Speaker 1: M you are entering the freedom hunt. Hurricane Florence barrels
Speaker 1: toward the Carolinas. Will talk about what the expectations are
Speaker 1: for that storm and how it's already being politicized. Also,
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris are lying about Judge Kavanaugh.
Speaker 1: They're lying in such blatant fashion even their own side
Speaker 1: has had to call it out. We'll discuss what the
Speaker 1: political calculation is. And also Norm McDonald banished. We'll talk
Speaker 1: about why and how he got caught up in a
Speaker 1: meet you moment coming up, This is the buck Sexton Show,
Speaker 1: where the mission or mission is to decode what really
Speaker 1: matters with actionable intelligence. Magnormastake, You're a great American Again.
Speaker 1: The Buck Sexton Show begins. Analyst by the NMVD. No.
Speaker 1: We believe that there could be well over a hundred
Speaker 1: thousand people displaced, meaning they've left their homes and can't return.
Speaker 1: Put that in perspective, there were about forty four thousand
Speaker 1: in Houston and the Gulf of Texas uh in the
Speaker 1: storm that they had, So this is two or three
Speaker 1: times bigger than that. The federal and state response and
Speaker 1: preparation to this point has far exceeded anything I've seen
Speaker 1: in my previous twenty five years. Um FEMA's prepositioning of equipment,
Speaker 1: their coordination with the states, the early decisions by governors
Speaker 1: and the actions by the President to sign the emergency declarations,
Speaker 1: the prepositioning of water and food generators, the prepositioning of
Speaker 1: power trucks to take care of the power losses. I've
Speaker 1: never seen as well a coordinated efforts that's being put
Speaker 1: on right now. Welcome to Bucks Saxton Show. Folks, I
Speaker 1: really like that we're getting on the record here from
Speaker 1: federal officials. You know how much preparation is going into this,
Speaker 1: Because one, I want to know that our fellow Americans
Speaker 1: and the Carolinas that are affected are getting as much
Speaker 1: assistance and attention and and and help us possible. That's
Speaker 1: the most important thing far in a way, Also though,
Speaker 1: as a secondary consideration here, it's good for us all
Speaker 1: to get a chance to u to hear from folks
Speaker 1: who are just being honest about what's going on, because
Speaker 1: you can tell the media's positioning themselves to pounce on
Speaker 1: Trump for this, and no matter what happens, no matter
Speaker 1: what Trump and the an FEMA and federal and state
Speaker 1: agencies try to do here to limit the damage and
Speaker 1: protect life with this massive storm at category three I
Speaker 1: believe right now still very high winds about to hit
Speaker 1: the US mainland. They're gonna try to make political hand this.
Speaker 1: They're gonna try to turn this into a yet another
Speaker 1: opportunity to bash President Trump. That is, that is a
Speaker 1: goal here, that is what they're looking for. And that's
Speaker 1: why you can see that some of the questions they're asking,
Speaker 1: they're they're preparing this narrative before it even happens. You
Speaker 1: had a guy from what Spectrum News producer Mike, who
Speaker 1: was asking a FEMA representative about funds being directed, and
Speaker 1: they're trying to they're trying to say, you know, Trump
Speaker 1: essentially isn't doing They're trying to find some basis to
Speaker 1: say Trump isn't doing enough here. Trump doesn't care about
Speaker 1: people that are getting hit by hurricane I just Trump
Speaker 1: doesn't care about anything. That's the media things, just himself.
Speaker 1: That's the storyline they want to run with no matter what. Well,
Speaker 1: here's how it actually went. When they talk to a
Speaker 1: FEMA representative a out a play five. We're learning this
Speaker 1: morning that Senator Jeff Markley obtained memos showing the Trump
Speaker 1: administration taking nearly ten million from FEMA, which deals with
Speaker 1: hurricane relief, and giving the money to ICE for more
Speaker 1: detention centers. What can you tell us about this? Is
Speaker 1: that funding? This that funding? Would that funding have been
Speaker 1: used for hurricane relief? Yes, ma'am, what I can tell
Speaker 1: you is we have plenty of resources, both monetary, staff
Speaker 1: and commodities to respond to the dangerous storm that is
Speaker 1: Hurricane Florence. We again ask those residents there in the
Speaker 1: impacted zones to heed the warnings. Now, uh, disitional information
Speaker 1: can be provided, but right now we want to focus
Speaker 1: on what are those impacts from Florence and what can
Speaker 1: our citizens do today which is the last good day
Speaker 1: to evacuate. And we really want to push that message specifically,
Speaker 1: shed any light on this funding that Senator Markley is
Speaker 1: Markly is calling attention to. Yes, ma'am, what I continued,
Speaker 1: we have plenty of resources to respond. We have plenty
Speaker 1: of resources to recover. That has not impacted our situation whatsoever.
Speaker 1: Plenty of resources, he says, Stop trying to find a story,
Speaker 1: Stop trying to create a story of insufficient resources because
Speaker 1: you want to make it sound like Trump doesn't care,
Speaker 1: isn't doing enough, or isn't doing a good job. Just
Speaker 1: stop right, that's that's not happening. It's not what's happening.
Speaker 1: You're supposed to report the who's not make it up
Speaker 1: as you go along, and not try to force a
Speaker 1: narrative that's not there. But as you know, folks, the
Speaker 1: left sea storms as an opportunity, SE's major natural disasters,
Speaker 1: weather events like this as an opportunity to slam the
Speaker 1: political opposition, and they can't accept that. You know, sometimes
Speaker 1: just really bad things happen that no one can completely
Speaker 1: or fully or adequately prepare for. There's going to be damaged.
Speaker 1: They'll even sometimes be loss of light. That is just
Speaker 1: the way things are, you know, they don't they don't
Speaker 1: have any sense of that, right, it's always, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: Trump didn't Trump didn't do this, or Trump won't do that.
Speaker 1: And they're trying to also tie this into uh, what
Speaker 1: happened in Puerto Rico already to create you see how
Speaker 1: they're trying to formulate this narrative. Because here's what President
Speaker 1: Trump said about Puerto Rico just yesterday. Playclip one. I
Speaker 1: think Puerto Rico was incredibly success from Puerto Rico was
Speaker 1: actually our toughest one of all because it's an island,
Speaker 1: so you just you can't truck things onto and everything
Speaker 1: by boat. We moved to hospital into Puerto Rico, a
Speaker 1: commendous military hospital in the form of a ship. You
Speaker 1: know that Puerto Rico got hit not with one hurricane
Speaker 1: but with two. And the problem with Puerto Rico is
Speaker 1: their electric grid and their electric generating plan was dead
Speaker 1: before the storm's ever hit. The job that TEMA and
Speaker 1: law enforcement and everybody did, working along with the governor
Speaker 1: in Puerto Rico, I think was tremendous. I think the
Speaker 1: Puerto Rico was an incredible unsung success. Now they're jumping
Speaker 1: all over him for this, right. They are the media
Speaker 1: there in a meltdown over there. They even got the
Speaker 1: all the mayor of San Juan to come out to
Speaker 1: trash drump plate too. Well. I think the person of
Speaker 1: statement is despicable. It just goes to the lack of
Speaker 1: understanding of reality that he has. If he thinks that
Speaker 1: the dead of three thousand people is the best, he
Speaker 1: really doesn't know what this was all about. This was
Speaker 1: never about politics. He's talking about on plaise Well, you know,
Speaker 1: nobody's singing his places, folks. I can't always tell with
Speaker 1: the Left whether we're dealing with an idiot or a liar,
Speaker 1: but all too often these days it's one, if not
Speaker 1: both of those things. When President Trump says that Puerto
Speaker 1: Rico is an incredible, unsung success, he's not saying the
Speaker 1: storm was a success. He's not saying, look at how
Speaker 1: great everything is in Puerto Rico. What he's trying to
Speaker 1: convey to the American people is that the federal response,
Speaker 1: under the circumstances, dealing with the limitations of reality, was
Speaker 1: very very effective. I mean, this to me would be
Speaker 1: like saying, well, how dare anybody say that the UH
Speaker 1: that that nine eleven, that the cleanup effort there was
Speaker 1: you know, a really really really really successful. You know,
Speaker 1: the cleanup effort didn't save any lives. You know that
Speaker 1: the clean up effort didn't stop the towers from coming down.
Speaker 1: Well no, but it's a terrible situation, and we we
Speaker 1: got we got attacked, a sneak attack by Jihada psychopaths
Speaker 1: skill three thousand Americans. But the response to that, afterwards,
Speaker 1: you can still say that the response to UH to
Speaker 1: deal with the debris to clean up the site to
Speaker 1: you know, was was well done by the federal government.
Speaker 1: You know, the these are these are kind of two
Speaker 1: separate things that you can refer to. With Puerto Rico,
Speaker 1: he's not saying the hurricane was an unsung success. He's
Speaker 1: saying the response to it, under the circumstances, which were
Speaker 1: incredibly difficult, was a very good response. It doesn't mean
Speaker 1: it's perfect, it doesn't mean it's not terribly sad that
Speaker 1: thousands of people died. He's just saying, we we did,
Speaker 1: under the circumstances, the best that could be done. And
Speaker 1: the left, of course, you know, they deny this. They
Speaker 1: shout him down for this, and they want us that
Speaker 1: he's an unfeeling brute and evil and in all the
Speaker 1: rest of him because folks, you know, we talked about
Speaker 1: everything is political now, even whether is very political to
Speaker 1: the left. Not just climate change. They're gonna do that
Speaker 1: with this too, but response to natural disasters is an
Speaker 1: opportunity to score gee political points. Well, we'll get more
Speaker 1: into this and the media meltdown over it in a moment.
Speaker 1: We've also got Joe Bus started joining to talk about
Speaker 1: uh some you know, his expert opinion on what we
Speaker 1: should expect here. So that and much more coming up,
Speaker 1: stay with me. The president's record on hurricane response uneven
Speaker 1: at best. A deadly hurricane in Puerto Rico almost exactly
Speaker 1: one year ago revealed that even natural disasters are processed
Speaker 1: by this president as political undertaking. If we've been talking
Speaker 1: about how the President today called the hurricane response in
Speaker 1: Puerto Rico one of the best jobs that's ever been done,
Speaker 1: pointing to last year's response to Puerto Rico's hurricane as
Speaker 1: quote an incredible unsung success, as an incredible unsung success,
Speaker 1: he's still saying it was an incredible unsung success. Stories.
Speaker 1: So how out of touch as President Trump, far more
Speaker 1: so than President Bush. If he thinks that's an unparalleled success.
Speaker 1: God only knows what he would think of father would be.
Speaker 1: You know, if the President thinks that his response in
Speaker 1: the federal government's response to Puerto Rico was an incredible success,
Speaker 1: and quite honestly, we're all in trouble. The statements by
Speaker 1: the President, let's be clear, are delusional and sensitive and outrageous.
Speaker 1: The only one who was lazy was you, Mr President.
Speaker 1: You were lazy and you weren't on duty. And people
Speaker 1: died because of it. Blaming Trump for the dead in
Speaker 1: Puerto Rico. I'm doing so, by the way, while saying that,
Speaker 1: you know, Trump is the one who politicizes hurricanes and
Speaker 1: hurricane believe. Isn't it astonishing? This is a reminder really
Speaker 1: of one of Obama's favorite tactics, which was Obama always
Speaker 1: took the position that the other side was political. He
Speaker 1: was just righteous and wise. You know, they have they've
Speaker 1: got politics. I've got solutions, the answers they do politics.
Speaker 1: I don't do that. You know, Obama always had that approach,
Speaker 1: and it's it's really dishonest and obviously demeaning to the
Speaker 1: other side. Um, but you know, they go even beyond so.
Speaker 1: So there's a couple of layers here of how unfair
Speaker 1: they are to Trump on this whole issue. It's not
Speaker 1: just that they say that. And look, I would have
Speaker 1: used different language than Trump to describe what happened in
Speaker 1: Puerto Rico and in his efforts to try and get
Speaker 1: Puerto Rico the aid that it needed. But you know,
Speaker 1: there's also this level of saying that Trump is the
Speaker 1: reason people died. I mean, that's just despicable. It's despicable
Speaker 1: to make that claim because there's no evidence for it.
Speaker 1: It's obviously a disgraceful thing to say. And they keep saying.
Speaker 1: In fact, Joe Crowley, who's the member of Congress, the
Speaker 1: kind of long time I'm big time Democrat from New
Speaker 1: York who lost to Alexandra Occasio Cortes. Uh he he
Speaker 1: just explicitly says, you know, basically, Trump killed people play
Speaker 1: a teen. We failed our fellow citizens and fellow Americans
Speaker 1: in Puerto Rico. President Trump ignored the entire island, leaving people,
Speaker 1: quite frankly, to die. Um, this Republican the Congress failed
Speaker 1: to allocate the necessary funds to help rebuild and repair
Speaker 1: the island, and I believe this was preventable. Now, you know, folks,
Speaker 1: I don't want to get too deep into this because
Speaker 1: I'd have to really dig into the numbers, but they're
Speaker 1: they're all Only sixty people were lost from the actual
Speaker 1: storm as it happened, So it was a very small
Speaker 1: number relatively speaking. You know, every life is precious and
Speaker 1: every death is a tragedy in the situation, I understand,
Speaker 1: but a very small number, relatively speaking, were killed from
Speaker 1: the storm. It was the aftermath of the storm. We
Speaker 1: had this number now three thousand people, which of course
Speaker 1: is very similar to the very close to the number
Speaker 1: of those who were killed on the day of nine oleven,
Speaker 1: not over a period of many, many months. But when
Speaker 1: you look at also how this is being UH tabulated,
Speaker 1: what they're doing is they're saying, well, the condition of
Speaker 1: the island was so deteriorated that the mortality rate when
Speaker 1: you took out the when when you when you you know,
Speaker 1: excluded the people that had left the island, the mortality
Speaker 1: rate of those who stayed behind was so significantly hired
Speaker 1: at three thousand people died. But you know a lot
Speaker 1: of these cases people are that they're talking about, they
Speaker 1: died from, you know, diabetes, They died from a lack
Speaker 1: of of treatment for h retreatable diseases. I mean, and
Speaker 1: I just think it's I think it's a very strange
Speaker 1: thing to claim the President Trump is responsible for those debts. UM.
Speaker 1: I spoke to the delegate from from Puerto Rico about this.
Speaker 1: I spoke to the UH the one person who represents
Speaker 1: Puerto Rican Congress, and she said, flatly, the federal government
Speaker 1: sent a lot of resources. The federal government was trying
Speaker 1: to help us. It was a really really bad situation.
Speaker 1: The storm was way worse than anything we had prepared for.
Speaker 1: That that's Trump's fault, now, you know, the folks. The
Speaker 1: thing you have to remember is that liberals see all
Speaker 1: of these different political stories in terms of cycles, right.
Speaker 1: They see it as what worked before. That's why they
Speaker 1: get so excited about Woodward and Bernstein and Watergate and
Speaker 1: Trump and impeachment. They think they can bring that whole
Speaker 1: thing back. And they also view a real tipping point
Speaker 1: in the Bush administration as the as the Katrina moment
Speaker 1: that Bush had, and they think that they can replicate
Speaker 1: that with Trump and start to turn the Remember Bush
Speaker 1: after not eleven very much United Country behind him very proper.
Speaker 1: There was really Katrina where you started to see a
Speaker 1: big shift in public opinion on George W. Bush. And
Speaker 1: they're hoping that the hurricane and Puerto Rico is an
Speaker 1: opportunity to do the same thing. So it's it's very
Speaker 1: it's very obviously political, very explicitly political from them. But
Speaker 1: I also think that it's it's it's dishonest on the facts.
Speaker 1: There was a lot of aid and a lot of
Speaker 1: supplies that were in the at the ports and Puerto
Speaker 1: Rico that weren't able to make it into the interior
Speaker 1: of the island because there were basically no bridges and
Speaker 1: no roads and no power, and so we were sending stuff.
Speaker 1: But you know, people keep saying, oh, well, if it
Speaker 1: was the mainland, it would be uh in the mainland,
Speaker 1: it would be such a better response. I mean, for
Speaker 1: one thing, you look at what happened with Katrina in
Speaker 1: New Orleans, and you know, I don't think that it's
Speaker 1: not like, oh something, you know, you look at what
Speaker 1: happened with Houston, even which wasn't on the same scale
Speaker 1: as Katrina in terms of lives lost, but obviously a
Speaker 1: tremendous amount of damage. Just because it's on the mainland
Speaker 1: doesn't mean that the federal government steps in and makes
Speaker 1: everything great and fix everything right away. And that's not
Speaker 1: true either. So I think there's a lot of overstatement
Speaker 1: of how big the the differences between what you what
Speaker 1: you've seen on Puerto Rico on the island, and what
Speaker 1: happened what's happened to the mainland when there's been a
Speaker 1: major disaster response that has been needed in in the past.
Speaker 1: But it's just you know, this is bushlied babies died. Folks,
Speaker 1: remember that the Iraq War, that was the mantra love Bush.
Speaker 1: Bush Lied babies died. And now you know with Trump,
Speaker 1: it's essentially Bush lied babies died in Puerto Rico. That's
Speaker 1: what they That's what they're trying to get going. As
Speaker 1: a mean, they're trying to create political advantage from this
Speaker 1: whole thing, even though none of them could tell me
Speaker 1: what was what was Trump supposed to do differently in
Speaker 1: Puerto Rico? What was what was supposed to be his uh,
Speaker 1: you know, the action that he would have taken them
Speaker 1: would have stopped people from being unable to, you know,
Speaker 1: get the medical care they needed inside of Puerto Rico.
Speaker 1: It was he supposed to send. Even more, they couldn't
Speaker 1: get the resources they were sending to the places they
Speaker 1: were needed in the island because of logistics problems, because
Speaker 1: the island was in such bad shape in the interior,
Speaker 1: because roads had been washed away, and because there was
Speaker 1: no power, and that obviously makes the entire response a
Speaker 1: lot more difficult. But you know, instead of using this,
Speaker 1: you know, if they were really concerned with the lives
Speaker 1: lost and if they really wanted to make sure this
Speaker 1: would never happen again, or that not nothing like this
Speaker 1: would ever occur again. They would take the position that
Speaker 1: we need to do a thorough after action report on
Speaker 1: everything that happened here on the on the federal government's response,
Speaker 1: and come up with solutions. But they're not going to
Speaker 1: do that. At least that's not gonna get nearly the
Speaker 1: same amount of attention and coverage. The primary focus here
Speaker 1: is in fact, bashing Trump. They're just gonna find a
Speaker 1: way to bash Trump in every way that they can.
Speaker 1: That's what they're trying to do. And it's it's gross, folks.
Speaker 1: We should we should be willing to say that. It's
Speaker 1: really disgusting. And they're saying the President United States is
Speaker 1: the reason that people died. In fact, he he has
Speaker 1: blood on his hands. If you take Joe Crowley at
Speaker 1: his word, we're gonna talk about this hurricane with an
Speaker 1: expert in in a moment here, you know what you
Speaker 1: should do to prepare for it and uh and what
Speaker 1: what you should be expecting. I know we've got a
Speaker 1: lot of team buck in the Carolina's hopefully folks. If
Speaker 1: you are near the coast, you have heated evacuation orders.
Speaker 1: But even if you're just in the general vicinity of
Speaker 1: the southeastern coastal US, you should probably be prepared for
Speaker 1: the really tough weather that's coming in. So why don't
Speaker 1: we We're gonna talk to an expert about this. Joe
Speaker 1: Best starting. We'll be with us in just a moment here,
Speaker 1: So stay there, team. Hurricane Florence is fast approaching. It's
Speaker 1: going to be here over the next forty eight hours,
Speaker 1: and they say it's about as big as they've seen
Speaker 1: coming to this country, and certainly to the east coast,
Speaker 1: as they've ever seen. We'll handle it. We're ready, We're able.
Speaker 1: We've got the finest people I think anywhere in the world.
Speaker 1: FEMA and first responders are out there. They're going to
Speaker 1: stand through the danger of this storm. Get out of
Speaker 1: its way, don't play games with it. It's a big one,
Speaker 1: maybe as big as they've seen, and tremendous amounts of water.
Speaker 1: The storm will come, it will go. We want everybody
Speaker 1: to be safe. We're fully prepared, food, medical, everything you
Speaker 1: can imagine. We are ready. We love you all, We
Speaker 1: want you safe. Get out of the storm's way, be ready,
Speaker 1: and God be with you. All right, So we've got
Speaker 1: a big storm heading for the country. You've no doubt
Speaker 1: seen some of the news coverage of this already. I
Speaker 1: wanted to bring on an expert who can tell us
Speaker 1: just what to expect and then also what some of
Speaker 1: the narratives will be. Where does the science meet the
Speaker 1: politics in the aftermath of all this we know that's
Speaker 1: likely to happen as well. We have Joe but starting
Speaker 1: with us now. He is the chief meteorologist of WeatherBell
Speaker 1: dot com. Joe, great to have you back on the show. Well,
Speaker 1: it's great to be here, Buck. I always want the on.
Speaker 1: So what everyone says, a lot of flooding, high wind,
Speaker 1: big storm. What should people in the Carolinas. By the way,
Speaker 1: we've got a whole lot of folks listening in the Carolinas.
Speaker 1: What should they be expecting and what should they be ground? Well, uh,
Speaker 1: in that area from Cape Lookout probably down to about Georgetown,
Speaker 1: South Carolina, but centered really from the Grand Strand up
Speaker 1: to Wilmington's and Cape Fear. This is going to be
Speaker 1: a siege. That's that's the word I'm using, because you're
Speaker 1: probably gonna have hurricane force winds that they're going to
Speaker 1: be impacting these areas for a couple of days around
Speaker 1: Cape Fear because this storm starts with the hurricane force
Speaker 1: winds later Tomorrow afternoon Tomorrow night, and it moves so
Speaker 1: slowly that Saturday morning there may still be hurricane force
Speaker 1: winds around Cape Fear. So the rights filled beach and
Speaker 1: the constant pounding from the east, um with hurricane winds
Speaker 1: into the UH, the crescent shaped bay on Slow Bay
Speaker 1: and these areas. I I can't even describe what can
Speaker 1: happen here in these coastal communities. Um again, I don't
Speaker 1: I don't know that you're going to see winds by
Speaker 1: the time the storm gets there as high as let's
Speaker 1: say Hurricane Hazel or Hurricane you go. But the slow movement,
Speaker 1: the tremendous amount of rain, and plus the path of
Speaker 1: the storm, which will be UH down the coast instead
Speaker 1: of coming up the coast, it's going back to the southwest.
Speaker 1: It's blocked by a big upper ridge of high pressure. Well,
Speaker 1: that's going to just compound the whole situation. And this
Speaker 1: is a set it back on Saturday. This is probably
Speaker 1: going to be the costliest storm and the history of
Speaker 1: the Carolinas, and that includes some great great storms like
Speaker 1: Hugo and Hazel and Isabel and Diane, and they have
Speaker 1: a a storied past as far as major hurricanes go
Speaker 1: in this area. And Joe, you know, for for folks
Speaker 1: who are wondering about preparation, especially for along the coast,
Speaker 1: when we're talking storm surge here, what does that really mean?
Speaker 1: I mean, how does that manifest? How bad can that get?
Speaker 1: How long can that last? Well, let's say you have
Speaker 1: a ten to fifty ft surge. That's the that's the
Speaker 1: water level, how high the water level will actually rise.
Speaker 1: That's not the waves on top of the water level.
Speaker 1: I mean, we've got reports of seventy ft waves with
Speaker 1: this off shore, so uh and the uh you know,
Speaker 1: even these communities like New Berne and Greenville, UH that
Speaker 1: are north on Pamlico Sound. The combination of the heavy
Speaker 1: rain coming down the river and then the constantist wind
Speaker 1: pushing the sound back in there, all those areas get
Speaker 1: flooded too. So you you know, you cannot you cannot
Speaker 1: possibly overestimate what this could do. In other words, if
Speaker 1: you folks are in there and you're thinking, well, you
Speaker 1: know what, I'm gonna ride this out on ten fifty
Speaker 1: ft above sea level, and I go out go out
Speaker 1: power a couple of days. No, No, well, you're you're
Speaker 1: probably going to go out power a couple of weeks.
Speaker 1: You're gonna have a couple of days when the wind
Speaker 1: is incessantly pounding away at you. So it's not like,
Speaker 1: you know, if you want to compare a regular storm
Speaker 1: Isabelle or you Go or Floyd, they moved through very quickly.
Speaker 1: There's three to six hours of you know, the crescendo,
Speaker 1: very strong winds, and then it dies down and the
Speaker 1: sun comes out and that's that. The next day you
Speaker 1: can start cleaning up. That's not going to be the
Speaker 1: case here now. Joe, Inevitably, and we're speaking of Joba Start,
Speaker 1: a chief meteorologist at WeatherBell dot com. Inevitably this happens.
Speaker 1: There's gonna be a lot of damage done. We know this.
Speaker 1: Hopefully there'll be no loss of life, but there'll be
Speaker 1: a lot of damage done, and people are going to
Speaker 1: jump right on the oh, it's because of climate change
Speaker 1: and wagon There'll be editorials about it, there'll be people
Speaker 1: going on TV talking about it. What is your you know,
Speaker 1: can't lose argument for folks out there that that that
Speaker 1: they will be able to replicate and repeat about can
Speaker 1: we just stop saying every time there's a really bad
Speaker 1: weather incident or any natural disaster, really these days it's
Speaker 1: climate change? Well why is why has firstance the last
Speaker 1: fifty years, The amount of major hurricanes hitting the eastern
Speaker 1: hit in the United States is only thirty seven percent
Speaker 1: of the amount of major hurricanes that hit in the
Speaker 1: previous fifty years. That's the first thing as far as
Speaker 1: this storm goes. Why where were these people in August third,
Speaker 1: where I quite publicly declared that a three week hurricane
Speaker 1: for it was going to come in in September two,
Speaker 1: said that this was going to come back here when
Speaker 1: it was recurvery. I don't see these people showing up
Speaker 1: way before and giving us any reasons for why this
Speaker 1: is happening. In other words, I said, it up with
Speaker 1: nature and what nature has done in the laws of
Speaker 1: meteorology and physics and climatology. And all they do is
Speaker 1: sit back and wait until something happens. And you know
Speaker 1: what answer don't they own it? Could it could snow
Speaker 1: cheese in New York City and they'll say it's climate change.
Speaker 1: And and unfortunately, you know, you get what you deserve.
Speaker 1: You report yourself if if we're going to have a
Speaker 1: gullible public that won't take the time to actually look
Speaker 1: and understand what has happened in the weather history of
Speaker 1: this country and of the planet, then you know they're
Speaker 1: going to fall for it. And um and these people
Speaker 1: know it. They could care less whether their reason is right. Now,
Speaker 1: not all of them, Okay. I know a lot of
Speaker 1: climate scientists. I know some on the other side of
Speaker 1: the issue, where I respect, I understand their argument. I
Speaker 1: look at their arguments less I see what you're saying.
Speaker 1: But I think you're there's much too much attribution to
Speaker 1: see as opposed to the big name. You start looking
Speaker 1: about some of the journalists that are coming out and
Speaker 1: saying what they're saying, And I mean I was watching
Speaker 1: some interviews and listening to some interviews and I literally
Speaker 1: couldn't watch it. And again, folks, uh, look at the past.
Speaker 1: I give the example. Hurricane Gloria was in this area, Okay,
Speaker 1: two weeks later, ten days later at the northeast on September.
Speaker 1: How come Gloria was stronger than this storm, a lot stronger.
Speaker 1: How come this ten or fifteen storms that have been
Speaker 1: stronger than than this storm in the southwest Atlantic. Is
Speaker 1: this going to be the strongest storm ever to hit
Speaker 1: the Carolines? And even if it was the strongest storm,
Speaker 1: what makes you think that nature couldn't do that anyway?
Speaker 1: If it produced something in nineteen fifty, why can't you
Speaker 1: produce something That's a fair point. Joe, Joe, Joe by
Speaker 1: starting everybody, Chief meteorologist at weather bell dot com. Check
Speaker 1: at weather bell dot com for more. Joe, really appreciate
Speaker 1: you joining us team. We've got much more to stay
Speaker 1: with us. This is what life looks like. I guess
Speaker 1: one overheated planet. The important point with all of this
Speaker 1: over is that you know, climate change didn't cause the
Speaker 1: hurricanes or the typhoons, but they made them worse because
Speaker 1: this is a natural disaster, which is a potentially a
Speaker 1: man made catastrophe because of the choices we've maked right
Speaker 1: and in what we're doing is interfering with the way
Speaker 1: the jet stream operates. I mean, the jet stream is
Speaker 1: the current of air that actually goes from west to east,
Speaker 1: and that's why flights going west to east take a
Speaker 1: lot less time than going east to west here in
Speaker 1: the States. Normally, that jet stream would push a lot
Speaker 1: of these storms back out into the open ocean. But
Speaker 1: now the jet streams up further north than it was before,
Speaker 1: and that's because the tropical regions are actually expanding. It's
Speaker 1: a man made catastrophe, that's right, man made. It's a hurricane.
Speaker 1: But we made it. No, we didn't, mate, We did
Speaker 1: not make the hurricane is not a mad man made catastrophe. Uh.
Speaker 1: You know, we we had that. Uh we we pulled
Speaker 1: that right in the in the break. Actually, as I
Speaker 1: said producer Mike, there's got to be he said, oh,
Speaker 1: there CNN blaming this on time and change. You know
Speaker 1: there is. It's so easy to find it right away.
Speaker 1: And I know that weather is a tough thing for
Speaker 1: news organizations to handle in some respects. What I mean
Speaker 1: by that is everybody wants to know what's going on
Speaker 1: with the weather. Not a lot of people have intelligent
Speaker 1: things to say about the weather, and so much of
Speaker 1: the seven cable news cycle is speculation, as we've discussed
Speaker 1: earlier in the week, and analysis, which is generally just
Speaker 1: speculation dressed up as something else. And so they end
Speaker 1: up doing this whole climate change dance because they're trying
Speaker 1: to fill time. They're trying to make it compelling. And
Speaker 1: and here's the part of this that I've realized from
Speaker 1: my time in dealing with the the mainstream media such
Speaker 1: as it is. There are some who are true believers
Speaker 1: and all this stuff. There there are some who are
Speaker 1: very much dedicated to the notion that climate change is
Speaker 1: a national security threat, is the reason for all of
Speaker 1: this uh. And they don't think that what they're doing
Speaker 1: is just providing these unfalsifiable uh notions of of what
Speaker 1: is going on with climate change, right, I mean when
Speaker 1: they say things like it doesn't cause the storm, but
Speaker 1: it makes the storm worse, how could you ever prove
Speaker 1: that or disprove it? More more importantly, how you know? Remember, folks,
Speaker 1: when some of you have asked me on this show,
Speaker 1: how what what's a good way to argue with a
Speaker 1: really indoctrinated liberal, I say, start from the premise of
Speaker 1: how do you disprove what it is that they believe?
Speaker 1: What would you have to provide them that would make
Speaker 1: them at least rethink what they believe in terms of evidence?
Speaker 1: And with a lot of these things, they will tell
Speaker 1: you they won't actually have an answer, They'll just get angry.
Speaker 1: And because that's what happens when you challenge belief instead
Speaker 1: of challenging rational thought and challenging people based on facts
Speaker 1: and verifiable and form. And so there are some people
Speaker 1: in this media climate change apparatus who are of the
Speaker 1: mind that this is real that, but I think there's
Speaker 1: also just a lot of opportunism here, right. A big
Speaker 1: portion of this is really just people that realize at
Speaker 1: CNN and elsewhere that they have an audience that wants
Speaker 1: to hear the the audience wants to hear about how
Speaker 1: climate change has caused all this. That they want to
Speaker 1: believe that there is a you know, a bad guy here,
Speaker 1: and and really that the bad guy is in fact
Speaker 1: the right. The bad guy is conservatism, the bad guy
Speaker 1: is oil companies, you know, all these. So it's a
Speaker 1: it's a great way to get the left excided because
Speaker 1: they immediately, uh, they immediately get to attack a number
Speaker 1: of targets that they really dislike and and and they're
Speaker 1: the on the righteous high ground here while all the
Speaker 1: people that are saying, a hold on a second, your
Speaker 1: your climate change views are nonsensical, and I really mean
Speaker 1: that that they don't hold up that they can't be
Speaker 1: sustained based upon never mind the facts which is based
Speaker 1: upon an analysis, based upon logic. They get very very angry.
Speaker 1: I remember once I was on and I made some
Speaker 1: joke about how about how you know, maybe if we
Speaker 1: use I was on CNN and I said, maybe if
Speaker 1: we use fewer aerosol cans, you know, and don't put
Speaker 1: a hole in the ozone, then liberals will calm down.
Speaker 1: It was something like that, but it was it was
Speaker 1: it was a joke. I mean, I was taking obviously
Speaker 1: taking a shot at the climate change mania and on
Speaker 1: all the which I know that's about CEO two and
Speaker 1: it's a different process and the ozone, but the point is,
Speaker 1: you know it used to be the hole ne ozone,
Speaker 1: now it's CEO two emissions is. People keep coming up
Speaker 1: with different versions of of of the same basic premise,
Speaker 1: which is that mankind is polluting the world by being mankind.
Speaker 1: Nd uh, and we're destroying the planet and only the
Speaker 1: righteous among us who believe in hashtag science, not science,
Speaker 1: but hashtag science can save it. And remember I got
Speaker 1: some I can't remember if it was via Twitter or
Speaker 1: it was an email that someone who was from some
Speaker 1: climate change think tank in DC wrote this, you know,
Speaker 1: how dare you weigh in on a subject of science
Speaker 1: that like you couldn't even begin to understand. And I
Speaker 1: think I responded the guy, you know, I just checked
Speaker 1: out your bio and you're not a scientist, you're a
Speaker 1: pr flak. So but see this is this is what
Speaker 1: I mean by it doesn't It doesn't matter what the
Speaker 1: situation is, what you say to them, no matter how
Speaker 1: foolish they look. They have such an incentive to push
Speaker 1: this hysteria. There's so many people whose careers depend on
Speaker 1: this and who have really who have built followings based
Speaker 1: on the notion of climate change. And I also note
Speaker 1: that someone like President Obama, I refuse to believe that
Speaker 1: you are really that free thinking and and quite honestly wise,
Speaker 1: I think it is impossible to be intellectually brilliant and
Speaker 1: and also have good judgment and believe in climate change.
Speaker 1: I don't think you can have those two. That you
Speaker 1: can be really, really smart, but you can't be really
Speaker 1: smart and have good judgment. Uh, if you believe in
Speaker 1: climate change as a function of or as something that's
Speaker 1: going to destroy the planet, as something that's going to
Speaker 1: end human life unless we take dramatic action, you know,
Speaker 1: this is where they as good Joel you staying climate
Speaker 1: change is not really it's such a stupid argument. We
Speaker 1: keep running around in circles with it because they're just
Speaker 1: hoping to denigrate the people that are pointing out that
Speaker 1: their ideas don't make any sense here, that there's no
Speaker 1: there there, that there's not any there's not any means
Speaker 1: to disprove their theories, and that they're really impervious to evidence.
Speaker 1: By the way, eighty foot tall wave, I just gotta think, John,
Speaker 1: I mean, can you imagine actually being out of the
Speaker 1: ocean and seeing an eighty foot tall wave? That to me,
Speaker 1: uh wow, it reminds me of the final scene of
Speaker 1: Point Break actually, where body decides that he's going to
Speaker 1: go out on a on a wave by um uh
Speaker 1: by pushing forward and and even though it's a you know,
Speaker 1: a hundred a hundred foot wave or something, he's gonna
Speaker 1: go out there and do that. So anyway, it reminds
Speaker 1: me the at a Point Break eight ft wave be terrifying.
Speaker 1: Or also, what's the movie, John, what's the movie where
Speaker 1: the they're out there in the in the boat and
Speaker 1: they just get caught Oh the perfect storm, right, the
Speaker 1: perfect storm. That's yeah, that's pretty straight. I thought that move.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's some cool c g I, but I
Speaker 1: don't know. It's kind of a story without much of
Speaker 1: a plot. It's like they're in a they're in a boat,
Speaker 1: they're in a big storm. Did you like it? I
Speaker 1: know it's based on a true story, but I didn't
Speaker 1: find the story all that all that compelling. I thought
Speaker 1: it was as these things go. I thought it was
Speaker 1: you know, it was all right, it was all right.
Speaker 1: What's your favorite? Do you like Twister? I think you
Speaker 1: haven't seen Twister. Twister is pretty good. It's Bill Paxson,
Speaker 1: rested r I p Bill Paxson. By the way, Uh,
Speaker 1: it's Bill Paxxton and Helen Hunt. I was gonna say,
Speaker 1: Laura Dern. I always get those two confused. Twister is
Speaker 1: pretty Twist is pretty good movie. So, and some of
Speaker 1: the problem with the big storm disaster movies is that
Speaker 1: that's always climate change and there's a lot of preachy
Speaker 1: stuff about that, and so I generally don't watch them.
Speaker 1: But anyway, I'll be there. I'll be the one thousand
Speaker 1: person the media to tell you today, get out of
Speaker 1: the way of the storm, folks, be safe, be safe. Yes,
Speaker 1: that is true. You've heard it from me, You've heard
Speaker 1: it from everybody. We're gonna switch topics here in an hour.
Speaker 1: To stay with me. Don't get caught up in the
Speaker 1: purge of conservatives that's going on on some of these
Speaker 1: social media sites. Don't have to worry. Hey, hold on
Speaker 1: a second, am I being shadow band? Your opinion matters,
Speaker 1: Your insight should be shared. You should be able to
Speaker 1: find like minded Americans and patriots to talk about whatever
Speaker 1: issues are top of your mind whenever you want, and
Speaker 1: not worry about censorship or agenda. That's why you should
Speaker 1: try a new social media site called Snippy. Snippy dot
Speaker 1: com allows you to post on topics, share photos, videos,
Speaker 1: whatever you like, all the functionality that you need in
Speaker 1: a social media site and none of the left wing bias,
Speaker 1: none of the censorship or any of that nonsense. I've
Speaker 1: got my account going. Snippy dot com is so fun.
Speaker 1: It's such a cool place to share your thoughts. Go
Speaker 1: see for yourself. You can follow writers, you can post
Speaker 1: yourselves snippy dot com totally free to start your account
Speaker 1: there snippy dot com, and also you can try the
Speaker 1: snippy dot com app on your smartphone. Check it out
Speaker 1: team I'll see you on snippy dot com. Buck Sextons
Speaker 1: decoding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence. Make
Speaker 1: no mistake, American, You're a great American again. This is
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show. Analysts. Buck Sexton. No, don't forget, folks,
Speaker 1: how much the Democrats are in a panic about the
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh nomination. They haven't. They haven't let up on this one.
Speaker 1: In fact, they came up today with a a somewhat
Speaker 1: novel approach to trying to pressure UH Senator Collins from
Speaker 1: voting in favor of Kavanaugh. This group has done a
Speaker 1: crowdfunding campaign that will that has raised a million dollars
Speaker 1: and they will donate it to Collins's opponent in Senate
Speaker 1: opponent if she votes in favor of Kavanaugh. Now, I
Speaker 1: would just say, if you think that money determines elections,
Speaker 1: go talk to the Jeb Jeb exclamation, Jeb dr the
Speaker 1: Jeb Bush team about that where I think they spent
Speaker 1: something like a hundred million dollars to it an electoral
Speaker 1: college vote and not not exactly lighten the world on
Speaker 1: fire with their amazing nous there, but this is clearly
Speaker 1: a you know, a new way of trying to put
Speaker 1: additional pressure on the senator from Maine to castor vote
Speaker 1: against Kavanaugh. Remember, they only need a couple of defections
Speaker 1: and this and this will actually work. You know. Democrats
Speaker 1: have already been trying this tactic of of just delay, delay,
Speaker 1: and and hope for the best. Try to slow that,
Speaker 1: slow down the process, call for an adjournment of the process.
Speaker 1: Say they need more time in the process. I mean
Speaker 1: that they're really doing everything and just just seeing what
Speaker 1: they can get to stick against the wall. Here they
Speaker 1: submitted I just saw this today, dred and seventy eight
Speaker 1: questions for the record for Kavanaugh, more than the total
Speaker 1: number this, according to Chuck Grassley, more than the total
Speaker 1: number ever submitted since the Senate started testimony for Scotus Pis.
Speaker 1: Democrats folks have put forward more questions for Cavana than
Speaker 1: all the questions combined for all of the previous Supreme
Speaker 1: Court nominees that went before the Senate, according to Chuck Rasley.
Speaker 1: And they say it's not enough, they don't have the documents,
Speaker 1: not enough, there needs more study. Whoa um. So as
Speaker 1: you know, they're they're in hysterics, they're lying, they don't
Speaker 1: care about what's true. Here. They don't care about what
Speaker 1: um is, what is what is reality when it comes
Speaker 1: to Cavinal, which is that he's an incredibly qualified guy.
Speaker 1: He is as mainstream a geopier as you are going
Speaker 1: to or rather as mainstream a A constitutional conservatives. I'm
Speaker 1: sure he's GOP two. Let's why don't you pretend like
Speaker 1: Supreme Court justices don't have politics. It's it's laughable, it's
Speaker 1: a nonsensical idea. But he's a perfect candidate for the court.
Speaker 1: We all know that. You know that, I know that.
Speaker 1: But the opposition to him is truly desperate and depraved.
Speaker 1: And that's why when when you look at the different
Speaker 1: things they're trying. All right, I get it right. They
Speaker 1: don't have they don't have a leg to stand on
Speaker 1: in terms of his resume, they don't have a leg
Speaker 1: to stand on in terms of, you know, what his
Speaker 1: um abilities are. So they're trying to find anything that
Speaker 1: they anything that they can and that's where we got
Speaker 1: this idea that I had to deal with last week
Speaker 1: when we had the Women's march, like co President or
Speaker 1: whatever they whatever they call her, Bob Blandon, who was
Speaker 1: really worried about her. But it's really a hysterical person,
Speaker 1: and not not in the haha funny way, but somebody
Speaker 1: who's worries me about her her stability based on the
Speaker 1: conversation that we had, you know, thinks that things that
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh is going to result in millions of women dying.
Speaker 1: That's that's a that's like pink elephants flying around the
Speaker 1: room level crazy. That's not normal. But one of the
Speaker 1: big opposition points to Kavanaugh has been that recently, um,
Speaker 1: they're saying that it's you know that he said that
Speaker 1: abortion inducing drugs are the same as birth control, that
Speaker 1: birth control pills are abortion inducing drugs. And I you know,
Speaker 1: I didn't sit through all three days of the hearings
Speaker 1: or whatever it was was countless hours. I watched a
Speaker 1: lot of it, but not all of it, so I
Speaker 1: couldn't know exactly what he said. But I knew that
Speaker 1: he wouldn't say that, because nobody that I know takes
Speaker 1: that position. People oppose birth control on on religious and
Speaker 1: ethical grounds, but they don't say that birth control is abortion.
Speaker 1: That's not true. I don't know anybody who says that
Speaker 1: that preventing conception is the same thing thing from terminating conception,
Speaker 1: which means terminating life. That would be illogical, that that
Speaker 1: doesn't actually make any sense. Um, And you would think
Speaker 1: that this would just be a tactic that the activists
Speaker 1: and the dishonest left would engage in as as a
Speaker 1: as a clear smear tactic. But you know, this is
Speaker 1: not on something that you would have to worry about
Speaker 1: beyond that, meaning that that it wouldn't get to the
Speaker 1: level of oh, well, some of the biggest voices in
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party would echo this just blatantly false claim
Speaker 1: that Kavanaugh said that birth control pills are abortion inducing drugs. Uh.
Speaker 1: This claim, by the way, has already been looked at
Speaker 1: by PolitiFact. They well, I know that these these are
Speaker 1: generally not organizations that you can just trust on this
Speaker 1: because they are they are political in their own ways.
Speaker 1: But just to keep in mind political PolitiFact referred to
Speaker 1: the claim that Kavanaugh says that it's abortion and Kamela
Speaker 1: hold On, I'll get there, that abortion inducing drugs and
Speaker 1: birth control the same as false. The Washington Post has
Speaker 1: come out and said four pinocchios. I mean, this is
Speaker 1: pants on fire level falsehood. And yet despite all that,
Speaker 1: you have Kamela Harris, who is still thought of I
Speaker 1: think as a pre eminent Democrat for the election, I
Speaker 1: still think people think of her as probably the most
Speaker 1: the most likely presidential Canada, just by default right now.
Speaker 1: And Kamala Harris tweeted out in eleven second clip in
Speaker 1: which Kavanaugh said filling out the form would make them
Speaker 1: complicit in the provision of abortion inducing drugs, that they
Speaker 1: were as a religious matter, objected, objected to um and
Speaker 1: then Kavanaugh. Uh, Kavanaugh chooses his words very carefully, and
Speaker 1: this is a dog whistle for going after birth control.
Speaker 1: Harris tweeted. He was nominated for the purpose of taking
Speaker 1: away at women's constitutionally protected right to make her own
Speaker 1: health care decisions. Make no mistake, this is about punishing women.
Speaker 1: I mean, just just scare mongering and idiocy from Harris.
Speaker 1: But she's not alone. If there's a giant false so
Speaker 1: to be pedaled, if there's a huge lie to be
Speaker 1: foisted upon people, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton can be counted on,
Speaker 1: she writes on her Twitter account today, I want to
Speaker 1: be sure we're all clear about something that Brett Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: said in his confirmation hearings last week. He referred to
Speaker 1: birth control pills as abortion inducing drugs that set off
Speaker 1: a lot of alarm bells for me, and it should
Speaker 1: for you too, folks. Not only did he not refer
Speaker 1: to birth control pills as abortion inducing drugs, he was
Speaker 1: referring to the position of a plaintiff in a case.
Speaker 1: So he was saying, this is what their position was,
Speaker 1: and then said it. This would be like saying that,
Speaker 1: you know, you get me to say something, you know,
Speaker 1: I I I say the words you know, I'm I'm
Speaker 1: not a Republican, And I say, you know, I'm not
Speaker 1: a Republican. Who would say that about me? Guys, that's crazy.
Speaker 1: But then they just take out well Buck said he's
Speaker 1: not a Republican. Well, yeah, I was making a joke
Speaker 1: where I was referring to the fact that anybody says
Speaker 1: that about me doesn't know anything about me. Well, well
Speaker 1: you said it, Buck Sexton's as not a Republican. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is the height of dishonesty. This isn't a little lie,
Speaker 1: This isn't a little exaggeration. Is a giant lie. Hillary Clinton,
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris, they are liars, according to the Washington Post,
Speaker 1: according to politic Fact, according to friendly media outlets that
Speaker 1: just know you can't justify this a lie and are
Speaker 1: a really important issue on a Supreme Court justice is
Speaker 1: honor and integrity and should or would be Supreme Court
Speaker 1: justice should he be elevated to the bench. And these
Speaker 1: are people that want to lecturists, you know, Harris and
Speaker 1: Clinton about Trump's lies and about how we need to
Speaker 1: bring back honesty and decency and integrity and our politics
Speaker 1: and blah blah all that crap. But they're liars. Do
Speaker 1: you think Jake Tapper is gonna bring them on to
Speaker 1: see an end show and say, Hey, are you a liar?
Speaker 1: Because this is a lie? I don't think so guarantee
Speaker 1: you he won't. Guarantee you he won't. How do I
Speaker 1: know that? Because I know the politics and I know
Speaker 1: who the frauds are. Do you think that matt Ow
Speaker 1: and the MSNB SEC we're gonna have them on and
Speaker 1: challenge him on this. Nope, because this lie is useful
Speaker 1: to the left and therefore they're okay with it. I
Speaker 1: will go and take Trump out tonight. I have thought
Speaker 1: an awful lot about blowing up the White House. Of course,
Speaker 1: I want to punch him in a place, in a restaurant,
Speaker 1: in a department store, at the gasol station and back
Speaker 1: a limb and you tell them that gun please get
Speaker 1: up in the face of some congress people. I just
Speaker 1: don't even know why there aren't uprisings of all of
Speaker 1: the country. Maybe there will be. I've come around the
Speaker 1: table and he's coming at me. So I grabbed him,
Speaker 1: threw him on the ground. His shirt got ripped, his
Speaker 1: beer mug busted. I got off of him, and that's
Speaker 1: when he jumped out and pulled the knife out and
Speaker 1: said he's gonna kill me. You know, folks, we get
Speaker 1: a lot of lectures from the left about how they're
Speaker 1: violent rhetoric or the violent rhetoric rather of Donald Trump
Speaker 1: and the things that he says and and just the
Speaker 1: way that he talks is going to create violence, and
Speaker 1: that it's going to be on our heads. And you know,
Speaker 1: we should be so concerned about this. We're always being
Speaker 1: told this right that the left is constantly uh pounding
Speaker 1: this theme of violence uh is the fault of Republicans
Speaker 1: because of because of the Donald Trump presidency, that's gonna
Speaker 1: be violence in the streets. Meanwhile, whenever there's actual violence
Speaker 1: to speak of, it seems much more likely than not
Speaker 1: that if it's ideologically motivated and has to do with
Speaker 1: American politics. It comes from the left. The single most
Speaker 1: horrific incident of politically inspired violence in this country in
Speaker 1: recent memory involved a Bernie Sanders supporter in Alexandria, Virginia
Speaker 1: showing up to a baseball diamond where there was a
Speaker 1: Congressional baseball team practice going on, and who tried to
Speaker 1: kill a number of members of the Freedom Caucuse. I mean,
Speaker 1: he went after the most conservative members of Congress is
Speaker 1: and tried to engage in a mass assassination. And he
Speaker 1: was a Bernie Sander supporter. He was a Democrat, all right.
Speaker 1: And that story just has you never hear it referenced
Speaker 1: by the media. It's fallen off the fallen off the
Speaker 1: radar entirely. You know, if it had been a guy
Speaker 1: in a maga hat uh and you know, wearing camo
Speaker 1: head to toe and us you know, a Second Amendment
Speaker 1: supporter and he had showed up there and tried to
Speaker 1: kill a bunch of Democrat members of Congress, we'd hear
Speaker 1: about this every week. I mean that there would be
Speaker 1: memorials sprouting up all over the country. You know, there
Speaker 1: there'd be all kinds of stuff, and this is what
Speaker 1: This is what we see with the media bias and
Speaker 1: the way that it affects the conversation that's going on
Speaker 1: all the time. But you know, we have another another
Speaker 1: incident here where a guy named Farsan Fazel or Fazeli
Speaker 1: is accused of trying to attack a Republican congressional candidate
Speaker 1: named Rudy Peters. You just heard from there with with
Speaker 1: a sound bite with a switchblade all right there there,
Speaker 1: This this guy went after a Republican congressional candidate at
Speaker 1: a festival in Castro Valley, UM and the man approach
Speaker 1: Rudy Peters, according to the l A Times here at
Speaker 1: his booth, made disparaging remarks and then you know, he
Speaker 1: pulled out a switchblade and tried to stab Peters, but
Speaker 1: the knife malfunction and a struggle ensued. Folks, this guy
Speaker 1: basically tried to kill a Republican congressional candidate, try to
Speaker 1: stab him the death in in you know, broad daylight
Speaker 1: and view of other people. How many of you have
Speaker 1: even seen this story? How many of you have heard
Speaker 1: this story on the news. I'm guessing very few of you.
Speaker 1: And you know, this is the game that they always
Speaker 1: planning a lot. I'm not saying it gets no coverage.
Speaker 1: I'm saying it gets low coverage, meaning that this is
Speaker 1: not viewed as indicative of anything. This is not viewed
Speaker 1: as a as a case that we all need to
Speaker 1: focus on because it tells us, you know, more about
Speaker 1: the re reality of contemporary American politics or something, right
Speaker 1: that this is just, oh, you know, just some crazy guy,
Speaker 1: some crazy guy that tried to stabber up a GOP
Speaker 1: Congretil Kennedy death with a knife. We all know this
Speaker 1: guy is a liberal, try to stab him, right, we
Speaker 1: all know that this is yet another case of somebody
Speaker 1: with with the Trumps arrangement syndrome. Who at least that's
Speaker 1: based on the reporting. I've seen what we know. I
Speaker 1: haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise. I don't think you
Speaker 1: knew this guy, you know, he says, and producer Mike,
Speaker 1: what's this other story about a a professor who because
Speaker 1: of Trump? To tell me the backstory? And this one
Speaker 1: because you brought this one to my attention, Yeah, it
Speaker 1: says a long time at College of Southern Nevada socialogy professor,
Speaker 1: professor Um shot himself in the arm in protest of
Speaker 1: President Trump. And now he's facing a felony gun charges.
Speaker 1: He did it, Yeah, he did it on campus. Uh
Speaker 1: then the second day of classes. So as kind of
Speaker 1: the way you know that there were there were monks
Speaker 1: during Vietnam we did self immolation to protest. You know,
Speaker 1: this guy is lighting him I mean this guy, he
Speaker 1: should not lighting himself fire. This guy is shooting himself
Speaker 1: in the arm with a shotgun to protest Trump. He's
Speaker 1: a college president who did this, and now he's now
Speaker 1: he's facing prison time for a felony gun charge. Mike,
Speaker 1: if we were trying to find a way to describe
Speaker 1: the symptoms of clinical Trump arrangement syndrome, could we do
Speaker 1: a better job than this self harm? Yeah, as a
Speaker 1: form of of Trump opposition, as a form of criticism
Speaker 1: of Trump. I think this is about as clear as
Speaker 1: it gets. It's amazing. And and and there's been like
Speaker 1: three or four stories in the last twenty four to
Speaker 1: four eight hours of there's another story. Do you hear
Speaker 1: about d C. McAlister? No? Uh, she put out a
Speaker 1: tweet the other day about her um views on abortion,
Speaker 1: and she was threatened with rape and strangling and now
Speaker 1: she had to go into hiding. That's an example. Another
Speaker 1: example is I think I saw this in either Daily
Speaker 1: Mail or Dai wire of a demp sessialist who who
Speaker 1: threatened a mass shooting at a MAGA event. You know,
Speaker 1: I just feel like MIKEA, this will happening. On the
Speaker 1: other side, we'd be here, We'd be hearing a lot
Speaker 1: more about it. You know, I can tell you this much.
Speaker 1: Imagine the outcry if a Democrat congressional candidate had had
Speaker 1: somebody pull out a knife and try to stab them,
Speaker 1: and it was clear that it was a Trump supporter.
Speaker 1: We would not only would we be hearing of that everywhere,
Speaker 1: you would have every White House reporter asking the White
Speaker 1: House do you think that do you think that you're
Speaker 1: the President Trump's rhetoric? You know, Sarah Sanders, you think
Speaker 1: President Trump's rhetoric is the reason for this? You know,
Speaker 1: do you do you denounce violence? I mean, they would
Speaker 1: try to tie it to the administration right away. You're
Speaker 1: seeing none of that with the crazy left wing opposition.
Speaker 1: And that's why we played some of those sound bites
Speaker 1: coming in of people saying crazy violent stuff about this administration.
Speaker 1: And they still think that that we're the bad guys.
Speaker 1: You know, they think we're the ones destroying democracy and
Speaker 1: we're the ones who are are promoting violence over politics. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: if you look at the data and what's really happening,
Speaker 1: it's the deranged left that's that's they're they're the dangerous ones.
Speaker 1: I mean that, I think this that's gonna be anny
Speaker 1: more clear and shoot yourself in the arm to protest Trump.
Speaker 1: Can I reach you that? The tweet real quick from
Speaker 1: the anonymous Twitter account about this at this MAGA event. Yeah,
Speaker 1: of course from the Democrats socialist a far left flickle group. Um,
Speaker 1: it says I am coming with a gun and I
Speaker 1: expect to get numerous blood stained MAGA hats as trophies.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, Yes, what a maniac. They have this
Speaker 1: s guy in custody. Ality, well, I don't the police, says.
Speaker 1: Police responded to the Trump International Hotel where the event
Speaker 1: was taking place. Um, I didn't see if they had
Speaker 1: anybody in custody yet. All right. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: Twitter is really bad, by the way about sharing information
Speaker 1: about people that are that are violent threats and stuff. Twitter.
Speaker 1: Twitter gets very cage. You know, they'll ban you for
Speaker 1: having like too ardent a pro life stance, but they
Speaker 1: you know, if you're threatening to kill somebody and like
Speaker 1: rape their whole family, Twitter to you know, if you're
Speaker 1: a conservative, Twitter doesn't really take take action. I think
Speaker 1: Twitter should have a here here's something. I think Twitter
Speaker 1: should have a policy where if you are are really
Speaker 1: threatening violence against somebody and you know, and you get
Speaker 1: you get warned, you don't stop, they should just out
Speaker 1: the person. They should say this is their IP address.
Speaker 1: That would shut it down. Real fat Twitter can do that.
Speaker 1: They're a private company. They they're under no obligation to
Speaker 1: protect the nabor. I think the same the true for
Speaker 1: all these social media companies. They're under no obligation to
Speaker 1: protect the anonymity of somebody that's clearly a menace. You know,
Speaker 1: people who are stalkers, harassers, threatening violence. You know that
Speaker 1: the terrible stuff that you see by the way they tend,
Speaker 1: and a lot of it comes from lat not all. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: I've had some friends who are you know, who are
Speaker 1: never trumpers, who have also been the targets of some
Speaker 1: really horrific stuff, which is which is a shame it
Speaker 1: should never happen. But I think social media companies are
Speaker 1: just out people that are that are a menace. On
Speaker 1: social media. You know, if you're if you're gonna if
Speaker 1: you're not gonna put your name to it, but you
Speaker 1: think you're gonna use these things as a weapon to
Speaker 1: go after people. I think they should put a stop
Speaker 1: to that. Uh, team, we got much more. Stay with me.
Speaker 1: Do you have opinions that you feel like you can express?
Speaker 1: I think we all do. Are you looking for a
Speaker 1: place to stir up some conversations, let your thoughts and
Speaker 1: your opinions be heard. I want to introduce you to
Speaker 1: an alternative social media site, snippy dot com. Snippy is
Speaker 1: an unbiased social media platform. It's all about conversation and community.
Speaker 1: Snippy not only encourages freedom of expression, but guarantees its
Speaker 1: users the ability to discuss topics freely without any suppression
Speaker 1: from administrators. Check in for a quick update about current events,
Speaker 1: or spend hours scrolling through users posts, Write your thoughts
Speaker 1: and strike up conversation. Snippy's founders have intentionally created a
Speaker 1: forum where anyone can feel free to express their thoughts, frustrations, ideas, anything. Really,
Speaker 1: it's a place where discussion is valued, a place where
Speaker 1: your opinion matters, and it's totally free. Go to snippy
Speaker 1: dot com now to express yourself. No shadow banning, no
Speaker 1: character limit, no suppression of conservative thought ever. Check out
Speaker 1: the website at snippy dot com or download the app.
Speaker 1: No censorship, no agenda. Joined snippy dot com. Do you
Speaker 1: get the discussion rolling Norm McDonald? You guys remember him,
Speaker 1: the comedian. I'll be honestly, I never thought he was
Speaker 1: all that funny. Some people love him. I know people
Speaker 1: that think that Norm McDonald is a genius. I was
Speaker 1: never much of a fan. But he is not even really,
Speaker 1: I don't. I don't think people say he's a conservative.
Speaker 1: He is just irreverent. He's a comedian. Oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: he's a comedian. He doesn't play to what all the
Speaker 1: expectations are of political correctness. Uh. Norm McDonald's gotten into
Speaker 1: some trouble folks, and the Tonight Show has canceled him
Speaker 1: in response to to his comments. Let me let me
Speaker 1: bring you into this story. Another moment of me to backlash.
Speaker 1: Not that Norm McDonald did any to any lady you. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: he's not. It's just his comments about me too got
Speaker 1: him into trouble, right, So he's kind of me too,
Speaker 1: collateral damage or you know, he's me too secondary damage here.
Speaker 1: He didn't do anything to any woman. Um. He said,
Speaker 1: he supports me too. But then he went on to say,
Speaker 1: according to the Hollywood Reporter, first of all, he said,
Speaker 1: I'm completely behind them me too movement. Um. But he
Speaker 1: had said that comments earlier on about uh, Roseanne Bar
Speaker 1: and Louis c K. That's what got him in trouble.
Speaker 1: He said, essentially, you know, Roseanne Barr was crying constantly
Speaker 1: after what happened to her, and her life was ruined.
Speaker 1: And Louis c K, you know, he was shunned from
Speaker 1: the public square, and you know he was ruined. And
Speaker 1: he said something like quote, the victims didn't have to
Speaker 1: go through that now in the in the Roseanne bar situation,
Speaker 1: I mean, the victor dooms are just people that have
Speaker 1: heard a racist comment. I have to say, I don't
Speaker 1: know if Roseanne is in fact so out of it
Speaker 1: that she would have said what she said, not realizing
Speaker 1: that Valerie Jarrett was African American. That was later on
Speaker 1: her her um not excuse, but her at least mitigation,
Speaker 1: She said she wasn't that she wasn't making a racist
Speaker 1: slur about Valerie Jarrett because she didn't know Valeri Jarret
Speaker 1: was African American. Is Roseanne bar obtuse enough to really
Speaker 1: for that to be true? I mean maybe, But nonetheless
Speaker 1: it was something that was a very it was a
Speaker 1: very very stupid thing to say. Um, but Norm McDonald
Speaker 1: essentially said, look, I'm all about me too, but people
Speaker 1: need to understand the uh, the reality here of what
Speaker 1: happens to people who get caught in some of this.
Speaker 1: And Roseanne is not a me too thing, by the way,
Speaker 1: I don't know what she's kind of getting. It's really
Speaker 1: just political correctness. I mean, me too shouldn't be used
Speaker 1: as a as a cudgel beyond the realm of men
Speaker 1: who are sexually harassing women, right, me too shouldn't just
Speaker 1: be anything. But it's it's going it is becoming that,
Speaker 1: you know, now, any political correctness, any marginalized group that
Speaker 1: feels like they've you know, they've been in some ways
Speaker 1: undermined or you know, treated poorly by public comments, they
Speaker 1: claim that the me too mental as well, because this
Speaker 1: is for brand purposes, for advertisers and sponsors. All this
Speaker 1: me too stuff is very powerful. But so Norm McDonald says, hey,
Speaker 1: you know, Lucy kay and Roseanne, you know, just you know,
Speaker 1: they didn't kill anybody, and their lives were ruined over
Speaker 1: this stuff. Uh. And Norm McDonald got the hammer dropped
Speaker 1: on him as a result of this. He got pushed
Speaker 1: out of his very publicly from his Tonight Show appearance.
Speaker 1: And he's got a new series coming out on Netflix.
Speaker 1: So he was trying to um, you know, he he
Speaker 1: was trying to promote that. That's why I was going
Speaker 1: to go on it. And you know, this is just
Speaker 1: another example, your folks, of how you've got to be
Speaker 1: so careful. Here's a comedian who's trying to have a
Speaker 1: somewhat nuanced conversation about, you know, the impact of this
Speaker 1: movement and what it means and and really what it
Speaker 1: just means is we're in a period of heightened of
Speaker 1: heightened sensitivity to something which we all know will be
Speaker 1: exploited by some people in some ways. One of the
Speaker 1: most interesting, one of the most reviewing exchanges I had
Speaker 1: with Alissa Milano, who is kind of the me Too
Speaker 1: movement founder or as a founder, considered a founder of
Speaker 1: the me too movement, even though she's never shared her
Speaker 1: own story about her her me too uh you know backstory, Well,
Speaker 1: she brought up a Z's on Sorry. Some of you
Speaker 1: know as he's on Sorry from the show Parks and Wreck. Right.
Speaker 1: He's a funny guy. He's a you know, American but
Speaker 1: of Indian parentage. And you know, he had some young
Speaker 1: woman who's a photographer who you know clearly had some
Speaker 1: kind of celebrity crush on him based on the story
Speaker 1: that I read, and they went out on a date,
Speaker 1: and you know, they just jumped right into, right into
Speaker 1: a highly sexualized encounter. And she essentially wrote a you
Speaker 1: he's icky and I don't like him, and he was
Speaker 1: being kind of gross. Uh tell all about this what
Speaker 1: was essentially a one night stand. And people were saying, well,
Speaker 1: that's me too. And I was sitting here and I'm saying, well, no,
Speaker 1: it's not you know, maybe he's kind of being a
Speaker 1: creepy guy, but it wasn't me too. He didn't force her,
Speaker 1: he didn't abuse her, he didn't use his position of power.
Speaker 1: But a LISTA and A Lissa Milano's view apparently, oh no,
Speaker 1: because he's a celebrity and leverage that to gain greater
Speaker 1: you know, sexual access by her with her consent. But
Speaker 1: to this this young woman, you know, that's kind of
Speaker 1: meat I don't know whoa that's I don't think of
Speaker 1: that as me to it all. So there are these
Speaker 1: these areas of it where it crosses into hold on
Speaker 1: a second, is that that's now covered? You know, is
Speaker 1: an unwanted attempt at at kissing a woman, uh in
Speaker 1: the workplace or not in the workplace. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: assuming she doesn't work for you, she's not your employee.
Speaker 1: But you know, if you have a colleague, that's a
Speaker 1: me tooth thing. Now. I mean you start to wonder
Speaker 1: where are some of these lines? Uh? And I think
Speaker 1: we do draw them in very different places. But Norm
Speaker 1: McDonald was trying to have that conversation and he got
Speaker 1: into all He got in all kinds of trouble because
Speaker 1: of it, because people don't they don't want to hear it.
Speaker 1: They don't want to hear that there's any any concern here.
Speaker 1: They don't want to hear about um. How you know,
Speaker 1: maybe there's some people that are going to abuse this
Speaker 1: for their own purposes. You better stay, you better just
Speaker 1: uh better be somebody who tows the line on this,
Speaker 1: or else you're gonna be in a world of trouble. Um.
Speaker 1: And I'm trying to find there was one quote He's
Speaker 1: essentially repeating what I've said many times before to all
Speaker 1: of you, and I'm trying. It's I'm losing darn Itt buck.
Speaker 1: Oh here it is, here, it is. I found it. Um.
Speaker 1: He said that, Uh, the the model used to be
Speaker 1: here we go. The model used to be admit wrongdoing,
Speaker 1: show complete contrition, and then we give you a second chance.
Speaker 1: Now it's admit wrongdoing and you're finished. And so the
Speaker 1: only way to survive is to deny, deny, deny. That's
Speaker 1: not healthy, that there is no forgiveness. And I do
Speaker 1: think at some point that it adds to our uh
Speaker 1: tribal ism um or this contributes to why every and
Speaker 1: so tribalistic. Absolutely true from Norm McDonald, the verious dute observation.
Speaker 1: This is the real change, folks. This is what's so
Speaker 1: different now is that you have a situation where you know,
Speaker 1: any time you get caught up, now, any time you
Speaker 1: have transgressed, he if you admit it, there's no upside.
Speaker 1: You're just going to be chased out of the public square.
Speaker 1: You're gonna be told that your your career is over.
Speaker 1: You are no longer entitled to any kind of uh
Speaker 1: second chance or opportunity to rebuild your career. Oh no,
Speaker 1: what's gonna happen is they're going to use your confession.
Speaker 1: It's like it's like an inquisition, right, They're gonna use
Speaker 1: your confession against you. And that is new. That is no.
Speaker 1: I remember, I'm trying to think of some examples where
Speaker 1: you you know, I remember Alec Baldwin back in the
Speaker 1: day saying, uh, kind of an anti gay slur. And
Speaker 1: I remember the Jonah Hill, the kind of pudgy comedy
Speaker 1: actor guy. He he did the same. And you see
Speaker 1: people and they'd make this apology tour and they kind
Speaker 1: of go around on all the shows they go on,
Speaker 1: you know, the daytime talk shows, they go on Ellen
Speaker 1: and go on Oprah, they go and you know, oh,
Speaker 1: I'm so sorry and that's not who I am. And
Speaker 1: they kind of lay low for a few weeks and
Speaker 1: then everybody would let it go. And I feel thought
Speaker 1: that that that process of just the public humiliation, uh,
Speaker 1: that jets you have to go through as part of
Speaker 1: the penance for a politically correct trans transgression. Right, I'm
Speaker 1: talking to people that have actually assaulted people, are in
Speaker 1: done criminal stuff. I mean, you just say the wrong thing,
Speaker 1: and you gotta go out there and do the whole
Speaker 1: apology to our situation. You know, I thought that was
Speaker 1: bad enough. Now it's worse than that, because you're supposed
Speaker 1: to do the apology tour and then at the and
Speaker 1: then you're you're you're still completely out. You know, you're
Speaker 1: you're no longer somebody that anybody can talk to or
Speaker 1: give jobs to, or trust or anything. So so Norm
Speaker 1: McDonald is is the latest to uh, to get caught
Speaker 1: up in this one. Sure enough. He's here's a comedian, folks,
Speaker 1: who's supposed to be pushing boundaries and and uh, he's
Speaker 1: supposed to be trying to not just make us laugh
Speaker 1: and make us think about things. I mean, comedy is
Speaker 1: a very powerful for satire. He's in incredibly potent way
Speaker 1: of of dealing with political issues, dealing with social issues,
Speaker 1: and a really really necessary one, you know. I mean,
Speaker 1: I think to really be in a free society, you
Speaker 1: have to be able to make fun of things that
Speaker 1: are considered sacred. I do think that's a pretty fundamental
Speaker 1: freedom and and for and he wasn't even trying to
Speaker 1: make fun of anything. He was just trying to talk
Speaker 1: about the culture here here's a comedian talking about the
Speaker 1: culture of intolerance for people saying anything intolerant, and he
Speaker 1: gets nailed for saying something intolerant. I mean, you can't
Speaker 1: make this stuff up. He's just you know, he's just
Speaker 1: trying to, uh, trying to add to the discourse in
Speaker 1: his own way, and he ends up paying paying the
Speaker 1: penalty for it. And I just think it's a shame.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, this is why, this is why
Speaker 1: comedians these days, by the way, aren't funny. You can't
Speaker 1: be funny. You gotta be Kathy Griffin. You've got to
Speaker 1: do this terrible thing. She this terrible stunt. She polled by,
Speaker 1: you know, having the the Trump's evered head and then
Speaker 1: cashing in on that and going around and giving a
Speaker 1: tour all over the world where she's just not funny.
Speaker 1: She's like a neurotic, annoying, stupid, crazy person who says
Speaker 1: things about politics that are kind of in joke form,
Speaker 1: but they're not funny. It's not clever, it's not amusing.
Speaker 1: And you see this with so many communities and why
Speaker 1: I'm saying the left is killed comedy. The left has
Speaker 1: made comedy, uh at least an endangered species if not extinct,
Speaker 1: because if you are always gonna be under threat of
Speaker 1: having your career ended, if you if you say anything
Speaker 1: that that offends certain groups, you know, you're you're you're
Speaker 1: never gonna be able to push any boundaries and do
Speaker 1: things that are unexpected and that really make people think.
Speaker 1: So it's just it's just a shame, it really is.
Speaker 1: By the way, the I see this other guy, another
Speaker 1: guy got caught up in the me too. Uh producer
Speaker 1: Mike what's his name? The sixty minutes guy? Do you
Speaker 1: know talking about all right, a senior a senior executive
Speaker 1: at at sixty minutes, the hallowed News, Uh, you know
Speaker 1: journalism show. Well, we'll talk about this in just a moment.
Speaker 1: But but he's out now, folks, I was talking to
Speaker 1: you about somebody who got caught up in a in
Speaker 1: a me too discussion moment, right, didn't actually do to
Speaker 1: me too, but you had Norm McDonald. I was being
Speaker 1: a little hard on before he's done some funny stuff.
Speaker 1: I guess I've never seen his stand up, to be fair,
Speaker 1: I just have seen him on on SNL. And but
Speaker 1: but Norm McDonald talking about Roseanne and uh and Louis
Speaker 1: c K. You know, he got himself into trouble. But
Speaker 1: that doesn't you know, that that shouldn't take away with
Speaker 1: the fact that this whole, this period of of outing
Speaker 1: these really gross, predatory uh media executives, has been very clarifying.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think there's a lot of a lot
Speaker 1: of good that's come from all this, you know. I
Speaker 1: think it's a very good thing that people know the
Speaker 1: truth about Charlie Rose, people know the truth about um,
Speaker 1: you know, go go down, go down. The list of
Speaker 1: all these different People'm actually forgetting the name of the
Speaker 1: guy who's the super overpaid more you know, UH Today's
Speaker 1: show guy, Uh, Matt Lower, you know, Matt Lower and
Speaker 1: and Charlie Rose and and certainly some of them cross
Speaker 1: over into the truly criminal area with people like Harvey Weinstein.
Speaker 1: But another one is out at at sixty minutes CBS
Speaker 1: sixty minutes. His name is Jeff Fager, and this I
Speaker 1: just thought this was pretty fascinating. So there were all
Speaker 1: these allegations printed about Fager, and again he's a very
Speaker 1: powerful news executive, and the news business folks is so
Speaker 1: ripe for this kind of abuse. I see it all
Speaker 1: the time. You have old, generally unattractive socially awkward men
Speaker 1: in positions of executive authority. Alright, a lot of that
Speaker 1: going on, and you have an influx of lots and
Speaker 1: lots of very attractive women, because in this business that
Speaker 1: is a major advantage, right, I know, I don't know
Speaker 1: if it feels weird to even say that, Oh, to
Speaker 1: be pretty and to be on TV, it's it's an advantage,
Speaker 1: but it's true. And and a lot of these guys
Speaker 1: try to leverage their positions into you know, into ah entree.
Speaker 1: It's a very euphemistic way of saying it, with these women, right,
Speaker 1: of getting access to these women, you know, sexually in
Speaker 1: one way or another. Uh. And this guy Fager, what
Speaker 1: was the subject of one of these one of these
Speaker 1: profiles in the I think it was in the New Yorker, right, Um,
Speaker 1: And the part of this guy was the executive producer, Wow,
Speaker 1: executive producer of sixty minutes. Um. That's a that's a
Speaker 1: that's a pretty big job. So he's out now. And
Speaker 1: and this is what he said, though this is his
Speaker 1: statement quote. The company's decision had nothing to do with
Speaker 1: the false allegations printed in the New Yorker. Instead, they
Speaker 1: terminated my contract early because I sent a text message
Speaker 1: to one of her own CBS reporters demanding that she
Speaker 1: be fair are in covering the story. My language was harsh,
Speaker 1: and despite the fact that journalists received harsh demands for
Speaker 1: fairness all the time, CBS did not like it. One
Speaker 1: such note should not result in termination after thirty six years,
Speaker 1: but it did. Wow, this guy was there for thirty
Speaker 1: six This guy's been at CBS as long as I've
Speaker 1: been alive. That is that is quite Ah. I can't
Speaker 1: imagine being thirty six years anywhere. I can't imagine being
Speaker 1: alive thirty six years. It still feels like forever to me.
Speaker 1: But here we are with this guy saying that essentially
Speaker 1: he sent a nasty text message and that was why
Speaker 1: he was fired. Folks, I just don't find this this
Speaker 1: credible at all. Uh. My guess is that this was
Speaker 1: the pretext that they you know, that that this text
Speaker 1: message was enough to not renew his contract and push
Speaker 1: him out now because that's easier for them than to
Speaker 1: have to go through the whole Oh you know, is
Speaker 1: is he guilty of these different accusations? And I see
Speaker 1: some journalists, uh, this one journalist from New York magazine wrote,
Speaker 1: quote a victory the women who have lived under Fager's
Speaker 1: tyranny for years. A truly horrible, nasty human being. That's yes,
Speaker 1: shar Ali at New York Magazine. Uh. You know these
Speaker 1: So you've got Jeff Fager, um, uh what's his what
Speaker 1: the guy from uh gosh, I'm Les Moonvez another one.
Speaker 1: I mean you start to wonder how many really powerful
Speaker 1: liberal By the way, folks Democrats, these are all fo
Speaker 1: B's and fo Hills, friends of friends of Bill and
Speaker 1: friends of Hill, Hillary Clinton, these are friends of Barack Obama.
Speaker 1: These are all big libs in the media. You need
Speaker 1: to remember that because they won't focus on it. Fager, uh,
Speaker 1: Moon Vez, Weinstein, Charlie Rose, Matt Lower Liberal, Liberal Liberal,
Speaker 1: all these guys are huge libs. Uh. And and you
Speaker 1: know they when when Fox was having its trouble with
Speaker 1: some of its own sexual misconduct that had gone on there,
Speaker 1: all these outlets just piled on and and now you're
Speaker 1: seeing that that that the very top of these places
Speaker 1: is just rotted with sexual harassers and predators. So it's
Speaker 1: interesting to see how this plays out, will continue play out.
Speaker 1: We've got big our three coming up. Team Stay with me.
Speaker 1: If you're running a business and you need to bring
Speaker 1: in some new hires, or if you own property and
Speaker 1: you want to lease it out to somebody that you
Speaker 1: can trust, who's got a good history of paying on time,
Speaker 1: no lawsuits, no problems. You need Global Verification Network. Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network is the only dual certified veteran owned background
Speaker 1: investigation and vetting company. They are headquartered in Chicago, and
Speaker 1: their risk mitigation experts are simply the best in the business.
Speaker 1: Whatever size company that you are talking about here, folks,
Speaker 1: whether you're a startup or a fortune one company, reach
Speaker 1: out to Global Verification and talk to them about being
Speaker 1: your background investigation company, because they will make sure that
Speaker 1: you get all the individual tension you need. They'll make
Speaker 1: sure that your cases are process quickly and accurately, and
Speaker 1: if there's any questions, will address them right away. Go
Speaker 1: to my g VN dot com. That's my g VN
Speaker 1: dot com or call eight seven seven six nine five
Speaker 1: one one seven nine. That's eight seven seven six nine
Speaker 1: five one one seven nine. Buck Sexton Mission Decoding the
Speaker 1: news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American.
Speaker 1: You're a great American again, this is the Buck Sexton show.
Speaker 1: CIA analysts. No, so many leaks, so little time. Team.
Speaker 1: We know that the deep statards over d o J
Speaker 1: and FBI have been busy for a long time trying
Speaker 1: to stack the deck in their favor in terms of
Speaker 1: public opinion when it comes to Russia collusion stuff, when
Speaker 1: it comes to the fises on Carter Page. We've got
Speaker 1: somebody now who's doing the work of actually getting to
Speaker 1: the ruth on all this stuff. We have Lee Smith
Speaker 1: with us now. He is a an investigative reporter for
Speaker 1: Real Clear investigations. He's got a really strong piece up
Speaker 1: called Decoding the Drips of Leak upon Anti Trump Leak.
Speaker 1: It is on Real Clear Politics right now. Lead. Great
Speaker 1: to have you back. Thanks very much for having me, Buck.
Speaker 1: It's always trific to do with you. All right, So
Speaker 1: let's talk about this, my friend. We we got we
Speaker 1: got leaks coming out the text messages earlier in this
Speaker 1: week between Struck and Page talk about a leak strategy.
Speaker 1: I got people saying, oh no, it's a leak strategy
Speaker 1: for how to deal with the bad, naughty media leaks.
Speaker 1: I'm like, well, I was in the CIA. We we
Speaker 1: had a pretty well understood league strategy, which is don't leak.
Speaker 1: So that's my first reaction, But you've actually dug into
Speaker 1: the details here. What do we need to know about
Speaker 1: what these FBI, d o J folks were doing, how
Speaker 1: they were leaking, who they were leaking to. Yeah, the
Speaker 1: way that I'm the way that I'm trying to describe
Speaker 1: it now, that's kind of sort of like a you
Speaker 1: can best understand it in terms of a football game
Speaker 1: now the new football season opening up. Maybe that's the
Speaker 1: best way to understand it. I think that after UM,
Speaker 1: after Trump won the White House, what we see is
Speaker 1: a very active campaign of leaks, an attacking campaign of leaks,
Speaker 1: UM prosecuting a campaign against Trump that are trying to
Speaker 1: hurt different Trump team officials. They knock Flynn out, the
Speaker 1: sideline sessions, they damage other people. The larger strategic gain
Speaker 1: is that they have the the Trump team in chaos
Speaker 1: trying to establish their agenda. They can't because they're always
Speaker 1: They're playing defense the entire time, defending against these accusations
Speaker 1: of Russia collusion and all this nonsense. At a certain point,
Speaker 1: about a year into the administration, UM House oversight committees
Speaker 1: start pushing back and that way the team Collusion is
Speaker 1: put on the defensive. So what we're seeing now also,
Speaker 1: you know a lot of a lot of Obama holdovers
Speaker 1: and never Trump Republicans leave start to leave the administration.
Speaker 1: Remember all the different people who've left FBI and d
Speaker 1: o J. So there are actually less people, less people
Speaker 1: who have access to classify intelligence to leak. And also
Speaker 1: again the House Oversight committees are now pushing back. They're
Speaker 1: seeing the bad things that the FBI and d o
Speaker 1: J and other figures did to damage and dirty the
Speaker 1: Trump campaign. So that's how I see the momentum changing.
Speaker 1: And the really the really big moment is when the
Speaker 1: House Oversight House Oversight Committees discover that it was their
Speaker 1: pressure they pressured um, they pressured Fusion into releasing the
Speaker 1: fact that or leaking the fact that they had been
Speaker 1: funded by the Clinton campaign and d n C. And
Speaker 1: that's in October two seventeen. So that's a key turning
Speaker 1: point right there. Now out they're saying, of course that
Speaker 1: that everything was by the book. I mean, I'm kind
Speaker 1: of amazingly that this that this this approach continues from
Speaker 1: from people that are supportive as we know, this is
Speaker 1: all about getting Trump right. I mean, the people that
Speaker 1: are generally very anti law enforcement, all of a sudden
Speaker 1: are running around and acting like, you know, the FBI
Speaker 1: can do no wrong and the d o the d
Speaker 1: o J, which you know under Republican administration is all
Speaker 1: about the patriarchy, the power structure and discrimination. Now the
Speaker 1: d o J is blameless that the d o J
Speaker 1: is beyond reproach. We know it's all about politics, But
Speaker 1: you know, what's it gonna take before they no longer
Speaker 1: are able to play this game of yeah you know everything.
Speaker 1: I mean, Struck got fired. We have text messages between
Speaker 1: between him and Page saying one they're gonna stop Trump
Speaker 1: to uh from this week, saying that they need a
Speaker 1: leak strategy. You know, is do you see a smoking
Speaker 1: gun that is kind of out there? You just haven't
Speaker 1: gotten it yet. I mean, is what's it going to
Speaker 1: take this? I mean, I think that one of the
Speaker 1: things we're looking at right now. I mentioned my article
Speaker 1: a couple of these recent pieces in the New York
Speaker 1: Times about FBI and CIA operations against against Russia. Both
Speaker 1: pieces I find pretty implausible. But the important thing about
Speaker 1: these I think these stories were crafted partly using classified
Speaker 1: intelligence also depending an awful lot on fiction, uh, a
Speaker 1: creative imagination. Um. And the purpose of these is to
Speaker 1: push back to try to deter Trump from de classifying
Speaker 1: the documents that congressional Republicans are asking for right now,
Speaker 1: and should Trump the classify those documents, as I believe,
Speaker 1: we all hope he did. We all hope that he
Speaker 1: does for the I'm hearing as soon as next week
Speaker 1: for my people, by the way, So yeah, that that
Speaker 1: would be that that, Thank goodness. I hope it does
Speaker 1: happen then. Um, But that's what I think they're trying
Speaker 1: to do. I think they're trying to push back on that,
Speaker 1: and they're trying to shave a more positive environment, um
Speaker 1: with these different leagues and these different stories coming out now.
Speaker 1: So we if that does happen next week, but that
Speaker 1: would be fantastic. I think then we're We've gone a
Speaker 1: long way towards clarifying a lot of the bad stuff
Speaker 1: that's gone on the last two years here. Now. I
Speaker 1: gotta say, there have been leaks that we know of
Speaker 1: in the press that almost certainly come from classified information.
Speaker 1: Right you had the leak about General Flynn's phone call.
Speaker 1: You know, nobody could that that's gonna be classified. I mean,
Speaker 1: and he got in trouble for it. So we know
Speaker 1: that was classified. Somebody leaked at and and Flynn got
Speaker 1: jammed up as a result of it. We have not
Speaker 1: seen and I think it's so interesting. Under the Obama administration,
Speaker 1: classified leaks were I would say over zealously prosecuted. I
Speaker 1: mean they they were. They were doing everything. They were
Speaker 1: pulling phone records of journalists, they were threatening to put
Speaker 1: journalists under oath throughout sources. In fact, they they did
Speaker 1: do well, they took that right to the edge and
Speaker 1: then they've done it out of prison anyway. Uh. But
Speaker 1: all that was going on. Meanwhile, Lee, we have nobody
Speaker 1: getting sent to prison that I know of right now
Speaker 1: for a classified leak, with the exception of one senates
Speaker 1: uh Senate to Select Committee on Intelligence staffer who's been charged.
Speaker 1: But that's it. Well, but they haven't even charged him
Speaker 1: for leaking classified intelligence though it appears he did. They
Speaker 1: have him for lying to the FBI. So while Attorney
Speaker 1: General's Session says that they're twenty seven open leak investigations,
Speaker 1: including what I've heard people call the Granddaddy of the
Speaker 1: mall is as you said, the leak of the Flynn
Speaker 1: conversation with the Russian ambassador. Um, as far as I know,
Speaker 1: look A the d o J maybe investigating all of them,
Speaker 1: or um John Huber, the you know, the prosecutor and
Speaker 1: UTAH maybe investigating them. But I think that we'd like
Speaker 1: to see something happening about these And what we see
Speaker 1: here is these are it's not just leaking classified intelligence
Speaker 1: is a very serious thing. And you can describe better
Speaker 1: than certainly much better than I can, that this is
Speaker 1: a this is a crime, and we see these These
Speaker 1: are not whistleblowers, right, These are not people who are
Speaker 1: calling out bad things. These are people who are leaking
Speaker 1: to prosecute a political campaign against the elected president. That
Speaker 1: that that I think the combination of breaking the law
Speaker 1: and for what purpose to prosecute a campaign of political warfare,
Speaker 1: I think it's very bad and I entirely agree. I
Speaker 1: think we need to get to the bottom of this
Speaker 1: and the people who have been breaking the law need
Speaker 1: to be cast. Where are you heading next with your
Speaker 1: with your reporting? Nearly what what's the what I mean?
Speaker 1: I know you're investigative reporters who probably can't really tell
Speaker 1: us all that much but what are you still trying
Speaker 1: to get answers to? UM? I think that the UH.
Speaker 1: I think that what we're learning more and more about
Speaker 1: about the oars is especially is especially interesting. UM. I
Speaker 1: think that the more and more we know about that,
Speaker 1: I think we might be getting closer and closer to
Speaker 1: the the kernel of what actually what actually happened here,
Speaker 1: how this whole relationship went on between Fijian GPS, the press, UH,
Speaker 1: the FBI, and d o J. So I think that's
Speaker 1: a very important thing for for for all of us
Speaker 1: to be looking at and see how that. Do you
Speaker 1: have a working theory, by the way, as to what
Speaker 1: really how did this whole thing start? There's there's notion
Speaker 1: of Trump and Russia and and you know Trump associates
Speaker 1: that need to be surveiled because they've changed the story.
Speaker 1: I know they said they haven't they have they you know,
Speaker 1: it was Carter Page and it was Papadopolis and now
Speaker 1: it was before both of them, and then it was
Speaker 1: after both them, and who knows what what's your working
Speaker 1: theory is to how this actually got going? That's a
Speaker 1: very that's a very good question. I mean, I try
Speaker 1: to respond to what we you know, what we can
Speaker 1: find out. I'll say one thing which has struck me
Speaker 1: for quite a while, and you and I may have
Speaker 1: spoken about this before. I continue to find it remarkable
Speaker 1: that they had an open counter intelligence investigation open on
Speaker 1: Michael Flynn, a retired three star general who was also
Speaker 1: former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. So that that
Speaker 1: tells me two things. That tells me. First of all,
Speaker 1: this was a real third world operation. The idea that
Speaker 1: they had a counter intelligence investigation open on a former
Speaker 1: spy cheek. I think that's bad enough in itself. But
Speaker 1: also this, I mean it appears that this goes back
Speaker 1: that this that this goes back quite a while. I mean,
Speaker 1: this was they started looking at They started looking at
Speaker 1: Flynn after the you know, after his dinner with Putin
Speaker 1: Um I guess that was December two thousand and fifteen.
Speaker 1: So again, I I don't want to speculate too much,
Speaker 1: but I think if we look at all the different
Speaker 1: people who have been named here, what it was, Carter
Speaker 1: Page or Paul Manafort, I I find the fact that
Speaker 1: Michael Flynn was someone that the FBI will I was
Speaker 1: looking at. I find that astonishing and I find it
Speaker 1: very significant. And also I find it important when trying
Speaker 1: to explain to people have this whole Rusty Gate thing
Speaker 1: as a hoax, asked them to explain, how do you
Speaker 1: possibly rationalize they had a counter intelligence investigation open on
Speaker 1: Michael Flynn, retired three star general, who is still you know,
Speaker 1: never been the only crime that he's ever even been
Speaker 1: whispered about being involved in was lying about not committing
Speaker 1: any crimes, so you know which which as we know,
Speaker 1: they can do to anybody. But but at least stay
Speaker 1: on it man. Next time you got another big, big
Speaker 1: piece out, we'd love to have you on Lee Smith
Speaker 1: everybody Real Clear Investigations and you can follow him on
Speaker 1: Twitter as well. Lee, thanks for joining us. Thanks for
Speaker 1: having me book. I really appreciate it. Team. We've got more.
Speaker 1: I want to tell you about what's going on at
Speaker 1: a school that embraced social justice a little too much.
Speaker 1: An update on Evergreen State College. Remember that school that
Speaker 1: had the day of absence for white people. It turns
Speaker 1: out that that wasn't exactly well. It didn't have the
Speaker 1: intended effect for how the rest of the country views
Speaker 1: that school. We'll get into some of that coming up.
Speaker 1: The FBI calls home title theft one of the fastest
Speaker 1: growing crimes. Embrace yourselves because having your credit card stolen
Speaker 1: is nothing compared to the hell you're in for once
Speaker 1: an identity thief takes control of your home's title. You know, folks,
Speaker 1: everything is stored online these days, including your home's title,
Speaker 1: and that means that domestic and international cyber thieves have
Speaker 1: a really easy time of getting access to your stuff.
Speaker 1: What they do in a home title theft situation is
Speaker 1: take you off your home's title, replace you with an alias.
Speaker 1: Then they borrow every penny they can, and they use
Speaker 1: your home's equity and stick you with the payments you
Speaker 1: won't know anything about until you get the late payment notices.
Speaker 1: Don't let this happen to you. By the way, identity
Speaker 1: theft programs don't protect you, but home title lock does.
Speaker 1: For just pennies a day, home Title Lock protects my
Speaker 1: most voluable asset, my family's home. Register now and get
Speaker 1: a free analysis and discuss if your homes title has
Speaker 1: been compromised. That's a hundred dollar value, folks, for free.
Speaker 1: Visit home title lock dot com. Again, that's home title
Speaker 1: lock dot com. So I'm gonna tell you about the
Speaker 1: Evergreen State College in a moment here. But but first,
Speaker 1: there's a there's a new iPhone out. Producer Mike is
Speaker 1: telling me, you know, I just I just got one,
Speaker 1: by the way, which means that there has to be
Speaker 1: a new one that comes out. Because I'm always behind
Speaker 1: the times on this stuff. I always get it wrong.
Speaker 1: Mike is is is the new Are you one of
Speaker 1: these people that camps out on the street for the iPhones? Like?
Speaker 1: Do you get that excited about this stuff? What is
Speaker 1: that all about? I don't understand that. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I sometimes I look at him, I'm like, you must
Speaker 1: not have a job. But then I'm like, you must
Speaker 1: have a job because you're spending money on an iPhone.
Speaker 1: So I don't know. It baffles me. It baffles me too, man.
Speaker 1: But the new one coming out, isn't it kind of
Speaker 1: the It's like an iPhone ten, but it's a cheaper
Speaker 1: iPhone ten, but it's a better I I don't know,
Speaker 1: there's a two different things. Well, they dropped three new
Speaker 1: iPhones today, the XR, the x S and the xs
Speaker 1: S max pricing structure. I mean them, they're all no expensive,
Speaker 1: but they did they raised the prices on some of
Speaker 1: their old iPhones, but then dropped the prices on others,
Speaker 1: so I don't I don't know exactly which ones are which,
Speaker 1: but the ones that they released today apparently have the
Speaker 1: it's the largest screen to date, like the x S
Speaker 1: has the is the largest screen size to date. Um,
Speaker 1: but the phone is the same size as their old
Speaker 1: um you know, six s pluses nice another device for
Speaker 1: us all to pretend we're doing work on when we're
Speaker 1: really just scrolling through social media. There we get exactly so.
Speaker 1: So guys, that Evergreen State College, that's the place where
Speaker 1: they had the the day of I don't know, I
Speaker 1: don't know how any remember this. This was a while ago.
Speaker 1: It's got a lot of attention because it was just
Speaker 1: so crazy. They had a day of absence where they
Speaker 1: wanted white people to just not go to school. It was, hey, hey,
Speaker 1: white people stay home today. We need to have a
Speaker 1: day without you. And what's What's one of the things
Speaker 1: it's really astonishing about that I was back in teen
Speaker 1: was how many people went along with it. They're like, yeah, sure, no,
Speaker 1: no white people allowed today. Sure, I'm just not gonna
Speaker 1: go to school. But there was one professor who has
Speaker 1: now become part of the I think he's considered one
Speaker 1: of these dark web intellectuals are not dark web, but
Speaker 1: is it, uh, the intellectual dark web. I think that's
Speaker 1: what they call it. Yeah, And he's one of these
Speaker 1: guys out there. He's up there with like Jordan Peterson
Speaker 1: and some of the others who they're considered revolutionaries because
Speaker 1: they have thoughts about things that you're not allowed to
Speaker 1: have thoughts about that. That's that's the way we're going now,
Speaker 1: especially on college campuses as you know. But at Evergreen,
Speaker 1: Brett Eric Weinstein I think was his was his name, right,
Speaker 1: Eric Weinstein's is I'm sorry, no, Brett Weinstein on why
Speaker 1: that was Eric Weinstein. Brett Weinstein is this professor who said,
Speaker 1: you know what, I'm not really cool with the whole
Speaker 1: not going not going to school thing because we're having
Speaker 1: a day of no white people. And he got hammered
Speaker 1: for that. People we're saying that he was he was
Speaker 1: a racist and he doesn't understand and he's just he's
Speaker 1: just wallowing and all that white privilege and and all
Speaker 1: and all this stuff. It's the uh, you know that
Speaker 1: this isn't a four year of four year college. Folks
Speaker 1: up in Washington state is Evergreen State College, and he
Speaker 1: got in all this hot water over and then of
Speaker 1: course people said, hold on a second, um, maybe this
Speaker 1: guy's actually got something worthwhile to say, and and he
Speaker 1: can't he do we have him on this show. We've
Speaker 1: definitely had some No, we had an n y U
Speaker 1: professor who had a similar situation, but we haven't had Wineste.
Speaker 1: I don't think we've had weine Steine on this show.
Speaker 1: I can't remember. We have so many guests. That's a
Speaker 1: high class problem. But anyway, why I'm updating you on
Speaker 1: Evergreen is for one and just to remind you all.
Speaker 1: As as we're always being told that that Trump is terrible.
Speaker 1: You know that the cover of The Atlantic, the very fancy,
Speaker 1: highbrow journal of of opinion and culture, has the death
Speaker 1: of Democracy on its cover for this month. You know
Speaker 1: it's it's all Trump is just destroying democracy in general.
Speaker 1: That's the that's the basics. Uh As people are saying
Speaker 1: all this crazy stuff. Meanwhile, they will support things like
Speaker 1: an idea of uh no white people allowed at school
Speaker 1: for the day, and they don't see that as being
Speaker 1: in any way problematic that they don't see a day
Speaker 1: without white people. As as an issue. Uh, and turns
Speaker 1: out other people do because there has been a ctisty.
Speaker 1: This is a quote, a catastrophic drop in applications to
Speaker 1: Evergreen State College. People do not want to go anymore.
Speaker 1: Oh wow, what a surprise. You mean when you have
Speaker 1: a crazy idea that a school embraces that is just
Speaker 1: beyond even what what you would expect from the social
Speaker 1: justice left and all of their lunacy, you mean that
Speaker 1: people might react to that in ways that you don't
Speaker 1: want them to. Uh. They expect three hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: freshman in the in their incoming class, but the school
Speaker 1: has a three thousand, a three thousand person enrollment. So
Speaker 1: if you do that year by year, their their numbers
Speaker 1: are down well, I mean, let's say it's roughly Uh,
Speaker 1: they have roughly six hundred students at the at the
Speaker 1: freshman incoming class rate, but they're supposed to have three thousand,
Speaker 1: so they're down like half. They're down half, which is
Speaker 1: Oh and and as producer Mike points out, MISSOO, which
Speaker 1: had that professor who was like, we need some muscle
Speaker 1: over here, we need some muscle over You know, guys,
Speaker 1: if you don't know I'm talking about you remember that
Speaker 1: Melissa was her name, Melissa Click Melissa, like I I
Speaker 1: need some muffo. He's video taping us here. Uh. That
Speaker 1: school producer Mike just wanted has had a thirty five
Speaker 1: percent drop. It app like Asians. So you know, I
Speaker 1: know right now a lot of people are saying, Oh,
Speaker 1: Nike's brilliant their marketing campaign social justice is such a winning,
Speaker 1: a winning strategy. Well, first of all, I think the
Speaker 1: jury is still out on whether Nike has made a
Speaker 1: smart move or not. Initially was a really bad move.
Speaker 1: Now the seconds rebounded. But for these schools that go
Speaker 1: too hard left on the social justice, the corrective mechanism
Speaker 1: that's in place is normal. People look at this and say,
Speaker 1: I don't want to go to that place, that school,
Speaker 1: it's crazy. So that's a good thing, you know, it's
Speaker 1: a it's a victory for sanity today and Evergreen State College.
Speaker 1: I want to talk about what it's like to try
Speaker 1: and be Russian and date in d C. I'm obviously
Speaker 1: not dating nor my Russian, but I read a story
Speaker 1: about it. Stay with me, So what's it like these
Speaker 1: days to be Russian and in the swamp. We'll just
Speaker 1: like with the walk around in the and the talk
Speaker 1: to the Konski, the truth is that because of all
Speaker 1: the Russia collusion in craziness, because so many people have
Speaker 1: gotten focused in on this notion of Russia as our
Speaker 1: as our greatest foe uh and and the Russian people
Speaker 1: as lurking under every under every bed, and and you
Speaker 1: know in every Internet chat room, on every computer there's
Speaker 1: a Russian troll just waiting to leap out and throw
Speaker 1: an election. I mean, it really is. It's a hysteria.
Speaker 1: It is a true Red Scare without the high level
Speaker 1: penetrations of the United States government. Oh that's right of Democrats,
Speaker 1: by the way, that occurred during the actual original Red Scare.
Speaker 1: But it's not just something that affects people in the
Speaker 1: world of politics, and and in the legal realm, you
Speaker 1: will also have the day to day. But I thought
Speaker 1: this was pretty funny. I mean, the uh, Politico has
Speaker 1: a magazine piece. Politico is kind of a competitor of
Speaker 1: of the Hill where I work. They have a magazine
Speaker 1: piece that's tinder Woes, Suspicious Landlords and snark key bosses,
Speaker 1: young and Russian in d C. And the subhead is
Speaker 1: Washington's young emigrat crowd is beginning to feel like they're
Speaker 1: living in a spy novel and they're the bad guys.
Speaker 1: So it turns out that there are plenty of folks
Speaker 1: who have really internalized all this stuff about Russia and
Speaker 1: Russia collusion to the degree that now when a young
Speaker 1: Russian guy or gal is out on a date in
Speaker 1: the district, people make jokes about whether they're, you know,
Speaker 1: part of the election meddling process, or if they're also
Speaker 1: working for the FSB. And I'mbroe. A while ago, there
Speaker 1: was a place here in d c uh that's called
Speaker 1: the Russia House, and they basically serve a lot of
Speaker 1: flavored vodka. I mean they just they make a lot
Speaker 1: of different flavored vodkas there and I went on a
Speaker 1: few dates they're back in the day. I definitely spend
Speaker 1: some time in Russia House and it was right on
Speaker 1: Connecticut Avenue in Washington, d c. It's a great spot.
Speaker 1: But because of all the anti Trump Russia stuff, they've
Speaker 1: actually seen a drop off in their business, which is
Speaker 1: just crazy, especially because the Russia House is owned by Americans,
Speaker 1: like they just this is kind of a kitchy thing
Speaker 1: that they've gone with and now people are are punishing
Speaker 1: Russia house that would seem because they they're worried that
Speaker 1: some oligarch is an owner in it or something. It's
Speaker 1: not true, and they tell some stories about this here
Speaker 1: about how quote um Mari Vanna, a three story restaurant
Speaker 1: and nightclub littered with Soviet eric kitch opened in DuPont
Speaker 1: Circle and became the Russian diaspora's day facto party house.
Speaker 1: It's KGB karaoke nights on Wednesday. Wednesday's raged into the
Speaker 1: morning hours. Top Russian acts like Avenushki Ivanushki International would
Speaker 1: swing through town to play gigs, and Washington Capital stars
Speaker 1: Alexander o Vette Skin and Alexander Semon would sometimes join
Speaker 1: in the revelry with students and summer workers from all
Speaker 1: over the former Soviet Union um and then they said
Speaker 1: before I would call an event and say hey, we're
Speaker 1: going to have Ukrainian Independence Day, and everybody would come.
Speaker 1: This according to a a Soviet born dj uh, he says,
Speaker 1: it didn't matter Ukrainian Russia, nobody differentiated. Then Vladimir Putin
Speaker 1: annex Crimea. The headlines were full of sanctions and the
Speaker 1: Ukrainians went their own way. And now it's considered poor
Speaker 1: taste to throw anything with Russian nationalist overtones. Um. When
Speaker 1: Maria Boutina twenty nine was charged with acting as an
Speaker 1: unregistered Kremlin agent from her perch as a grad student
Speaker 1: at American University, it seemed to confirm Washington's worst suspicions
Speaker 1: about them. And now, more so than ever, the Capital's
Speaker 1: young Russian Tonians find themselves living in a battlefield of
Speaker 1: the new Cold War. Oh man, it's pretty funny. This
Speaker 1: is a piece by uh who can't find out who
Speaker 1: it is? Oh Ben Shreckinger talking about how when they
Speaker 1: go out on tender dates now or when they try
Speaker 1: to rent an apartment, they hear stuff from their landlords
Speaker 1: about whether they well, actually they think there's discrimination. You know,
Speaker 1: technically you're not allowed to discriminate against somebody even based
Speaker 1: on national origin in housing, which I'm not sure everybody knows.
Speaker 1: You know that you can't based on gender, uh, disability,
Speaker 1: or ethnic or racial origin. But you can't even say, hey,
Speaker 1: you know, we're we're at war with ex country, so
Speaker 1: I'm not going to rent a people who are from
Speaker 1: that country, which I think would surprise a lot of folks.
Speaker 1: But you know, these these periods of time when you
Speaker 1: have a certain uh nationality and a certain country that
Speaker 1: becomes the number one boogeyman in our international relations, it
Speaker 1: has these kinds of effects. I remember after after nine
Speaker 1: eleven and then going into the Iraq War period, there
Speaker 1: was a pretty heavy degree of anti French sentiment. You
Speaker 1: guys remember this, remember back with the whole They're gonna
Speaker 1: call him Freedom fries instead of French fries. There was
Speaker 1: a restaurant in New York called E Tazuni, which means
Speaker 1: the United States, and they it was completely American owned
Speaker 1: and operated, but they just it was French cuisine and
Speaker 1: they called it at a Zuni. I remember them them
Speaker 1: being quoted about how they felt like people weren't and
Speaker 1: they had heard from people that they didn't want to, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, support a French restaurant because of what Francis
Speaker 1: foreign policy was. So, you know, you come up against
Speaker 1: this sometimes and it's silly, but in d C it's
Speaker 1: it's very real right now because you get people that
Speaker 1: are getting picked up like Maria Boutina, who are essentially socialites.
Speaker 1: She was a socialite who was trying to, you know,
Speaker 1: storm the corridors of power here in America and to
Speaker 1: do so by personal connections, and there they have her, Folks.
Speaker 1: She's locked up and they won't even let her out
Speaker 1: on bail. So she's in prison for this whole thing,
Speaker 1: and they're going to try to get her on a
Speaker 1: foreign agent registration violation. I don't know what else they
Speaker 1: think they're gonna nail her on, but that's usually a
Speaker 1: pretty minor thing, at least when it involves an American.
Speaker 1: But there's a hysteria from the do o J all
Speaker 1: the way down. I think that's what That's what the
Speaker 1: real difference is here, folks. It's not just that people
Speaker 1: are socially thinking of Russia as oh gosh, I've heard
Speaker 1: about this on the news, but the Department of Justice
Speaker 1: acts like anything Russia related now is a dire threat
Speaker 1: of the country. So if you're on a tender date
Speaker 1: and you're and you're Russian, say you're from Georgia, they
Speaker 1: won't know which one. Liberty, Truth and Great Hair Team
Speaker 1: Buck rallies together. Now feel those funky beats. It's time
Speaker 1: for roll call. That's where I feel those funky beats
Speaker 1: with the roll call Facebook dot Com slash Buck Sexton.
Speaker 1: Let's get two of the dudes and do debts. Bill writes,
Speaker 1: When you do Hillary's voice, it cracks me up. I
Speaker 1: think for about fifteen minutes one night you could do
Speaker 1: pretend that she's there and have conversations with her. Wow.
Speaker 1: Bell Hello. By the way, I have really learned a
Speaker 1: lot from listening to you. Thank you so much. Bill.
Speaker 1: I hope we entertain you here and I hope that
Speaker 1: you enjoy your time on the show and learn things.
Speaker 1: So all though all that good stuff happening. Thank you
Speaker 1: very much. Um. Michael writes, By the way, if you
Speaker 1: really want to know about hurricanes and white climate change
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with them, get Joe bust Stardi
Speaker 1: on the show. He's the Jesse Kelly of meteorology. Well,
Speaker 1: let me tell you first of all, that's how I
Speaker 1: praise uh to call him to Jesse Kelly of meteorology.
Speaker 1: As you know, we like Jesse Kelly very much here
Speaker 1: in the hut. Um. And and look at that, Michael,
Speaker 1: we had Joe on the show. Isn't that amazing How
Speaker 1: it happens like that? You know, ask and ye shall receive,
Speaker 1: my friend, that's how we make it happen here. We
Speaker 1: we are in the team. Buck pleasing business in the
Speaker 1: Freedom Hut, which is important because all of you have
Speaker 1: high expectations for just that very fact, that very thing,
Speaker 1: Laurie writes, Buck, you mentioned on there that you don't
Speaker 1: believe people like Nancy Pelosi we're Christians if they held
Speaker 1: the leftist views you were discussing. I'm curious what you
Speaker 1: believe about the apostle paul statements to the Church in Corinth,
Speaker 1: where he describes those who practice certain behaviors will not
Speaker 1: enter the Kingdom of Heaven. At the same time, he
Speaker 1: makes it clear that although those who claim to be
Speaker 1: Christians may have one to practice those behaviors, they do
Speaker 1: so no longer. I think the list he gives is
Speaker 1: an indictment on many who claim to be Christians, don't you, Laura.
Speaker 1: I'd have to check it out. I'm not familiar with
Speaker 1: that verse. I'm not familiar with that passage in the Bible.
Speaker 1: And and remember I was just really referring to I
Speaker 1: don't understand how you can claim to be a believing
Speaker 1: Christian and be in favor of abortion for all nine
Speaker 1: months of a pregnancy, and in fact, real abortion abortion
Speaker 1: movement doctrine is that you have the right to an
Speaker 1: abortion even if the fetus is successfully delivered against the
Speaker 1: best efforts of the medical team involved. That's why there,
Speaker 1: That's what necessitated the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. And
Speaker 1: I would note that not only did my advisor at
Speaker 1: Amherst help craft that bill at Amherst College, he was
Speaker 1: involved in that a long time ago. But Barack Obama
Speaker 1: was one of the very few that I know of
Speaker 1: at least who, as a state senator in Illinois, voted
Speaker 1: against a companion bill to the Born Alive Infants Protection
Speaker 1: Act because he wanted to be an absolute thumbs up
Speaker 1: from ney Roll pro choice America and the planned parenthood.
Speaker 1: Uh money machine behind politics, So that you take that
Speaker 1: for what it's worth. But Laura, I'd have to check
Speaker 1: that verse out and we will see. Uh. Derby writes,
Speaker 1: hey Buck shows amazing as always, Derby man. You always
Speaker 1: you always brighten up my day. Derby. I can always
Speaker 1: count on Derby to make things a little better. I
Speaker 1: am continually impressed by your analysis. Your ability to articulate
Speaker 1: your opinion is very impressive to me because you have
Speaker 1: the ability to say exactly what's on my mind the time.
Speaker 1: Well done, sir. As a side note, I suffered in
Speaker 1: silence for eight years, but I can be silent no longer.
Speaker 1: Obama whistles when he says the letter S. It makes
Speaker 1: me crazy. I hope I'm not the only one shields high. Brother.
Speaker 1: Love to you and miss Molly, hope you're both doing
Speaker 1: well well. Love right back to you, Darby from us
Speaker 1: here in the swamp in d C. And I am.
Speaker 1: I can't tell you that I have ever picked up
Speaker 1: Obama making an what do you say he does whistling
Speaker 1: when he makes an S sound. I'm I have never
Speaker 1: picked up on that, and I tend to think that
Speaker 1: I'm a pretty astute. I'll have to go back and
Speaker 1: listen to some of it. Um, t J. Right, book,
Speaker 1: you really don't think Woodward is a fabricator? What about
Speaker 1: the confession he obtained from the comatose CI director William Casey.
Speaker 1: If that's not fabrication, I don't know what is, t J.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm sure there have been fabrications in his past,
Speaker 1: just based on his reporting record. I'm not saying he's
Speaker 1: never fabricated. I'm just saying I find it hard to
Speaker 1: believe that he would engage in wholesale fabrications in this book.
Speaker 1: But keep in mind that he doesn't fabricate does not
Speaker 1: mean that he is not peddling fabrications, right Like t J.
Speaker 1: If I was interviewing you for a book and you were, uh,
Speaker 1: the main person that I needed to talk to you
Speaker 1: on a certain subject, and I said, Hey, what happened
Speaker 1: when you had a conversation about this or that thing
Speaker 1: in the room? And I wrote down verbatim what you said,
Speaker 1: and I transcribed it, and I and I also recorded
Speaker 1: the audio. I'm not fabricating, but if you fabricated, then
Speaker 1: the information is fake. And I think that that a
Speaker 1: lot of that has happened. Not only to think that
Speaker 1: would be general Madison, others have said that some of
Speaker 1: the information in the Woodword Book is in fact fabricated.
Speaker 1: I would note that this weekend, I'm gonna dive into
Speaker 1: the Woodword Book. This weekend. That's gonna be my my
Speaker 1: light reading. Lucinda cool name Rights deer Buck. I'm touched
Speaker 1: by your nine eleven store and how it changed the
Speaker 1: direction of your life. I appreciate your show and look
Speaker 1: forward to listening every day. Knowing this, I'm glad, for
Speaker 1: lack of a better word, that you abandon your Wall
Speaker 1: Street ambitions and ended up in my speakers. PS. You
Speaker 1: have read two emails from my friend Julie who has
Speaker 1: who has the cute baby in Colorado. If you read
Speaker 1: this on air, shout out to her for recommending you
Speaker 1: shields high. Lucinda Well, absolutely shout out to Julie and
Speaker 1: her adorable baby for passing on word to Lucinda, who
Speaker 1: is now also a part of Team Buck. As I've
Speaker 1: been saying, this is how the show grows. And this
Speaker 1: is the single most helpful and honestly most kind of
Speaker 1: generous thing you can do for all of us here
Speaker 1: in the freedom hund Is it just tell a friend, hey,
Speaker 1: check out this show. Uh, Kimberly right, Hannity always has
Speaker 1: Joe Bastardi on to explain these storms, and he is
Speaker 1: like me, a climate DENI are well, Kim Again, I
Speaker 1: anticipate what the team wants to hear and some of
Speaker 1: this stuff, so I anticipated as as best I can. Uh,
Speaker 1: And I'm glad that we're able to have Joe on
Speaker 1: the show. Um, the podcast is missing an I heart on.
Speaker 1: Adam says, all right, Adam, we'll take a look at that.
Speaker 1: I don't I don't know why that is. You know,
Speaker 1: we had that one day, we had a kind of
Speaker 1: a half show on the podcast. We've gone back to
Speaker 1: full podcast. Don't worry. Uh. And you can all plan
Speaker 1: on the podcast getting released earlier on in the day.
Speaker 1: So the podcast of the show, you can always listen live.
Speaker 1: You can listen on the I heart stream, you can
Speaker 1: listen on whatever your whatever your affiliate station is across
Speaker 1: the country. But you can also if you're a podcast listener,
Speaker 1: check in because we try to get as much of
Speaker 1: the show up as early as we can. So check
Speaker 1: in your feeds, folks, and you'll probably start to see
Speaker 1: it earlier on because we had been posting it around
Speaker 1: ten Eastern. We're moving it up quite a bit from there.
Speaker 1: In fact, we're gonna move it up as early as
Speaker 1: we can hopefully get in a few hours earlier than
Speaker 1: that into your feeds, so that way you can listen
Speaker 1: on the way home, you can listen as you're making dinner. Uh.
Speaker 1: And that and people won't be a day behind with
Speaker 1: the podcast. So I think that's really important. Uh. Sheldon writes, Buck,
Speaker 1: thank you for the great shows. This is related to
Speaker 1: the podcast issues earlier in the week. I want to
Speaker 1: be clear year. UM, I would love the early quick
Speaker 1: hit podcast along with the night radio podcast. I think
Speaker 1: what was confusing was we had the quick hit podcast
Speaker 1: as promise, which was great, but the full show was
Speaker 1: never uploaded on Monday. Then on Tuesday we only got
Speaker 1: the full show, no quick hits. I'm not sure how
Speaker 1: things work as far as iTunes and podcasts operate. If
Speaker 1: you still want to do the short show, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: we'd love to hear that Shields High from Sheldon. So, Sheldon,
Speaker 1: what what we're gonna do for now is just we're
Speaker 1: just gonna focus on the full show. And this has
Speaker 1: been something of an experiment. We're gonna focus on the
Speaker 1: full show, but we're gonna get it up earlier. We're
Speaker 1: gonna have the podcast up earlier on in the day
Speaker 1: because some of this show, some of the radio show
Speaker 1: you're listening to, is delayed. So a lot of what
Speaker 1: you're a lot of the different segments, UM are getting
Speaker 1: delayed later on in the radio clock, depending on what market,
Speaker 1: what station you're listening on. So the pod, instead of
Speaker 1: waiting for us to clear all the all stations everywhere,
Speaker 1: we're gonna put the podcast up earlier in the day.
Speaker 1: So that is the plan, and writes Charleston, South Carolina. Here,
Speaker 1: we made the decision to evacuate last night. Glad we
Speaker 1: did because the storm changed path of it overnight and
Speaker 1: the Charleston area looks to get more of a hit
Speaker 1: than it was going to yesterday. Things got harry when
Speaker 1: the governor called for evacuations Monday. Trying to keep calm well,
Speaker 1: and it's very important that you keep calm, and you're
Speaker 1: in our thoughts and prayers to be sure, and we
Speaker 1: want to make sure that you and all of your
Speaker 1: loved ones are safe and that's priority number one. So
Speaker 1: make sure you take care of yourself, take care of
Speaker 1: those around you, and check back in with us once
Speaker 1: you've made it through this storm. All good and team
Speaker 1: that's gonna be it for the Freedom Hunt, or rather
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show. Today, same thing, I guess see
Speaker 1: you tomorrow, same time. Shields high