaker 1: just a moment. And I'm sorry, I know that this
Speaker 1: might seem like buck, Why do we have to waste
Speaker 1: your time with Abanati? Because the people that are telling
Speaker 1: you to vote for Biden and vote for Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: or Elizabeth Warren is the savior of America or whatever.
Speaker 1: The same people, the same news anchors that want to
Speaker 1: constantly wag their finger in your face, tell you Donald
Speaker 1: Trump is boorish, a philistine, disgusting, you know, a horrible
Speaker 1: person whatever it may be, a barbarian. That the same
Speaker 1: people that say that to you treated Michael Avenati very well.
Speaker 1: The same individuals who would say that someone like me
Speaker 1: is always as in the tank for tromp Oh, you know,
Speaker 1: never refuses to be honest with people. They thought that
Speaker 1: Michael Avenati might run for president. That was being talked
Speaker 1: about that this guy, maybe Avana. There were articles written
Speaker 1: you can google, you'll see maybe Abnati is the guy
Speaker 1: that they need to beat Donald Trump. I mean, I
Speaker 1: think he might have a better shot than some of
Speaker 1: these Democrat candidates even still, but that's just a function
Speaker 1: of how terrible the Democrat candidates are. But we knew
Speaker 1: that he was a disgusting and dishonest fellow because he
Speaker 1: was the lawyer. And you must remember this for people
Speaker 1: always want to talk now about the Stormy Daniels thing
Speaker 1: he did the president before he was the president, having
Speaker 1: fair with a porn star. You know, I mean, I
Speaker 1: leave I leave this to your own your own discretion
Speaker 1: and judgment. But that was what everybody was talking about
Speaker 1: at the time. You know, the President, as we know,
Speaker 1: has a he's an imperfect man and has a an
Speaker 1: interesting history when it comes to women and his relationships
Speaker 1: with them. But he's not the first. Of course, with
Speaker 1: JFK it was all like, oh, he's just such a
Speaker 1: you know, it's just roguish charm and everything else. I mean, yeah,
Speaker 1: with Trump, it's oh my gosh, he's a monster. But
Speaker 1: the more important of a Nati incident was always his
Speaker 1: willingness to try to use Julie Sweatnick as the final
Speaker 1: the final you know, shoe to drop or Domino to
Speaker 1: fall or I don't know, pick an analogy, the final
Speaker 1: last straw, the last straw for Judge Kavanaugh, Julie Sweatnick,
Speaker 1: who was a who was a visibly and clearly disturbed
Speaker 1: and deranged person, put on national TV by a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of different news outlets, of course, because anything to
Speaker 1: destroy Kavanaugh was consider justified. Avanati was her counsel. He
Speaker 1: sat with her, He had conversations with her in much
Speaker 1: greater detail than we even heard on TV. He had
Speaker 1: her sign a sworn affidavit alleging that Brett Kavanaugh was
Speaker 1: part of a secret gang rape ring that nobody ever
Speaker 1: heard of before while he was in high school, and
Speaker 1: that Luie Swetnick, who had graduated and was already in college,
Speaker 1: would go back to hang out at the high school
Speaker 1: parties where these gang rapes were occurring and never thought
Speaker 1: to say anything to anyone ever about it. And Avanati
Speaker 1: believed her to the point that he would tie his
Speaker 1: professional reputation tour and would feel like it was okay
Speaker 1: to use these absurd, clearly defamatory allegations against Kavanaugh in
Speaker 1: a legal proceeding. Avanadi is really the modern Democratic Party, though.
Speaker 1: That's what you have to remember, the will to power,
Speaker 1: utter ruthlessness, do whatever you have to do, destroy the
Speaker 1: other side. There's no honor, there's no decency, there's no
Speaker 1: fair play, there's no obeying of any rules. So in
Speaker 1: a sense, Avanati is really the distillation of the modern Left.
Speaker 1: Useful when he's useful, and they don't care what happens
Speaker 1: after the fact, you know, a pit bull for their
Speaker 1: side and nothing else matters. Well, the good news is
Speaker 1: not only did he probably remember hearing from people that
Speaker 1: were involved in the defense of Kavanaugh in DC talking
Speaker 1: to them that week when the when the votes were
Speaker 1: going to be cast by the s by the Senate.
Speaker 1: Avanadi with Sweatnick may in fact have saved Kavanall's nomination
Speaker 1: because if you think Julie Swetnick is telling the truth,
Speaker 1: you're a moron. You're just not You're not. It is
Speaker 1: not possible to be an intelligent human being and know
Speaker 1: about what Julie Sweatneck's allegations were and see her interviews
Speaker 1: and think she was telling the truth. You're just you're
Speaker 1: not the dumbest person ever, but you're not smart. Not possible.
Speaker 1: But he therefore might have I think saved Kavanaugh's nomination
Speaker 1: because then it was clear was a hit. It was
Speaker 1: a hit. Don't never for they always want to talk
Speaker 1: about Blasi Fork because you know, she cried, and she
Speaker 1: seemed a little bit more like, you know, sort of
Speaker 1: a little bit of a you know, believable in the
Speaker 1: emotional I mean, and she's also she's also full of it.
Speaker 1: Don't even get me started. But here's here's the problem. Now,
Speaker 1: this is why I'm bringing this up right now. Afinati
Speaker 1: was at a discipline or hearing in California where they're
Speaker 1: doing the what is effectively the predisbardment proceeding of involuntary
Speaker 1: inactive status as a lawyer. So this is the hearing
Speaker 1: where they're like, you're not really a lawyer anymore while
Speaker 1: this is going on, because oh, by the way, we're
Speaker 1: going to dispar you in the state of California's about
Speaker 1: to get dispart But he couldn't even finish that, my friends,
Speaker 1: without federal officers showing up to arrest him at that
Speaker 1: civil hearing about his law license. Left wing hero Anderson Cooper,
Speaker 1: Jake Tapper, Rachel Maddow's favorite lawyer for months, Michael Avanati
Speaker 1: favor the best. It's gonna run for president. He's an
Speaker 1: amazing fellow. Here's from the charges, the unsealed charges against him. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, the United States of America versus Michael John
Speaker 1: a naughty and just if you just look at the
Speaker 1: recitation of why they've picked this guy up, I'll just
Speaker 1: give this to you. This is from the kind of
Speaker 1: table of contents of the charges. Because they got a
Speaker 1: big case they're bringing against him. There is probable cause
Speaker 1: to believe the defendant has committed federal crimes while on
Speaker 1: pre trial release. Mail and wire fraud that's one of them.
Speaker 1: Structuring that's another one. There is probable cause to believe
Speaker 1: defendant committed state crimes while on pre trial release. Defendant's
Speaker 1: violation of California law. Defendants violation of Washington state law.
Speaker 1: There are no conditions or combination of conditions that will
Speaker 1: ensure the safety of the community. Defendant is a danger
Speaker 1: to the community. This is in if this isn't the
Speaker 1: federal filing that just came out while they arrested him.
Speaker 1: Defendant is unlikely to comply with the conditions of his release,
Speaker 1: and the issuance therefore of an arrest warrant for the
Speaker 1: defendant is appropriate. Who avanati, my, my, my, This fellow,
Speaker 1: this fellow is going to find himself has found himself
Speaker 1: on the wrong side of the law for sure. But
Speaker 1: these are things that are very hard to you know,
Speaker 1: when you're cheating on when you're cheating on taxes, when
Speaker 1: you're defrauding clients, when you are lying to investigators all
Speaker 1: charges that the federal government has laid against them, when
Speaker 1: there's a case against you in New York, when there's
Speaker 1: a case against you in California. These are things that
Speaker 1: either did or did not happen. They either have you
Speaker 1: on this stuff or they or they don't, and they
Speaker 1: tend not to bring these kinds of charges unless they've
Speaker 1: got you so CNN Hero, MSNBC Hero Resistance icon Michael
Speaker 1: Avanati is on the precipice of being disbarred and spending
Speaker 1: quite a bit of time in federal prison. Ge. They
Speaker 1: have some heroes on the left, don't they. You're in
Speaker 1: the freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast
Speaker 1: around hit Back Who. We're grateful that no lives were lost,
Speaker 1: and we will never downplay the serious of any attack
Speaker 1: on the United States or its forces. But judging from
Speaker 1: the type and intensity of the strike, the regime certainly
Speaker 1: must now understand well we will do if they ever
Speaker 1: again post risk to American lives. If rand escalates, we
Speaker 1: will end it on our terms. That, my friends, is
Speaker 1: a description of the new calculation that the Iranian regime
Speaker 1: has to make any time now they think about threatening
Speaker 1: American lives. This is changing the red line. This now
Speaker 1: shows that there will be more severe consequences that the
Speaker 1: United States government under President Trump will take action against
Speaker 1: any Iranian, any Iranian government of shoal who is actively
Speaker 1: threatening the lives of Americans. That's a change, that's a
Speaker 1: difference from what had been the case on a bipartisan basis,
Speaker 1: stretching back for decades. And it's why the media has
Speaker 1: moved on from this Iran story quickly because Trump won.
Speaker 1: Trump stared down the Mullas and won. He was right,
Speaker 1: the calculation was correct. That's where we are. Notice how
Speaker 1: for a few days it was Trump is reckless. Trump
Speaker 1: is horrible. Trump is terrible. He's leading us into war.
Speaker 1: It's a war crime. He's threatening war crimes. All of
Speaker 1: the criticism against Trump. How much criticism during that period.
Speaker 1: Were you really hearing from the media about the Mullahs
Speaker 1: about what's going on in Iran, about their murdering of
Speaker 1: hundreds now coming up on a few thousand protesters in
Speaker 1: the last few months alone. Who did the journalist sound
Speaker 1: more upset about? Who did the journals shed more tears
Speaker 1: when they're talking about Trump or the mullets. You already
Speaker 1: know the answer, You already know what the problem is
Speaker 1: here with the way the journalists talk about this. There's
Speaker 1: also this is this is stunning. There is new footage
Speaker 1: out that shows, I believe it or not, the Iranians
Speaker 1: they didn't shoot that airliner once. There is video. Wall
Speaker 1: Street Journal has it posted. Now it seems to show
Speaker 1: that they hit it with a missile one time, and
Speaker 1: then they hit it with a missile again, they hit
Speaker 1: it again. I mean, unbelievably horrific, unbelievably incompetent. I can't
Speaker 1: imagine what it would be like to be on that
Speaker 1: you know, on that plane, on that civilian jetliner, in
Speaker 1: that moment when the strike happened, and then for it
Speaker 1: to happen a second time. The Iranians couldn't figure this out.
Speaker 1: Killed one hundred and seventy six people, and guess what,
Speaker 1: the Iranians lied about it for days. This is showing
Speaker 1: this is the nature of the regime that Trump is
Speaker 1: trying to stand up to, that they would kill and
Speaker 1: they didn't just kill Iranians, they killed Ukrainians. They killed
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of Canadians. These are people whose families
Speaker 1: are never going to be the same. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is a major loss of life. How could they have
Speaker 1: to this question? But how would Iranians be so dumb?
Speaker 1: This isn't over, you know, this isn't in an area
Speaker 1: of active hostilities. There's not you know, you look at
Speaker 1: for example, what happened, and this was a terrible tragedy too,
Speaker 1: but it was a slightly different circumstance. If the shootdown
Speaker 1: of MH seventeen, that flight that was shot was a
Speaker 1: Malaysian Airlines flight that was shot down over Ukraine. There
Speaker 1: were some differences there. For example, there were cargo planes
Speaker 1: that have been landing support for the Ukrainian military, and
Speaker 1: so the Russian backed separatists were trying to send a
Speaker 1: message that they couldn't use those, so they mixed up.
Speaker 1: There were, but there were there was reason for them
Speaker 1: to think it was possible that it was an enemy aircraft.
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously it was a horrific mistake there too.
Speaker 1: In this case, this was a plane taking off from
Speaker 1: a civilian airport in Tehran, the capital city of Iran,
Speaker 1: and there's there's no there's no US incoming, there's nothing
Speaker 1: going on, and they shoot the plane once and then
Speaker 1: they shoot it again. The wonder the people are out
Speaker 1: in the streets. Not only you know, it's the Iranian
Speaker 1: regime is not only vicious, the Iranian regime is incompetent.
Speaker 1: The people in charge. You have to remember this, they
Speaker 1: draped themselves and all of this ideology and about the
Speaker 1: revolution and death to America, and this is straight out
Speaker 1: of the old Soviet playbook too. It's all about the revolution.
Speaker 1: It's all about, you know, the glory of Lenin or
Speaker 1: Stalin or whatever, slogans and statues and protests in favor
Speaker 1: of the regime in the street, you know, in marches
Speaker 1: and displays and pomp and circumstance. But the people that
Speaker 1: are taking for themselves power to make decisions that affect
Speaker 1: people's lives. The people that think that they should determine
Speaker 1: who gets, what gets made, where it goes, they're morons,
Speaker 1: utter morons. They're not accountable to the people. They're not
Speaker 1: chosen by the people. Why would they be good at
Speaker 1: their jobs. Their job is just to do whatever the
Speaker 1: other idiots who have seized power want them to do
Speaker 1: so they can keep their job. It doesn't matter what
Speaker 1: happens to the people. They don't They don't care how
Speaker 1: miserable and how oppressed the people are. They never do
Speaker 1: because they convinced themselves to justify I mean, if you
Speaker 1: are part of the regime, if you're a member of
Speaker 1: the IRGC, if you're a member of the Iranian regime's
Speaker 1: upper ranks, never mind, all the way up to the
Speaker 1: Guardian Council You don't care how much suffering the average
Speaker 1: Iranian goes through. It doesn't matter to you, because that's
Speaker 1: just the price you pay to support the Islamic Revolution
Speaker 1: of Iran. That's just the cost of doing business. You know,
Speaker 1: you shoot a civilian airline round of the sky with
Speaker 1: one hundred and seventy six people. Yeah, it's a it's
Speaker 1: a mistake. But you know they're defending the Iranians against
Speaker 1: the Great Satan and against Little Satan Israel. Right, That's
Speaker 1: that's the justification I'll give themselves. They are imbeciles. One
Speaker 1: of the real turning points in the Soviet Union was
Speaker 1: more and more people figuring out that the party bosses
Speaker 1: are the party bosses within the party, the Communist Party,
Speaker 1: not like there are more parties, but the little commissars,
Speaker 1: the little petty dictators running different areas of the bureaucracy
Speaker 1: with the government and control of so much, were complete
Speaker 1: and utter buffoons, self dealing, self interested, not good at
Speaker 1: They're not even good at implementing their incredibly flawed plans,
Speaker 1: not even able to keep the trains running on time,
Speaker 1: while they were the ones making sure that the trainings
Speaker 1: were crappy and slow and Rickety in the first place,
Speaker 1: and that's that's what the Iranian, the Iranian youth are
Speaker 1: reacting to. You know, they're not the mulas, aren't even
Speaker 1: aren't even efficient tyrants. They're not even good at tyranny. Oh,
Speaker 1: they're good at oppressing people, but they're not good at
Speaker 1: making all the decisions for those people. And you'd think
Speaker 1: there'd be opportunities here to tell that story more for journalists.
Speaker 1: You think they would care more about that than they do.
Speaker 1: But no, it was always about the whole dust up
Speaker 1: with the ram was really about getting Trump. For the
Speaker 1: journalists and what happens to the Iranian people. It was
Speaker 1: a deeply secondary, a deeply secondary concern. That's also a
Speaker 1: reminder as we sit here and think about you know,
Speaker 1: everything is a question of degree when you're talking about governance. Okay,
Speaker 1: in Iran, people can't protest, there's no free press, and
Speaker 1: you can disappear in the middle of the night. You
Speaker 1: have no habeas corpus, no rule of law, no individual rights,
Speaker 1: and the people in charge don't care. Here we don't
Speaker 1: yet have it like that, obviously, but do you think
Speaker 1: the idiot democrats in charge care that you know your
Speaker 1: dishes can't get washed that you don't have good light
Speaker 1: on your good light to read with at night because
Speaker 1: they have to use the light bulbs aren't as good. No,
Speaker 1: because they've got an ideological excuse for all the inefficiencies,
Speaker 1: all the stupidities that they inflict upon you. So it's
Speaker 1: the same mentality. This is why government needs to be limited.
Speaker 1: This is why enumerated powers matter. You don't want the people,
Speaker 1: You don't want the imbeciles to be able to make
Speaker 1: more decisions that are absolutely necessary, whether it's in Iran
Speaker 1: or here. Thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcasts.
Speaker 1: Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts. The Department of Justice
Speaker 1: was consulted, and frankly, you know, I don't think it
Speaker 1: was a close It was a close call. I believe
Speaker 1: that the president clearly had the authority to act as
Speaker 1: he did on numerous different bases. Now their questioned whether
Speaker 1: the president was even allowed to do that strike, and
Speaker 1: they're they're going after Bar. There is a I think
Speaker 1: it was in the New Yorker. There's a profile of
Speaker 1: Attorney General Bar written that you should be It's long
Speaker 1: and it's a little bit, a little bit dry, but
Speaker 1: it's a hit piece on bar and it tries to
Speaker 1: claim that he has a he's effectively a toady of
Speaker 1: the president, that his sense of the law is entirely
Speaker 1: part is in that they're just trying to tear this
Speaker 1: guy down with everything that can. Because I think that
Speaker 1: the Attorney General may have saved the Trump presidency, and
Speaker 1: right rightfully so. But he may have saved the Trump
Speaker 1: presidency because he understood the game that they were trying
Speaker 1: to play with the special counsel. He knew that it
Speaker 1: wasn't Mueller, that it was Weisman, that Weisman was going
Speaker 1: to try to just smear and slime the president in
Speaker 1: every way that he could and just attach attach this
Speaker 1: ten things that maybe we're criminal. We can't charge them though,
Speaker 1: but we're saying maybe they're criminal. We'll leave it to
Speaker 1: the Congress to decide trying to do this Alley you
Speaker 1: for impeachment. Barn knew exactly what's going on, so he
Speaker 1: just said, Nope, that's not how this that's not how
Speaker 1: this is going to go. Didn't bring charges. We don't
Speaker 1: see any basis for charges. Dunzo. The bar from John Matten.
Speaker 1: Just just wap it down. Just wap it down in
Speaker 1: the end zone. Don't don't try to freiser Mark Lows
Speaker 1: and I use I want to use more sports analogies
Speaker 1: so people think I'm like a normal American. I know
Speaker 1: I play sports. I just don't watch enough professional sports.
Speaker 1: I know very much about these days. Um Anyway, there's
Speaker 1: a real effort on the left to defame and destroy
Speaker 1: Attorney General Bar It's a very sussful. He's actually a
Speaker 1: very wealthy lawyer too. He's done really well for himself,
Speaker 1: lives in a big house in McLean, has a nice family,
Speaker 1: nice family life, you know, successful daughters. You know, this
Speaker 1: is the guy that you want to be your neighbor,
Speaker 1: although you'd have to be making a lot of dope
Speaker 1: because he's got a giant house in mcclan, which those
Speaker 1: of you don't know. McLean is like, oh, very fancy
Speaker 1: expense where it's where a CIA headquarters is. So I've
Speaker 1: spent a lot of time in McLean, Virginia driving around
Speaker 1: there and there's some very big houses. They hate Bar
Speaker 1: because he's very effective, he's very successful, and he knows
Speaker 1: the games they're trying to run. So they put out
Speaker 1: this piece, and also Bars Catholicism comes up for a
Speaker 1: bit of a bit of open season on that too,
Speaker 1: and they say, they bring up Opu's day, and they
Speaker 1: make it seem like Bars some kind of religious zelat
Speaker 1: or extremist. I mean, they can try, but all this
Speaker 1: really is is a reminder that anybody who is effective
Speaker 1: at stopping the scorched earth campaign of the Democrats, anyone
Speaker 1: who understands that to be an effective defender of this administration,
Speaker 1: you have to be a wartime conservative. You can't be
Speaker 1: a Mitt Romney, John McCain political go along to get
Speaker 1: along guy. Anyone who understands that it is going to
Speaker 1: come under a withering, withering assault. And that's what's happening
Speaker 1: with the attorney attorney general bar right now. All right,
Speaker 1: I haven't even gotten I know, I kind of went
Speaker 1: into a different direction to that because the impeachment thing
Speaker 1: I don't find quite as as exciting as I guess
Speaker 1: some other people do, just because I think that this
Speaker 1: is I think it's ridiculous. I think that anybody who
Speaker 1: is being even a little bit honest about the situation
Speaker 1: knows that this is absurd. I mean, Pelosi gave a
Speaker 1: press conference this morning. I watched it before before the show,
Speaker 1: and she said, all you really need to know about
Speaker 1: Pelosi and the whole impeachment thing is this, this one line,
Speaker 1: this one charge. Producer Mark plate clip eighteen. Please on
Speaker 1: December eighteenth, the House of Representatives impeach the President of
Speaker 1: the United States, an impeachment that will last forever. Since
Speaker 1: December eighteenth, there have been comments about when are we
Speaker 1: going to send the articles over? Well, we had hoped
Speaker 1: that the courtesy would be extended, that we would have
Speaker 1: seen what the process would be in the Senate. Short
Speaker 1: of that that, time has revealed many things since then,
Speaker 1: time has been our friend. No, that's the opposite of reality.
Speaker 1: Time is not a friend. But she said, the impeachment
Speaker 1: will last forever. This is what I've been telling you
Speaker 1: all along. They're impeaching the president. So the president is impeached,
Speaker 1: so that you can say that, so that will be
Speaker 1: a fact. Remember, Richard Nixon was not impeached. People keep
Speaker 1: bringing that up to He knew that he was going
Speaker 1: to be, so he bailed. But now Trump is an
Speaker 1: impeached president. Right, he joins Clinton and Andrew Johnson and
Speaker 1: third time in history does anyone even really know why
Speaker 1: he's being impeached. They're going to send over these articles
Speaker 1: about abuse of power and about obstruction specifically on the
Speaker 1: Ukraine issue. They didn't add more articles. That was thought
Speaker 1: that that might that might happen. But here she is
Speaker 1: telling you what this is really all about, which is
Speaker 1: just to paint him with the brush of impeachment to
Speaker 1: stain him forever he's been impeached, which is meaningless because
Speaker 1: the way the Democrats approach this, if they really really
Speaker 1: don't like the president and they have a majority in
Speaker 1: the House going to impeach him, let's impeach him abuse
Speaker 1: of power. You could Oh, you could say that about
Speaker 1: any president, any president. Because said it about Obama, he
Speaker 1: said about Bush, said it about Bush Clinton. I'm sure
Speaker 1: they'd come up with the way to say about Reagan
Speaker 1: Ron Contra. I mean, there's all the all the so
Speaker 1: many ways you can go without about this. Everybody's going
Speaker 1: to get impeached now. Democrats have and I really mean this,
Speaker 1: they have debased impeachment as a process. They have made
Speaker 1: this now a petty partisan tool, and they want us
Speaker 1: to believe it's something more than that. That's why when
Speaker 1: Pelosi goes, hey, the founder said, you know, go back
Speaker 1: to the Earth. You know, George Washington and Thomas Payne.
Speaker 1: And she she had this whole thing where she started
Speaker 1: rattling off a bunch of the of the Founders, And
Speaker 1: I gotta tell you, Pelosi speaks of the Founding Fathers
Speaker 1: with all the reverence and familiarity of a space alien
Speaker 1: whose ship crash landed into America yesterday. This. Yeah, that guy,
Speaker 1: you know, Benjamin Franklin or whatever, you know, the guy
Speaker 1: from the Money, He totally would have liked this impeachment.
Speaker 1: Like what I mean, if she's gonna constantly claim that
Speaker 1: this impeachment force is about the Constitution, I think she
Speaker 1: needs to do a much better job of at least
Speaker 1: pretending she has even a passing familiarity with the Constitution.
Speaker 1: That would be nice. I would prefer that this is
Speaker 1: like when I mean, the two funniest things you see
Speaker 1: Pelosi do is but she's she's all the Founding Father's
Speaker 1: way of part of this. That's that's amazing. And then
Speaker 1: the other thing that she does that's that's pretty amazing
Speaker 1: is when she claims that she's really sorrowful, a sorrowful
Speaker 1: and prayerful about this when she can highly hardly gosh,
Speaker 1: I don't know why my words ability right now is
Speaker 1: not buck with the words not good. Um, she can
Speaker 1: hardly hide her glee at what is going on here.
Speaker 1: And that's the truth. That's the truth of what is happening. Um.
Speaker 1: They're already trying to tell us by the way, that
Speaker 1: Hunter Biden is not irrelevant. Whitney. You know they want witnesses,
Speaker 1: but only the witnesses they want. It's not I it's
Speaker 1: gonna work that well. They named the seven, the Big seven,
Speaker 1: the impeachment managers. It's a shift. Nadler, Jeffries, you know
Speaker 1: a few others, same basic, same basic nonsense. Schiff and
Speaker 1: Nadler as the house manager, as the house managers for this.
Speaker 1: Here is Nadler, for example, telling us all that everything
Speaker 1: we need to know about Hunter Biden. Of course, Play nineteen,
Speaker 1: the President betrayed his country by trying to extort the
Speaker 1: Ukraine by withholding three hundred ninety one million dollars in
Speaker 1: military aid that Congress had voted in order to get
Speaker 1: Ukraine to announce an investigation of a domestic political opponent.
Speaker 1: That's the allegation. Any witness who has information about whether
Speaker 1: that is true or not true is irrelevant. Witness. Anybody
Speaker 1: like Hunter Biden, who has no information about any of
Speaker 1: that is not irrelevant witness. Any trial judge in this
Speaker 1: country would rule such a witness as irrelevant and admissible.
Speaker 1: Of course, betrayed his country. They love to say that,
Speaker 1: which is a horrific charge. Right. I mean that's effectively
Speaker 1: effectively saying that in the common parliance understanding of treason,
Speaker 1: I mean, that's what betraying your country is, right. I mean,
Speaker 1: the treason as a legal matter is giving aid and
Speaker 1: comfort to the enemy. But treason as a as the
Speaker 1: way that we understand the terms to betray your country.
Speaker 1: This claim now is being made by Democrats that the president,
Speaker 1: by not giving money fast enough to Ukraine, a country
Speaker 1: in which we have some but pretty minimal interests, a
Speaker 1: country with which we are you know, we are not
Speaker 1: at war with Russia, we are not fighting. We don't
Speaker 1: have an active conflict going on with the Russians in Ukraine.
Speaker 1: But he betrayed his country by not giving money to
Speaker 1: to Ukraine fast enough. I need to know how it's
Speaker 1: not a betrayal then of this country that Obama was
Speaker 1: too much of a whimp as commander in chief to
Speaker 1: give the Ukrainians the weapons they said that they needed.
Speaker 1: Didn't he betray his country too? Oh, it's because it's
Speaker 1: for personal gain. Obama didn't. Why do we think Obama
Speaker 1: didn't want to take the risk to give those javal
Speaker 1: and anti tank missiles to the Ukrainians because he didn't
Speaker 1: want the blowback at home of the Russians escalating and
Speaker 1: thus getting deeper into this. And you know it was. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they every decision of president makes at some level you
Speaker 1: can tie back to his own interest. Trying to be
Speaker 1: a good president is in his own interest. This is ridiculous.
Speaker 1: This whole thing is a flatly absurd And you know,
Speaker 1: they're just using a lot of a lot of big words,
Speaker 1: a lot of weighty allegations, because this impeachment is a joke.
Speaker 1: It's a joke. It's not funny, but it's ridiculous. Here's
Speaker 1: Nadler saying that McConnell better do what we tell him
Speaker 1: to do or else this is a cover up. That's
Speaker 1: the word you're gonna hear now Play twenty. The Senate
Speaker 1: isn't intended by the Constitution to conduct a fair trial
Speaker 1: the American people know, and in a trial, you permit witnesses,
Speaker 1: you present the evidence. If the Senate doesn't permit the
Speaker 1: introduction of all relevant witnesses and of all documents that
Speaker 1: the House wants to introduce, because the House is the
Speaker 1: prosecutor here, then the Senate is engaging in an unconstitutional
Speaker 1: and disgusting cover up. Nope, sorry, Nadler, Now there's a
Speaker 1: disgrace disgusting. There are all these Democrats, they're just odious Democrats.
Speaker 1: But let's let's let's take a look at what he's
Speaker 1: really saying here. Um, it's the Senate is allowed to
Speaker 1: just do this the way the Senate wants to do this.
Speaker 1: He's claiming it's unconstitutional if the Senate doesn't do what
Speaker 1: they say. But guess what, this isn't a criminal proceeding.
Speaker 1: The Senate gets to decide what the preceding will be,
Speaker 1: just as Adam Schiff in the House, the Democrat controlled
Speaker 1: House got to decide and control what the preceeding on
Speaker 1: that side would be. So they had one set of
Speaker 1: rules when Democrats had the votes, and now they have
Speaker 1: one another set of rules when Democrats don't have the votes,
Speaker 1: and they expect people people of any intelligence and any
Speaker 1: seriousness to take them seriously. I don't a well one
Speaker 1: of the thing is really going to happen here and
Speaker 1: understand how how serious this though really is. I mean,
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi is suggesting, is suggesting that the president United States,
Speaker 1: and I'm sorry, not suggesting stating openly, not forget suggesting
Speaker 1: stating the president should lose his job, should be that
Speaker 1: the people who turned out and voted for Trump in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, they can't have the president they voted for
Speaker 1: for four years. And now they're even bringing up other
Speaker 1: are completely extraneous things here too. Now now they're they're
Speaker 1: trying to throw in all but it's a cover up
Speaker 1: and that in Russia, Russia, it is utterly bizarre. It
Speaker 1: is absurd. You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sex and Show podcast. And it's important to see
Speaker 1: that the president to know and putin to know American voter,
Speaker 1: voters in America should decide who our president is, not
Speaker 1: that or no Pluton voters, not Vladimir Prutin, should determine
Speaker 1: the election. This is from a Speaker of the House.
Speaker 1: My friends still clinging to this Russia collusion, delusion fantasy.
Speaker 1: It is. We have to start drawing some firm lines here.
Speaker 1: One that I saw last night, for example, the debate
Speaker 1: they brought up fracking. In a ban on fracking, it
Speaker 1: is not possible to be an informed, intelligent person I
Speaker 1: know anything about the economy and the energy industry and
Speaker 1: think that a total ban on fracking in this country
Speaker 1: is a reasonable or good idea. It's not possible to
Speaker 1: think that and be smart to know what the heck
Speaker 1: you're talking about. It's completely insane to think that's a
Speaker 1: good idea. Okay, Pelosi repeating that Putin could determine our election.
Speaker 1: It is not possible to be a serious, fair minded
Speaker 1: person and believe that Vladimir Putin determined the twenty sixteen
Speaker 1: election or could determine the next US election. It's not possible.
Speaker 1: If you still cling to that, you have a problem.
Speaker 1: You're either not very bright or not very honest, or
Speaker 1: a combination thereof. This isn't a oh but they have
Speaker 1: their opinion. I have my opinion. And this isn't chocolate
Speaker 1: or vanilla or god forbid, strawberry ice cream. This is
Speaker 1: just reality versus unreality, truth versus falsehood. Vladimir Putin did
Speaker 1: not determine the last election. Nancy Pelosi bringing this up
Speaker 1: and pretending that in some way he may have determined
Speaker 1: the last election. To use this smear continuously is just
Speaker 1: on just another data point the Nancy Pelosi is a
Speaker 1: deeply dishonest person, and that this whole thing has gotten
Speaker 1: just disgusting the way the Democrats are approaching it. We're
Speaker 1: an election year. Beat Trump, beat him, Let's see what
Speaker 1: you got. He's such a terrible president. Meanwhile, they keep
Speaker 1: saying he's terrible. Guys, what's so terrible again? The economy,
Speaker 1: the huge, bloody, costly war we're in. What's what's the
Speaker 1: terrible thing with Trump? Again? I need someone to come
Speaker 1: up with what's so awful? Oh, he said a mean
Speaker 1: thing three years ago that Libs don't like. That's what
Speaker 1: I'm supposed to be so worried about. He calls out journalists.
Speaker 1: He's right, what he calls out journalists in't the worst
Speaker 1: journalism needs to be. You know, nuke from orbit just
Speaker 1: so we can all be safe, just so we can
Speaker 1: be sure. It's a line from aliens. Metaphorical. Okay, journalism
Speaker 1: isn't a person, it's a it's a it's a profession.
Speaker 1: Oh but cocaine, Mitch understands what's going on? Play Fi
Speaker 1: play fifteen. Last weekend on television, the speaker bragged that
Speaker 1: this president is impeached for life, regardless of what the
Speaker 1: Senate does, regardless of what the Senate does, as if
Speaker 1: the ultimate verdict or a start of an afterthought. Likewise,
Speaker 1: Senate Democratic leader recently said that as long as he
Speaker 1: can try to use the trial process to hurt some
Speaker 1: Republicans reelection champs this quote, it's a win win. That's
Speaker 1: what this is all about. The Democratic leader just laid
Speaker 1: it right out there in case anybody had any doubt. Yeah,
Speaker 1: notice how what the House does. We're all supposed to
Speaker 1: care a lot. And it's really a rhetorical game. Oh
Speaker 1: he was impeached. Well, when the Senate does its thing,
Speaker 1: he will be cleared, exonerated. There you go. What else
Speaker 1: is there to say? The Senate is supposed to have
Speaker 1: every bit as much authority in this process. We should
Speaker 1: treat the Senate with all the solemnity that Pelosi is
Speaker 1: wanted us to treat the House, even though the House
Speaker 1: deserves the Democrat controlled House deserves nothing but our complete
Speaker 1: and utter contempt because what they've been doing is so contemptible.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember
Speaker 1: to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcasts. Special treat for all of you.
Speaker 1: Our buddy and my fellow. The first host, Jesse Kelly
Speaker 1: is with us now. He's the host of the Jesse
Speaker 1: Kelly Show. He's got his own showdown in Houston. He's
Speaker 1: on the first on Pluto TV channel two forty eight,
Speaker 1: and we have things to talk about, mister Jesse Kelly.
Speaker 1: Good to have you on the program, Sir, It's good
Speaker 1: to be here in the flesh man. So let's just
Speaker 1: let's just hop into something right away. Red meat is
Speaker 1: very expensive in New York City, and it's it's a
Speaker 1: special thing when someone else is purchasing that perfectly charred
Speaker 1: meet for your consumption. So I wanted to I want
Speaker 1: to just lead with I appreciate that you will make
Speaker 1: good on your bet with regard to Pelosi and the
Speaker 1: articles of impeachment as soon as possible, because I might
Speaker 1: go tomahawk, Jesse Kelly, I might not even might not
Speaker 1: even just be ribby. We're talking bone and ribby that's
Speaker 1: gonna be like a seventy dollars steak. I hope you're
Speaker 1: aware of this. It is the problem. Yes, I'm aware
Speaker 1: of it. And here's the issue, because I don't think
Speaker 1: you're perfectly aware of the situation. I owe you a
Speaker 1: sneak for losing our bet with Nancy Pelosi. I owe
Speaker 1: you a sneak for at least two other things that
Speaker 1: I can think of, just favors that you've done me.
Speaker 1: I'm this is no exaggeration. I'm four or five steaks
Speaker 1: and that I owe you at this point in time.
Speaker 1: And now I'm starting to look at my bank account
Speaker 1: and thinking I even afford to meet Buck again. I
Speaker 1: don't even know what I do here. But yes, obviously
Speaker 1: it's throwing ahawk. You got kids too, so I know
Speaker 1: you gotta get them like the little mini air Jordan's
Speaker 1: and stuff. So we'll just we'll just we'll do one steak.
Speaker 1: But it looks like the one steak covers at all, Jesse.
Speaker 1: But it looks like they articles of appeachment are are
Speaker 1: going to get trends transmitted after all. But now let
Speaker 1: me ask you for real, as somebody following this very closely,
Speaker 1: I saw these press conference this morning, and I just
Speaker 1: cannot imagine. I cannot imagine you are someone who is
Speaker 1: not a staunch Trump hater or someone who's a real
Speaker 1: Trump defender, Right, if you're somebody who happened to be
Speaker 1: in the middle, and you just look at this impeachment process,
Speaker 1: I don't know how it's possible to come away from
Speaker 1: going to think anything other than the Democrats look like
Speaker 1: utter buffoons. But I don't really mean, well, the pool
Speaker 1: numbers say that's what happened, but the poor numbers say that.
Speaker 1: I mean, look, the Democrats aren't stupid. Well, I take
Speaker 1: that back, they are stupid. They've been polling independence, They've
Speaker 1: been pulling Russ bells sweet voters throughout this process because
Speaker 1: it's all about the twenty twenty elections. And they've had
Speaker 1: polls where they've published, and they've had secret polls where
Speaker 1: they've tried to keep it quiet, impudent, and they have
Speaker 1: taken a beating with Rust Belt independence throughout this process.
Speaker 1: It has been the worst political miscalculation I have ever
Speaker 1: seen in my entire lifetime, which is why I always believed,
Speaker 1: albeit stupidly, I always believe that Nancy Pelosi actually wouldn't
Speaker 1: send it at all because the Democrats need this thing
Speaker 1: to stop. They needed to stop. It has been a
Speaker 1: disaster for them. And you're right the press conference today,
Speaker 1: even today, they couldn't be on message. That's up there
Speaker 1: talking about we have to impede him more, helped cheating
Speaker 1: the election, when the impeachments nothing about the elections that
Speaker 1: it is awful. You have Nancy Pelosi who cannot even
Speaker 1: get through a sentence and a lucid manner anymore, and
Speaker 1: no reporter wants to address this as if it's not
Speaker 1: a story that the speaker the House might be mentally degenerating.
Speaker 1: It's amazing what's happened at that part. I just you
Speaker 1: mentioned the Russia, Russia, Russia stuff, which has come back
Speaker 1: into fashion for Democrats. I mean this was just in
Speaker 1: the last twenty four hours. Representative shift A Prouser Mark,
Speaker 1: would you play a clip eleven please? Certainly he looks
Speaker 1: like they're at it again, and with nine towards helping
Speaker 1: this president. We all have to announce any further meddling
Speaker 1: in our elections. Americans should decide American elections. Americans do
Speaker 1: decide American elections, and anyone who thinks that Putin's deciding
Speaker 1: our elections just watches too much. Rachel Maddow, I don't
Speaker 1: know what else to say. That's the funny thing about it, bug.
Speaker 1: I mean, honestly, if you get past all the Twitter
Speaker 1: noise and Adam shifted is lying about it than Nancy Pelosia.
Speaker 1: I believe she called him Vladimir Plutin today. It was
Speaker 1: just kind of strange. But if you get past all that,
Speaker 1: all Trump has really been accused of, or all Russia
Speaker 1: has been accused of six Trump assign all Russia has
Speaker 1: been accused of is running some Facebook ads. I mean,
Speaker 1: and there are people out there because of the Democrat
Speaker 1: Media Alliance's messaging for the past three years. There are
Speaker 1: people out there who, seeing Vladimir Putin low crawled into
Speaker 1: voting booths and changed votes for Donald Trump from Billary Clinton.
Speaker 1: In the last election, Russia ran a few Facebook ads people.
Speaker 1: That's all. Yeah, And there tense here. Seems very clear
Speaker 1: that they have learned nothing from the Mulla report. They
Speaker 1: have learned nothing, you know, none of that matters. Just
Speaker 1: bring up Russia again and Democrats will think that there's
Speaker 1: some really big here. Anyway, We're you're not on the
Speaker 1: same page on this one. I just wanted to kind
Speaker 1: of get your oh, and I also want a quick
Speaker 1: reaction from you. First of all, did you watch and
Speaker 1: this is I'm not trying to call you out because
Speaker 1: I mean I missed the first like twenty minutes of it.
Speaker 1: Did did you watch the debate last night? Okay? For one,
Speaker 1: that is calling me out because I'm embarrassed to say
Speaker 1: I did watch this one. I have not watched a
Speaker 1: single Democrat debate. Also the highlights outbuild the people and
Speaker 1: all all that was said, but I've been avoiding them.
Speaker 1: But now that the field is nailed down, I was like, yeah,
Speaker 1: the two minit, maybe the knives will come out to
Speaker 1: night and whatnot. Maybe there's something interest single happened and
Speaker 1: it was a disaster. Not a single one of those
Speaker 1: people one even come close to competing with Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: not one who had the best night. For you, I mean,
Speaker 1: if if you if you just looked at that, apart
Speaker 1: from everything else that those candidates have said and done
Speaker 1: up to this point, if you're just saying, okay, I
Speaker 1: gotta pick you know, if you were a paid Democrat consultant,
Speaker 1: which I know you know, you'd have to hit the
Speaker 1: bottle really hard at night just to sleep. But if
Speaker 1: you were a paid Democrat consultant and you had to
Speaker 1: pick one just based on the debate performance last night,
Speaker 1: who would it be? Joe Biden? Joe Biden. People think
Speaker 1: that other people, you know, we we all focus. You
Speaker 1: and I both did. Everybody does this. It's human nature.
Speaker 1: This sound bid or this moment you know when you think, oh,
Speaker 1: that was the moment they won that debate, or that
Speaker 1: was the moment you lost the debate. Joe Biden is
Speaker 1: in the league. Joe Biden is the clear front runner
Speaker 1: still at the thing xact moment. If the other candidates
Speaker 1: are going to continue to have public debates and not
Speaker 1: go after Joe Biden, and Joe Biden is going to
Speaker 1: win every one of them. Nobody went after Joe Biden
Speaker 1: last night. So Joe Biden. I don't care about Bernie
Speaker 1: saying is you know, comming lines. I don't care about
Speaker 1: Pete Badug or whatever its name is. Any debate where
Speaker 1: Joe Biden does not come out bleeding. Joe Biden won. Now,
Speaker 1: I also want to ask about nineteen seventeen, the movie
Speaker 1: that you and I both saw. I saw them my birthday.
Speaker 1: I actually went with my family, which is kind of
Speaker 1: an intense birthday movie. But I wanted to see it
Speaker 1: and it was out. I know you've just recently seen it.
Speaker 1: It's nominated for a bunch of stuff. First, we've put
Speaker 1: aside the nominations and all that nonsense for a moment.
Speaker 1: Just what do you what do you think about this
Speaker 1: World War One movie? Well, I should qualify this by
Speaker 1: saying I am a World War One I know you are.
Speaker 1: I'm a World War One three. I consumed everything I
Speaker 1: can on it. There's a hardcore history podcast on it's
Speaker 1: called Blueprint for arm Again. That's seriously like twenty hours long.
Speaker 1: I'll read every book I can. I just I love
Speaker 1: World War One. I find it to be an infinitely
Speaker 1: fascinating conflict and this movie did it justice man, and
Speaker 1: it was. It was different than other war movies in that,
Speaker 1: you know, there weren't a bunch of you know, cheap scenes.
Speaker 1: You know, you can throw in cheap scenes for a
Speaker 1: quick gas from the audience. But you felt like you
Speaker 1: were you felt like you were a World War War
Speaker 1: on soldier walking from this place to that place. That
Speaker 1: I don't want to give lay too much, as I
Speaker 1: hope people are still going to watch the movie. But
Speaker 1: you it felt real, man, and the intense moments were
Speaker 1: extra intense because of how real baby did it. I
Speaker 1: was so far away impressed what you Yeah, No, absolutely,
Speaker 1: I thought that the you know sometimes when whenever there's
Speaker 1: a movie that has a has a ploy to sell it,
Speaker 1: I mean, for mind, the one that comes a mind
Speaker 1: for me is everyone's like, oh, Avatar, you have to
Speaker 1: see it in three D. It's life changing. I'm like,
Speaker 1: it kind of made me want to vomit. And the
Speaker 1: movie is terrible and it's like COMI propaganda and James
Speaker 1: Cameron hasn't done anything good since Aliens. But anyway, you know,
Speaker 1: and this time it's because it's all one shot, right,
Speaker 1: there's no breaking from that one shot in the entire
Speaker 1: two hours plus of this movie. I thought, oh, is
Speaker 1: this just gonna be a gimmick effectively? Right? Is this
Speaker 1: the gimmick that? But it actually I agree with you.
Speaker 1: It's almost like it because of that first person perspective
Speaker 1: that you're in the whole time. It feels like you
Speaker 1: are traveling along with this guy on his mission, and
Speaker 1: did add to that sense of intensity. It really took
Speaker 1: on the feeling of like a first person shooter, except
Speaker 1: you were just watching you weren't you know. It wasn't
Speaker 1: like some some corny action thing. You're a first person
Speaker 1: shooter just hoping you weren't going to get shot. It
Speaker 1: is so funny brought that up, because that's the first
Speaker 1: thing I thought when I heard, Oh, it's all one shot.
Speaker 1: I rolled my eyes and it's not. Okay. We finally
Speaker 1: have a World War One movie and some fancy schmancy
Speaker 1: Hollywood directors get to ruin it by trying to be
Speaker 1: a special butterfly and do it different than everything else.
Speaker 1: But you're right, and to explain it more shotting, because
Speaker 1: I gess some people they may not realize that they're
Speaker 1: not cutting to this guy's space in that guy's face,
Speaker 1: and then you're zooming over to this part of the
Speaker 1: battle and that part of the battle. Cameras are surrounding
Speaker 1: these guys on this mission, and they're walking with them
Speaker 1: the whole way like that. I don't know how the
Speaker 1: actors did it, buck I mean, clearly they had to
Speaker 1: have cut scenes at some point. I don't know if
Speaker 1: they didn't, but it was it was a great movie. Experience.
Speaker 1: And I'll tell you I hope that this is about
Speaker 1: a bunch of movies. Highly recommend people see this in
Speaker 1: the sea. I have a feel in the movie theater
Speaker 1: experience with adds something extra. Yeah, and the set designs incredible.
Speaker 1: I mean the production value. They spent over one hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars on this movie. And you can tell from
Speaker 1: from just the way I mean the the the production
Speaker 1: value that you see on the screen. You know, Jesse,
Speaker 1: everyone thinks for you now as a as a radio
Speaker 1: host host on Pluto TV the first channel through forty
Speaker 1: eight of course, um, and you're also a former marine.
Speaker 1: If I have to ask you for is this is
Speaker 1: this in top ten? And this is a tough one.
Speaker 1: I mean, I didn't we didn't coordinate this before. And
Speaker 1: is nineteen seventeen for you a top ten all time
Speaker 1: war movie? Oh, no question, it's it's honestly, it's probably
Speaker 1: top five. I mean it was just because honestly, and
Speaker 1: I have it's so real and it really I mean it.
Speaker 1: You know, all of these people it's been the war.
Speaker 1: It brings the things back for you, not the terrible way,
Speaker 1: but it does. But it gives you that feeling of
Speaker 1: this is how these guys lived right down again and again.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to give away ending major right down
Speaker 1: to him stabbing his hand in barbed wire like and
Speaker 1: that's that would be a minor nothing seen in most movies.
Speaker 1: But the way they did this, and you saw it
Speaker 1: and you just thought to yourself, oh that it sucks.
Speaker 1: Now his hand is going to hear the rest of
Speaker 1: the movie there and it? Did you know? I just
Speaker 1: had added, No, I don't want to. I don't want
Speaker 1: to also force you to make something too on the
Speaker 1: spot here for us, but I you know, so we're
Speaker 1: not going to go in order. But if I ask
Speaker 1: you for five of your top ten five all of
Speaker 1: your top ten greatest warm movies of all time, what
Speaker 1: do you got for us? Man, I've got something. Gosh,
Speaker 1: I've got some weird ones in there. Oh man, I've
Speaker 1: stop ten war movies. Uh. Platoon is on everybody's shortlist.
Speaker 1: It's also on my shortlist, There's no question about it.
Speaker 1: I hate that sound like my grandpa, But Dirty Doesn't
Speaker 1: is still on that list. That's a great movie, dude.
Speaker 1: And I don't even like old movies. I'm not one
Speaker 1: of these people who hate Oh you have to see
Speaker 1: you know, one Flaw over the Cuckoo's Nest, and though
Speaker 1: Dirty doesn't, is absolutely on that list. Uh, probably Saving
Speaker 1: Private Ryan only you gotta put you gotta put Saving
Speaker 1: Private ryant on the world. Ye, come on. The Normandy
Speaker 1: experience has gotta be on there. And this last one,
Speaker 1: I don't know if most people have heard it, heard
Speaker 1: of it, or seen it, or even really call it
Speaker 1: a war movie, even though I would. It's called start,
Speaker 1: it's with Val kilm Or, it's called Spartan, And I
Speaker 1: actually think, and I may be wrong about this, I
Speaker 1: think Peter Jackson is the one who made it the
Speaker 1: same Peter Jackson who made you know, the Lord of
Speaker 1: the Rings movies. Most people have not seen this movie Spartan.
Speaker 1: But Val kilm Or did extensive special Forces training before
Speaker 1: the movie, and he even talks like those guys, and
Speaker 1: it is it is one of these people have not
Speaker 1: seen it is awesome, one of thout paper movies that
Speaker 1: I've never I've never even heard of that movie. So
Speaker 1: you're you're your list, I gotta say, has some has
Speaker 1: some surprises of interesting stuff. Do you have asked, because
Speaker 1: we brought this up, have you seen Master and Commander
Speaker 1: with that with Russell Crowe, that movie is horrible. Please go,
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, Jesse, Kelly, we were doing so well today,
Speaker 1: we're doing so well. You don't like Master Commander. I
Speaker 1: don't even know. Now, what are you gonna tell me next?
Speaker 1: You don't like black Hawk Down either of me? Jesse.
Speaker 1: We we're gonna have to post lists on Facebook and
Speaker 1: cross reference and both agree and then make fun of,
Speaker 1: where necessary, each other's choices on the top ten All
Speaker 1: time War movies list. I can't believe you'll like Master Commander.
Speaker 1: Some members of my audience right now are They are
Speaker 1: throwing their powdered wigs on the floor and discussed with you. No,
Speaker 1: I don't like Master and Commander. And on top of that,
Speaker 1: I love the Solid Ship, the Age of Exploration. I
Speaker 1: love that type of battle. I love that era. But
Speaker 1: I thought it was criminal. You could take Russell Crowe
Speaker 1: and it's flading like that and make a movie that
Speaker 1: freaking slow and boring. And I'm judging you right now,
Speaker 1: and we're absolutely doing that. We gotta have dueling, dueling
Speaker 1: top ten war movie lists. And before we let you go, Jesse,
Speaker 1: we got one more thing. Um, there's some exciting news
Speaker 1: on Pluto TV channel two forty eight the first. I'll
Speaker 1: let you make the announcement on my show. Why not
Speaker 1: go for it? Oh yeah, we are adding the very
Speaker 1: own Data Lash on our show right here on the
Speaker 1: first or on our channel, I should say, on the first.
Speaker 1: That makes a lineup. Now, a buck Stext and Data Lash,
Speaker 1: me and Mike's Later. That is quite a line up,
Speaker 1: I'll tell you that much. The first is shape enough
Speaker 1: to be appointment to Yeah, I gotta say, I actually
Speaker 1: like everybody who's on the first. So this is a
Speaker 1: rarity I can tell people in the media game. It's
Speaker 1: a rarity that you get a bunch of different personalities
Speaker 1: together and there's not at least one person that you're like.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, maybe they decide that they want
Speaker 1: to just open a little sweet shop somewhere and not
Speaker 1: do this anymore. So I'm very happy that we've got
Speaker 1: we got you, we got Mike's Later, and now Dana Lash. Everybody.
Speaker 1: Dana Lash has joined the mix. If you have not already,
Speaker 1: download the Pluto TV app channel two forty eight the first.
Speaker 1: Also check out my man Jesse Kelly's podcast. He is
Speaker 1: a very funny and very insightful individual, despite the fact
Speaker 1: that some of the warm movies he likes, or actually
Speaker 1: some of the warm movies he hates, are amazing. But
Speaker 1: we'll leave it at that for now. We'll continue this
Speaker 1: feud in the future. Mister Jesse Kelly, great to have you, sir.
Speaker 1: You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show podcast. I promise I'm not going to spend a
Speaker 1: lot of time talking about the Royal family in the
Speaker 1: UK on this show and the trials and tribulations. Good heavens,
Speaker 1: what's going on? Are we? Are we losing some members
Speaker 1: of the royal family? Oh no, excuse me, Reginald. Reginald,
Speaker 1: bring me my tea. My throat is feeling rather dry
Speaker 1: because I'm so anxious about what's going to happen here.
Speaker 1: Where are the servants today? The royal family? What's going
Speaker 1: on here? M Yeah, there's the whole Meghan Markole and
Speaker 1: Prince Harry thing that's everyone talking about. And I should
Speaker 1: have known this, but now now we're being told that
Speaker 1: this is this is a result of racism. That's why
Speaker 1: Megan Markle no longer is not comfortable in the Royal family.
Speaker 1: I don't even I don't know or care enough about
Speaker 1: the royal family even assess why this is happening, but
Speaker 1: I found this fascinating. An expert on racism and race
Speaker 1: relations went on the BBC doctor Shola Moss shag bomb memo,
Speaker 1: shog bam me moo, yeah, chuck bama moo. I think
Speaker 1: I got that right. She wanted to tell folks about
Speaker 1: what racism really is. Play clip for producer Mark and
Speaker 1: I'm not a racist, and I understand that for a
Speaker 1: lot of people who are triggered about the truth of racism,
Speaker 1: they can't handle the truth, and because they can't handle
Speaker 1: the truth, they would look to displace to distract. I
Speaker 1: am not anti white. It being anti racist means being
Speaker 1: anti white. There's just no correlation. That makes no sense.
Speaker 1: And the fact that not just me, for a lot
Speaker 1: of other people, including white people, have called out racism,
Speaker 1: not just within the context of what's happening with Harry
Speaker 1: and Megan, but that it is a cultural issue in
Speaker 1: the United Kingdom tells you that it's something that people
Speaker 1: are really uncomfortable about talking, really uncomfortable talking about it.
Speaker 1: I feel like I can't speak to the UK context
Speaker 1: of this, but we have to talk about race and
Speaker 1: racism in this country so much that it feels like
Speaker 1: it's it feels like it's been mandated from on high.
Speaker 1: I feel like this is a conversation we're constantly having
Speaker 1: play club five. I find it quite interesting that people
Speaker 1: are more outraged about the so called race card being
Speaker 1: played than being outraged by racist behavior. It begs the
Speaker 1: question what kind of society are we? Why is it
Speaker 1: difficult for you to understand except that it's also your
Speaker 1: responsibility and the fact that a lot of people, like myself,
Speaker 1: there's black people, I think minority are done with having
Speaker 1: to bear the burden of not only nat oppressed by racism,
Speaker 1: then having to defend ourselves from the racism, then having
Speaker 1: to explain what that racism to people who perpetuate the racism,
Speaker 1: and then be at the brunt of the denial from
Speaker 1: the same perpetrators that our lived experience of racism doesn't exist. People. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we're done with that. That's right. You can be totally
Speaker 1: you're racist, even if you don't do anything wrong. If
Speaker 1: you object to that, that is in itself racism. And
Speaker 1: people who only want to talk to you constantly about
Speaker 1: racism are sick of talking about racism because it's too
Speaker 1: much of a burden. I'm glad we cleared all that up.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember
Speaker 1: to subscribe on Apple podcast, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcasts. Ain't no party like a Team
Speaker 1: Buck party, because a Team Buck party don't stop. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we got Buck turned up to eleven. It's time for
Speaker 1: roll call, Roll call, but first a little bit of housekeeping.
Speaker 1: We gotta code. We got a code read via the
Speaker 1: audience for producer Mark over here, producer Mark, Yes, where
Speaker 1: is Clemson located? Producer Mark, I have learned that's in
Speaker 1: South Carolina. It's kind of awesome to be fair. I'm
Speaker 1: not a college football guy. We're in New York. There's
Speaker 1: no college football team anywhere near here. Rutger stinks. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, yeah, we've got basketball a little bit with college,
Speaker 1: but not really. You're I mean, you got a ranger's
Speaker 1: hat on right now. I'm a hockey guy. I'm a
Speaker 1: baseball guy like the NFL, but we don't. I mean
Speaker 1: the culture of New York, we don't have a college
Speaker 1: football team. So well, it's okay, that's all right. Producer
Speaker 1: Mark MAYACALLPA. On this one, A lot of people have
Speaker 1: pointed out there I missed. I was thinking of Auburn
Speaker 1: rival with Alabama, not Clemson, that I would have that. Actually,
Speaker 1: I think I didn't know about Auburn um. So I'm
Speaker 1: glad that we Glad we've established this. I admit my mistake.
Speaker 1: When your mistakes, it's fine. A ton more about sports
Speaker 1: than you do. That is accurate. But yeah, we had
Speaker 1: to clear that up because some people were like, what
Speaker 1: is going on in the Freedom Hunt? I'm sure every
Speaker 1: message you read is about here we go. Let's see
Speaker 1: what we got here? Uh, Sandy? First up? This is
Speaker 1: on Facebook dot com, Slashboxxon. Hey Buck. Now, I'm not
Speaker 1: an OSS member, I do remember the early days before
Speaker 1: your show was three hours. Thank you for keeping us
Speaker 1: safe and warm at night. You are the only show
Speaker 1: I subscribed to and recommend you to friends often. As
Speaker 1: a I thought maybe you were going to escape this
Speaker 1: with producer Mark. As a Clemson graduate. I want to
Speaker 1: let you know Producer Mark, that the Clemson University's in
Speaker 1: South Carolina, we played football the original Death Value Stadium.
Speaker 1: I love your show and with you, Mark, all the best.
Speaker 1: That was a very nice one. That was a very supportive.
Speaker 1: She likes you. She's on team Mark. You know, some
Speaker 1: Team Brandon's about to chime in, So there's gonna be
Speaker 1: some Team Brandon today. It's okay, though, it's okay, but yep,
Speaker 1: it happens. It happens. Daniel, Hey Buck. I love the
Speaker 1: show and it is the one podcast I try never
Speaker 1: to miss. I want to let you in on a
Speaker 1: Vince Vaughan movie that I'm pretty sure you haven't seen
Speaker 1: and will change your mind about his range. It's called
Speaker 1: Return to Paradise and co stars Joaquin Phoenix, not Vaughn
Speaker 1: playing himself at all, and his pure drama and excellent film.
Speaker 1: You should check out Shields High Well, Daniel, thank you.
Speaker 1: I I've never even I've never even heard of that.
Speaker 1: I've never heard of that movie, so I can't comment
Speaker 1: on it. All I can comment on Jesse Kelly is
Speaker 1: a great man. I really do like Jesse Kelly a lot.
Speaker 1: I cannot believe he trashes Master and Commander like that.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're gonna have to ward. This is a
Speaker 1: feud that's going to extend for quite some time now.
Speaker 1: But anyway, The Dirty have you seen The Dirty? Dozen.
Speaker 1: I've never heard of that. I mean, I'm sorry, I've
Speaker 1: never seen it. I've heard of that one. Matthew, here
Speaker 1: we go, Buck. I listened to you through Spotify. I
Speaker 1: hope you get to see your ratings through Spotify the
Speaker 1: same way you do with radio and Pluto TV. I
Speaker 1: discovered your show when an ad play while I was
Speaker 1: listening to Sean Hannity. I've been a huge fan ever since.
Speaker 1: Granted that was a few months ago, but I plan
Speaker 1: on being all through season four and beyond with you.
Speaker 1: I still like Hannity while I'm waiting for your show
Speaker 1: to update. His interviews with higher ups are interesting, but
Speaker 1: you cover broader topics and you're actually a pretty funny guy. Thanks.
Speaker 1: A question that has been rattling around in my brain
Speaker 1: for a while is in regards to Andrew Yang and
Speaker 1: more recently Elizabeth Warren, in respect to their plans, Yang
Speaker 1: with his one thousand dollars a month and Warren with
Speaker 1: wiping out student debt. It seems to me that that
Speaker 1: is less a campaign ideal and more just an attempt
Speaker 1: outright to buy your vote. What do you think you
Speaker 1: up the great work? North Carolina has got your back
Speaker 1: well Matthew, thank you for the very kind note. It's
Speaker 1: great to hear you heard about me from listening to
Speaker 1: the Hannity podcast and now you're listening to the buck
Speaker 1: Sexton podcasts. So thank you so much. And yeah, the
Speaker 1: show is very different is you know. We do very
Speaker 1: few interviews here and have far fewer guests because I
Speaker 1: always have a lot of things I want to say
Speaker 1: to you guys. As for the buying of votes, I mean, yeah,
Speaker 1: but you could always say that, I mean, Matthew, I
Speaker 1: think that's true, and it seems a little bit more
Speaker 1: obviously true insofar as the buying of votes with cash
Speaker 1: in this case is not through some welfare program. It's
Speaker 1: not something that anybody would look at and say, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know, it's it's like, in this case, it feels
Speaker 1: almost like you're getting a check sent to you for
Speaker 1: a vote. But you know, that's kind of what happens
Speaker 1: with a lot of the welfare states as it exists.
Speaker 1: I mean, people are getting money, although in this case
Speaker 1: everyone gets some money. It's just a little different. I mean,
Speaker 1: I see what you're saying. Also, Andrew Yang is not
Speaker 1: going to become president, so it's never going to happen.
Speaker 1: So that's also something we should keep in mind here
Speaker 1: and Warren wiping on student debt. Yeah, that's a payoff.
Speaker 1: But a lot of things are pay off the voters.
Speaker 1: And look what Trump is doing with farmers as a
Speaker 1: result of the trade tensions with China. People would certainly
Speaker 1: claim is a payoff, and they would be not you know,
Speaker 1: they wouldn't be crazy, wouldn't be silly for them to
Speaker 1: do so, Matthew, thank you so much. Great to have
Speaker 1: some new some new folks listening on the podcast. Our
Speaker 1: podcast numbers are going up, up, up every month. By
Speaker 1: the way, I'm gonna have my friend Ben Weingarten in
Speaker 1: tomorrow and Friday and Monday for me here on the show.
Speaker 1: So you got a few days of Ben, and that's
Speaker 1: the biggest break I'm planning on taking from the show
Speaker 1: until the election. So just know that that's the idea
Speaker 1: right now. And Ben'll do a great job. He's already
Speaker 1: lining up all kinds of fantastic guests and we're looking
Speaker 1: forward to having him in here and hanging out. Jason
Speaker 1: Clemson and Alabama. You guys are killing me. Jason, Yeah, man,
Speaker 1: I I gotta say you're You're right, So we producer
Speaker 1: market and producer Buck had a well producer Mark and
Speaker 1: host Buck had a little wampwomp yesterday. I mean I
Speaker 1: even should have probably caught that one. He also sent
Speaker 1: me a photo of Pensacola Beach, which looks really nice.
Speaker 1: If I'm looking for a low key beach with beautiful sand, huh,
Speaker 1: interesting Pensacola Beach. That's my thing. I just I love beaches.
Speaker 1: I can't handle a beach where there's um. I can't
Speaker 1: handle a beach where there's too many people on the beach,
Speaker 1: Like when you see these these photos are like Rio
Speaker 1: de Jannarro and everyone's in the water and you're like
Speaker 1: shoulder or shoulder with everybody. I like to stay away
Speaker 1: from crowds at beaches. So you got to find how
Speaker 1: we find where that stuff is. Wow, I'm trying to skip. Okay,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna skip. We have we may have gotten more
Speaker 1: messages here from people angry about the clubs and thing.
Speaker 1: Why do you think I told you in advance? We
Speaker 1: have to address it. Yeah, that's a thing that happened. Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: Gary and Shannon on sixty four KF I have a
Speaker 1: huge list of amazing hangouts in La. Love the show
Speaker 1: shield Sigh. All right, thank you, Angela. I'll have to
Speaker 1: check that out. I got a pretty busy schedule and
Speaker 1: I'm out in LA. But if I get some time
Speaker 1: to go see some cool things, I will definitely do so. John,
Speaker 1: there were women in uniform in World War One, research
Speaker 1: the Hello girls who were the telephone operators the front lines. John.
Speaker 1: I know there are women that took part in the war,
Speaker 1: and we weren't trying to minimize that, but there were
Speaker 1: not women running across no man's land with rifles with
Speaker 1: bayonets on them, trying to storem enemy trenches. So that's
Speaker 1: what we really and that's if you see the movie,
Speaker 1: you'll see that. That's all that. That's all there is.
Speaker 1: There's no like back in the rear with the gear stuff.
Speaker 1: You're on the front line the whole time, moving with
Speaker 1: the front line. So yeah, American female switchboard operators in
Speaker 1: World War One, the Signal Core female telephone operators unit. Interesting,
Speaker 1: I got, John, I didn't know about that. I can
Speaker 1: be honest. I'm gonna check that out. Kyle four row call, Well,
Speaker 1: thank you for specifying. What's up, Buck, I've always wondered
Speaker 1: why legalizing marijuana is considered a left wing or liberal argument.
Speaker 1: It seems like more of a conservative libertarian idea of
Speaker 1: individual freedoms with less government overreach. And not only that,
Speaker 1: but it's a pro small business stance as well. A
Speaker 1: lot of the businesses that have opened up have been
Speaker 1: wildly successful. I just nu understand why Republicans are so
Speaker 1: scared on this issue. Kyle. A few things here. I
Speaker 1: would say. First, if you're going, you can take a
Speaker 1: position that I think is very much conservative about marijuana
Speaker 1: that would result in the at least the limits nation
Speaker 1: of federal law that makes marijuana llegal. And it would
Speaker 1: take you all the way back to the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: case the origin of so much federal overreach. The Supreme
Speaker 1: Court case then is Wickered v. Philburn, and in Wicker v. Philburn,
Speaker 1: it was decided that someone who even sold wheat within
Speaker 1: his own state, because wheat is a cross state product,
Speaker 1: it affects the price of wheat in other states. And therefore,
Speaker 1: even if the wheat is for your own consumption, because
Speaker 1: you would not be engaging in commerce within your own state,
Speaker 1: that could affect commerce in other states. The interstate commerce
Speaker 1: clause says that they can regulate wheat that you're growing
Speaker 1: for yourself, which is stunning. Even if it's not in
Speaker 1: interstate commerce, it is considered to be a part of
Speaker 1: interstate commerce. And under that very expansive and very wrong
Speaker 1: headed interpretation of the Commerce Clause, you now have the
Speaker 1: federal government able to involve itself in effectively whatever the
Speaker 1: federal government wants to involve itself in as far far
Speaker 1: too much of that to be sure. As for legalizing marijuana,
Speaker 1: just as a as an idea, I you know, there's
Speaker 1: a very it's very hard to make the argument to
Speaker 1: me that marijuana should be illegal while alcohol should be legal.
Speaker 1: Both are substances that have you know, health effects. We
Speaker 1: just are socially much more inclined to be accepting of
Speaker 1: the downsides of alcohol. Um. But that's that's really where
Speaker 1: I come to. And and then also you look at
Speaker 1: the realities of prohibition and what they have been for
Speaker 1: marijuana and what they were for alcohol from the you
Speaker 1: know whoever it was nineteen twenty something to nineteen thirty something.
Speaker 1: So yes, there you have it. H We'll see though,
Speaker 1: I mean, the real argument would be that the real
Speaker 1: argument for me would be that it's really more dangerous
Speaker 1: then people realize. Steve Rights buck Ster, you have the
Speaker 1: best show on radio. Steve, you have fantastic taste in
Speaker 1: radio shows. You just said that miss McConnell should just
Speaker 1: shut the impeachment hearing down without any witnesses. It occurs
Speaker 1: to me that the Democrats have strategized this out already.
Speaker 1: If the Senate does that, Schumer will say Trump has
Speaker 1: something to hide if witnesses are allowed to be called.
Speaker 1: The house managers have that covered. Two. Everything is geared
Speaker 1: toward November, Steve Oss and you rock well, Steve, thank
Speaker 1: you so much for the kind note. Yeah, well, the
Speaker 1: Democrats are going to have a line of attack here
Speaker 1: no matter what. If you don't bring the witnesses, there
Speaker 1: will be a line of attack. If you do bring
Speaker 1: the witnesses, they will seize upon some aspect of the
Speaker 1: witness testimon and say, ah, see, the Senate was unwilling
Speaker 1: even when presented with the truth. The vote based upon
Speaker 1: the truth of these witnesses. So you can't avoid that,
Speaker 1: you can't escape that. But nonetheless, so yeah, I think
Speaker 1: I still stand by my sense that that McConnell should
Speaker 1: just take this and just he should just take the
Speaker 1: football and spike it say nope, we're done. It's been real.
Speaker 1: Exonerate and then just have Trump tweeting exonerated in all
Speaker 1: caps every day for like a month and just go
Speaker 1: without that'll it'll trigger the Libs and it'll give us
Speaker 1: the counterpoint to what they're really trying to do, which
Speaker 1: is all about messaging for the twenty twenty election. We're
Speaker 1: aware of that, we understand that. So that's where we're at,
Speaker 1: all right, skipping past all the helpful reminders about about
Speaker 1: the geography of Clemson, oh Man producer Bark, you know,
Speaker 1: the good news is as long as you don't, you know,
Speaker 1: mix up uh Wayne Gretzy with Mark Messier, you know,
Speaker 1: I think we can forgive you. I'm honestly shocked. Look
Speaker 1: at that, though, right, that was pretty good. You struggled.
Speaker 1: It seemed like, yeah, the first one's easy. I mean, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: but I remember he was the best ranger for a
Speaker 1: while when I was growing Mark MESSI yes, yeah, he
Speaker 1: was like the super well known ring injury. He brought
Speaker 1: a cup to New York and a no big deal.
Speaker 1: Oh we did, really? Yes, really you didn't notice a
Speaker 1: parade in Manhattan? No, you lived in Manhattan. It probably
Speaker 1: went past my apartment. I don't even realize. Yeah, all right, Beth, Right,
Speaker 1: it's just found you on Pluto. I've seen you on Fox.
Speaker 1: Was throw the Fine your show on the first yesterday.
Speaker 1: It was the first time I checked out Pluto. I've
Speaker 1: been searching for a substitute for Fox. During the day.
Speaker 1: We'll watch faithfully each day. Love your show from Beth Well, Beth,
Speaker 1: thank you so much. I really appreciate that. Please, please
Speaker 1: do spread the word. Tell people they can watch us
Speaker 1: during the day. We got Dana Lash in the mix. Now,
Speaker 1: Jesse Kelly, Mike Slater, more fantastic conservatives, young, vibrant, fiery, principled,
Speaker 1: funny conservatives will be joining the line up here on
Speaker 1: Pluto TV channel two forty eight, the first in the
Speaker 1: months ahead, and we're gonna put on some really good
Speaker 1: stuff for you. So I think you're really good. You're
Speaker 1: We're gonna like it. Tell people spread the way. It's free.
Speaker 1: You download the app every it's free. There's no there's
Speaker 1: no subscription, no cost, no nothing for you to be
Speaker 1: watching us. On the first on channel two forty eight,
Speaker 1: Dennis Buck I found that insurting that there wasn't more
Speaker 1: comparison to Trump taking out solomany As to win. The
Speaker 1: USA shot down Admiral Yamamoto's plane in nineteen forty three.
Speaker 1: Really enjoy the show, shields high, Dennis writes, Dennis, You're yeah,
Speaker 1: we we shot down a general's plane and he died.
Speaker 1: So generals are combatants, folks. I feel like we don't
Speaker 1: really think about it. Used to be the general was
Speaker 1: on the horse with everybody, you know, with everyone else
Speaker 1: around him. And if you got through enough of the
Speaker 1: other soldiers, enough of the foot soldiers, you know, the
Speaker 1: cavalry or whatever, you get to the general. Guess what.
Speaker 1: The generals are combatants. Unless he surrenders in time, he
Speaker 1: can be he can be killed. I mean, this is
Speaker 1: just because he got four stars on your shoulder doesn't
Speaker 1: mean that you're not a combat right. I mean there's
Speaker 1: a reason why you know, officers, you know, even very
Speaker 1: senior officers carry weapons in war zones. A very good point,
Speaker 1: though people forget about the Yamamoto shoot down. Let's see here, Vincent, right,
Speaker 1: hey Buck, it sucks about California's insane water fines. In
Speaker 1: a totally unrelated subject, A fun experiment is putting a
Speaker 1: large neo neodium meum neodymium. I already know what that is.
Speaker 1: Magnet neck. I am ron burgundy next to metering devices.
Speaker 1: It's like freezing them in time. Godspeed, CALLI conservative shields High. Well,
Speaker 1: thank you, Vince. I didn't know about that, but I
Speaker 1: could definitely check that out. Peter Wright steer back. I'm
Speaker 1: a fairly new listener, and I really enjoy your show.
Speaker 1: That being said, I have been missing your German accent lately.
Speaker 1: It is my absolute favorite and I can't stop laughing
Speaker 1: once you launch into it. We need Markel to step
Speaker 1: up and start meddling in our elections. I enjoy most
Speaker 1: of your other impressions as well. Otherwise, very good stuff.
Speaker 1: Thanks for the incident entertainment. She'll say, Well, Pete, I'm
Speaker 1: so glad Peter, you enjoys the Angler because she enjoys
Speaker 1: telling you what to do all the time, all day long.
Speaker 1: Oh are you going to be using that light bulb
Speaker 1: that endine has too much energy? I don't think so.
Speaker 1: Not an angler's botch No, not allowable. Make sure you
Speaker 1: tell everybody's that Angler is part as a box exton
Speaker 1: sean they s your download it or else Schnell download
Speaker 1: It's a box exton show she'll tie