Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Mid terms are done,
Speaker 1: the fight for begins. Democrats gained control of the House
Speaker 1: of Representatives. The Republicans gained a few seats in the Senate.
Speaker 1: This is now an all out political war, my friends.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about the showdown that begins now. This is
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is
Speaker 1: to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Magnorma stake American,
Speaker 1: You're a great American. Again, the Buck Sexton Show begins.
Speaker 1: An No, it was a pretty good night last night,
Speaker 1: all things considered. Republicans broke with history and we're able
Speaker 1: to prevent the Democrats from overrunning them. We're able to
Speaker 1: not just keep their lead in the Senate, but at
Speaker 1: a few seats to it. As I'm sure you know,
Speaker 1: the whole country has been well, most of the country
Speaker 1: has been thinking about this since the results came in
Speaker 1: last night. I know it's not not breaking news for you.
Speaker 1: The Democrats win the House. We know that we've been
Speaker 1: aware of that now for a number of hours. But
Speaker 1: the implications for this are are profound, um and I
Speaker 1: will get into them. There's some very important breakdown of this.
Speaker 1: We have to be together. First, why was it that
Speaker 1: the Democrats did not have what was expected? Oh? What
Speaker 1: was expected? Again? That's right? A blue wave was what
Speaker 1: Now they're saying, oh, nobody really expected that. Uh we
Speaker 1: we remember, we know that there was going to be
Speaker 1: a blue wave. We remember that. That's um, that was
Speaker 1: the way that this was supposed to go. And then
Speaker 1: last night, sure enough we had to hear this play.
Speaker 1: Eleven Democrats did hope for a big blue wave that
Speaker 1: is not happening. There's no blue wave. Is it a
Speaker 1: blue wave? What do you want to call it? It
Speaker 1: may not be a blue wave. It's a rainbow wave.
Speaker 1: It's not a wave. It's not a wave. It is
Speaker 1: not going to be that blue wave landslide. It's not
Speaker 1: going to be a wave. This blue wave that clearly
Speaker 1: does not seem to be materializing. I don't know whether
Speaker 1: we won't call it a wave, but it's a blue move,
Speaker 1: a blue ripple. You can't call it a wave if
Speaker 1: you don't have a big statewide wind anywhere. How do
Speaker 1: you call it a wave? If you don't win Florida,
Speaker 1: How do you call it a wave if you don't
Speaker 1: win Missouri? Yeah, it's not a wave. So so it
Speaker 1: would be bad to call it one um and those
Speaker 1: who were saying, well, that wasn't the expectation. Ah, we
Speaker 1: have we have this thing called the Internet, so we
Speaker 1: can actually track down what they were saying. Play sixteen.
Speaker 1: The wave is building. The question is just how big.
Speaker 1: We're standing on a beach looking out at the ocean
Speaker 1: and we're seeing what looks like a really really really
Speaker 1: big wave because it's going to be a democratic wave
Speaker 1: or a democratic tsunami, a blue wave. There's a wave
Speaker 1: out there. Are we going to see a wave, the
Speaker 1: wave election, a blue wave, a blue wave, the democratic wave.
Speaker 1: That's going to be a democratic wave, an anti Trump wave.
Speaker 1: There is a wave coming, the tidal wave coming. Likely
Speaker 1: that the Democrats have. The blue wave, this blue wave
Speaker 1: that has going across this country. It's like that Will
Speaker 1: cry will blue wave in November. The blue wave is okay,
Speaker 1: you get, but we get the idea. Right. They were
Speaker 1: all saying it. They were all saying it, but it
Speaker 1: didn't happen. Now they say they didn't say it because
Speaker 1: if all of them were so wrong, maybe there was
Speaker 1: some bias at work. Maybe there was a reason that
Speaker 1: they were off in their calibrations. Maybe it's not just
Speaker 1: that this was a surprise to them based on their analysis,
Speaker 1: but maybe they were more hopeful than anything else that
Speaker 1: there would be a wave um but there was not.
Speaker 1: Now a few very important takeaways from last night. First
Speaker 1: of all, Trump is still highly effective at campaigning for
Speaker 1: other people. It's not just the sen was the Trump election,
Speaker 1: and we got obviously the House and the Senate, and
Speaker 1: there was this moment of a revolt against the elites
Speaker 1: and and against leftism and the left word tilt of
Speaker 1: the country that had gone on almost unabated for eight
Speaker 1: years of the Obama administration. It wasn't just that. It
Speaker 1: was also that last night we find that President Trump
Speaker 1: is effective, his base is still with him, there is
Speaker 1: still hope in the agenda and that it will continue
Speaker 1: to be implemented. And the Democrats put a tremendous amount
Speaker 1: of money and activism and organization and celebrities and all
Speaker 1: this stuff into At the end of the day, this
Speaker 1: is the best they could do at a time when
Speaker 1: they're telling us that the country is under threat down
Speaker 1: to its very foundations. They have been proclaiming. And those
Speaker 1: of you listen to the show, no because I play
Speaker 1: their crazy clips on the air, that this democracy is
Speaker 1: under threat, that Trump is undermoting our institutions, that he's
Speaker 1: a racist, a misogynist, a rapist, a fascist, a Russian agent,
Speaker 1: all this crazy stuff, and an imbecile and should be
Speaker 1: removed by the twenty And they they just spew all
Speaker 1: this hateful nonsense and then tell us that the president
Speaker 1: is hateful. They say all of this and then turn
Speaker 1: around and pretend that they're the ones who are being adults.
Speaker 1: But in that environment, this is the best they could do.
Speaker 1: Losing even more control of the Senate, and you know,
Speaker 1: winning winning a majority, but by no means a passive,
Speaker 1: defining majority in the House representatives. What does that tell
Speaker 1: you about their judgment when it comes to where this
Speaker 1: country really is. What does it tell you about their
Speaker 1: ability to be taken seriously about the Democrat and the
Speaker 1: left right, to be thought of as real voices in
Speaker 1: the national conversation that aren't just overcome with envy and
Speaker 1: frustration and rage and delusion. All these big races we
Speaker 1: were told about last night, Gillham, Abrams, O Rourke, Oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, all these superstars and winning lost. They all lost.
Speaker 1: Someone telling me, by the way, why is it that young, telegenic,
Speaker 1: charismatic African American former fighter Polee John James in Michigan
Speaker 1: received probably one one of the media coverage leading up
Speaker 1: the election that also young tellogenic, charismatic African American Gilham
Speaker 1: received in Florida. Oh, that's right. One is a Republican,
Speaker 1: the others a Democrat, a leftist at that, I mean,
Speaker 1: a real Bernie Sanders style Democrat. But as much as
Speaker 1: they don't want to admit it, last night was a
Speaker 1: wake up call for Democrats. This is going to be
Speaker 1: even harder than they thought. They had to assume, whether
Speaker 1: they were willing to say so publicly or not, that
Speaker 1: the two years of Russia collusion, conspiracy mongering, the two
Speaker 1: years of Trump is a white nationalist. He's speaking in
Speaker 1: dog whistles all the time. This just unrelenting negative media coverage.
Speaker 1: That that had to have changed perceptions by about people
Speaker 1: who are open to new information. Right, It just you
Speaker 1: would assume by information osmosis over a period of time,
Speaker 1: people say, well, I mean there must be something wrong
Speaker 1: with Trump, right, look at what they're saying. It's all negative,
Speaker 1: it's all terrible. Oh no, A lot of us know
Speaker 1: that they are the fake news, and they are the
Speaker 1: enemy of truth, a phrase that you've heard probably first
Speaker 1: here on this show, and now other people have picked
Speaker 1: up too. They are the enemy of truth. They undermine
Speaker 1: truth and honesty and integrity and authenticity every day. And
Speaker 1: in fact, I think they embrace it now because they
Speaker 1: find it to be useful. They view themselves as in
Speaker 1: an all out war against the president United States, and
Speaker 1: so anything that is another weapon in that arsenal must
Speaker 1: be embraced, no matter how disgraceful, no matter how damaging.
Speaker 1: So now I sit here and think about what we're
Speaker 1: going to be subjected to by Democrats going forward. It
Speaker 1: is going to be ugly because last night the American
Speaker 1: people and the Democrats and the leftists minds there were disappointment.
Speaker 1: The leftists are disappointed in America right now. They thought
Speaker 1: that there would be a repudiation of Trump, and there
Speaker 1: is no way they can say that it was a
Speaker 1: repudiation of Trump. In fact, given what happens historically when
Speaker 1: people just want change and the people in power that
Speaker 1: have disappointed individuals who felt like they would get more
Speaker 1: willing are willing to change and just want to try
Speaker 1: the other side. Right there's all these trends, all these
Speaker 1: dynamics that favor of the Democrats, and with that going
Speaker 1: on to lose Senate seats in the balance and to
Speaker 1: pick up whatever it is, thirty or so seats in
Speaker 1: the House. I mean, some of this is still there's
Speaker 1: some I think there's some recounts being talked about. Some
Speaker 1: of this is still outstanding. Um, that to me is
Speaker 1: anything but some kind of huge SmackDown of Trump and
Speaker 1: what he has done. In fact, it is really an
Speaker 1: affirmation of the political movement that you and I have
Speaker 1: been supporting now since the day Trump took office, well
Speaker 1: many of you since the day Trump announced for president,
Speaker 1: and you were you were visionaries. You saw it coming
Speaker 1: long before many of the rest of us did. So
Speaker 1: last night was a good defensive maneuver at a time
Speaker 1: when the Democrats were inevitably going to be on offense.
Speaker 1: It was a stalemate. If this was a boxing match,
Speaker 1: you would say that it was a split decision. And
Speaker 1: everything now points to and it's not just the people
Speaker 1: in the political class and uh, you know, journals and
Speaker 1: analysts and all the all the rest that are do
Speaker 1: you think about because everything that you see now until
Speaker 1: then until that next election day is going to be
Speaker 1: colored by this fight between Democrats and Republicans. There is
Speaker 1: very little now of real substance that the president is
Speaker 1: going to be able to do that involves Congress. We'll
Speaker 1: talk a bit more during the show today about people
Speaker 1: to healthcare, maybe infrastructure package. You know, anything is anything
Speaker 1: is possible. Sure, anything could happen, but I don't think
Speaker 1: anything will happen. You will see a ferocious anti Trump
Speaker 1: resistance that is able now because they finally have control
Speaker 1: of one branch of government, is able to indulge all
Speaker 1: of their wildest fantasies about Trump Russia collusion. Is able
Speaker 1: to be vindictive, seek to settle scores, and it is
Speaker 1: going to be nasty. It is going to be a
Speaker 1: very tough fight. Now, I want to tell you about
Speaker 1: why I think last night happened the way that it didn't. Obviously,
Speaker 1: for me, the two biggest factors were, well, you could
Speaker 1: say three one the economy, two Trump, three the Kavanaugh effect.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about the cabin affect, and then I'll address
Speaker 1: where all this is going. And of course, the resignation
Speaker 1: requested resignation of my buddy Jeff Sessions as Attorney General
Speaker 1: to miss Jeff. I liked him. I know some of
Speaker 1: you are disappointed he didn't do more on Russia collusion,
Speaker 1: but he recused himself. Once you recuse yous over, you
Speaker 1: can't unrecuse yourself. So but Jeff Sessions, as you know,
Speaker 1: was out. That was the big breaking news. Like that
Speaker 1: happened later on today. Trump is he's cleaning house after
Speaker 1: the election, just as we all expected him to. But
Speaker 1: that has important implications that that gives us a sense
Speaker 1: of where things are going to. Mueller is going to
Speaker 1: be a name you hear a lot more in the
Speaker 1: weeks and months ahead, probably months. As much as I
Speaker 1: hate to say it, the Russia collusion investigation is going
Speaker 1: to go back at the top of the headlines. Again.
Speaker 1: It's gonna be a whole shift. We should prepare for it.
Speaker 1: But I do want to take a moment we come
Speaker 1: back to just discuss Kavanaugh and what that meant in
Speaker 1: this election, and also what it tells us about what
Speaker 1: the fight ahead will look like. Stay with me, team,
Speaker 1: We'll be right back. The observations on the Kavanaugh effect
Speaker 1: very helpful. Yeah, I think the Republican sort of core
Speaker 1: voters in the States that were critical to us. We're
Speaker 1: highly offended by the questioning of the presumption of innocence
Speaker 1: and the tactics, and I think it was like an
Speaker 1: adrenaline shop. We were worried bad lack of intensity on
Speaker 1: our side, and I think the Kavanaugh I've certainly provided
Speaker 1: that it was extremely helpful. It's noteworthy that the one
Speaker 1: Democrat and a red state who survived voted for her Kavanaugh.
Speaker 1: The Kavanaugh effect was one of the biggest lessons of
Speaker 1: the mid term. And as you know, I speak with
Speaker 1: particular pride on this issue as somebody with all of
Speaker 1: your support, who was as vocal as I could be
Speaker 1: and in contact with the White House and people on
Speaker 1: Capitol Hill about how we needed to back Kavanaugh. Stands
Speaker 1: strong with Kavanaugh and that women were lying about him
Speaker 1: as part of a character assassination the likes of whist
Speaker 1: of which this country had really never seen before, at
Speaker 1: least not in my lifetime. It was appalling. It was
Speaker 1: painful to watch a good man have his reputation destroyed
Speaker 1: on such flimsy pretext and such obvious motivation. But you know,
Speaker 1: the good news is that normal Americans don't appreciate the
Speaker 1: ritualized humiliation of a respected husband, father, and jurist, the
Speaker 1: amusement and political satisfaction of the pink hat maniacs Justice Kavanaugh.
Speaker 1: It's good to say it now, isn't it not, Judge Kavanaugh.
Speaker 1: Justice Kavanaugh stood strong and he fought back. It's not
Speaker 1: just that members of the Senate, and thank you, Lindsey
Speaker 1: Graham did the right thing for the GOP. In the GOP,
Speaker 1: it was also that Kavanaugh realized he was backed into
Speaker 1: a corner and they were about to finish him off.
Speaker 1: And they were so angry and so full of vitriol
Speaker 1: and hate about his performance because they knew they were
Speaker 1: just they had him. They they were so close to
Speaker 1: finishing off Kavanaugh in front of the whole country, in
Speaker 1: front of over twenty million people watching those sham hearings,
Speaker 1: that embarrassment to the Senate, and he, in front of
Speaker 1: his wife and his children, all of his colleagues and friends,
Speaker 1: found the strength to stand and fight for his honor
Speaker 1: and the truth. Because he did that, we now have
Speaker 1: a conservative constitutional sitting on the Supreme Court, and we
Speaker 1: have a conservative Republican majority in the Senate. If you
Speaker 1: have any doubt about that, let me just share with
Speaker 1: you the following as McConnell said. Joe Manchin, a Democrat,
Speaker 1: Yes on Cavanaugh. He got reelected in West Virginia last night,
Speaker 1: but hide Camp went no on Kavanaugh. She lost in
Speaker 1: North Dakota. Mccaskell no on Kavanaugh, lost in Missouri. Donnelly
Speaker 1: no on Kavanaugh, defeated in Indian Anna. Voters of of
Speaker 1: good conscience and good sense punished cowards in the Senate
Speaker 1: for doing the wrong thing, and as a result of that,
Speaker 1: we now have a strong Senate majority and probably lost
Speaker 1: ten to fifteen fewer House seats because of Kavanaugh. But
Speaker 1: also we understand who the enemy is here and how
Speaker 1: they will fight what they're willing to do. We must
Speaker 1: understand that Kavanaugh was really just a symptom of the
Speaker 1: larger disease of all out personal destruction at the hands
Speaker 1: of leftists. That is what they now seek to do
Speaker 1: to regain power. Their arguments are garbage, their positions are laughable.
Speaker 1: They claim to embrace science when they rejected. They claim
Speaker 1: to want to bring more healthcare to more people, and
Speaker 1: they don't understand the basic math involved. So how do
Speaker 1: you think they're gonna win through a campaign? Of humiliation
Speaker 1: and individualized terror, just like what they did to Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: whenever there is a political motivation for them to do so.
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh was a harbinger of what is to come, not
Speaker 1: just in the months they had over the next two years.
Speaker 1: Thank god he stood in fight, and thank Heavens for
Speaker 1: all of you who supported that fight and who voted
Speaker 1: to support that fight team. We got a couple of
Speaker 1: calls up, let's get to here for some of the folks.
Speaker 1: Charlie in Saulisbury, Maryland, what's up, Charlie, Hey, thanks for calling.
Speaker 1: Let me call you Buck, thank you for calling in.
Speaker 1: What's on your mind? Yeah? I was listening to a
Speaker 1: couple deals with Trump's interviews with reporters and won't report
Speaker 1: were asking about, you know, the investigation since Nancy will
Speaker 1: probably be speaker and stuff like that, and he said, well,
Speaker 1: you know, we're not done with our investigations, and he
Speaker 1: named off, you know, like the server and missing emails
Speaker 1: and comy and that, and then the next reporter I
Speaker 1: think it was an extra maybe too too later that
Speaker 1: person asked about um going now get a brain fusion? Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: A bunch of different investigations being asked about sure, So
Speaker 1: are you asking me should Trump do this? Is this
Speaker 1: the right way to go to essentially tell them that
Speaker 1: there will be investigatory retaliation in response. I mean the
Speaker 1: answer is yeah, that that he should tell them that because,
Speaker 1: for example, the Hillary Clinton email investigation, she wasn't cleared.
Speaker 1: They just chose not to bring charges against her. They
Speaker 1: could reopen that and look at more more information and
Speaker 1: decide that they might have a different outcome here. So
Speaker 1: you know, if the Democrats want to play rough, they
Speaker 1: should know that Trump and the Republicans will play rough
Speaker 1: in response. And that's the only way I mean, that's
Speaker 1: the only way you can deal with the left. If
Speaker 1: you show any weakness, they exploited. The second question to
Speaker 1: him was about declassifying the documents, and they don't understand Trump.
Speaker 1: He he's got all the cards. Well he's he's held
Speaker 1: that back. And by the way, I think that people have,
Speaker 1: you know, including myself, have said I'm frustrated. I wish
Speaker 1: you would. I asked the president to his face. We
Speaker 1: had a conversation about it. I as him, I said, well,
Speaker 1: will you release the documents? He said he's going to,
Speaker 1: but then he got pushed back, and I think he's
Speaker 1: holding it back because he wants to see, you know,
Speaker 1: the release of the stuff that he's got, I think
Speaker 1: would have a lot it would be a lot of
Speaker 1: egg on the face of the d o J. The
Speaker 1: FBI would look really bad. But better to to hold
Speaker 1: it until you need it. And he might wait until
Speaker 1: the Mala report comes out and then as a response
Speaker 1: to the Muller report, drop that. Now, think about how
Speaker 1: that goes, right, So, so you know, he's you know exactly,
Speaker 1: I mean, but you think about this when when people
Speaker 1: always talking about Tump playing five D chests. I mean,
Speaker 1: I actually used to political chess growing up. I was Okay,
Speaker 1: it wasn't very good. Uh, but you don't want to
Speaker 1: pull your queen out too early, you know. And and
Speaker 1: I think in this whole Russia collusion investigation, the queen
Speaker 1: that Trump has, so to speak, is that he can
Speaker 1: declassify this stuff and just show what a sham the
Speaker 1: whole thing is. So let it play out, right, let
Speaker 1: Mueller do what he's doing. The moment that all of
Speaker 1: a sudden Mueller starts trying to subpoen at Trump's uh,
Speaker 1: you know, financial records or something. Then all of a
Speaker 1: sudden he goes, Okay, now let's let people know what's
Speaker 1: really going on here. So I think he's trying to
Speaker 1: be strategic about it, and I do think there are
Speaker 1: concerns about third party until essentially, are our foreign partners
Speaker 1: giving us information that we don't We don't want to
Speaker 1: burn them, right, It's like a journalist doesn't want to
Speaker 1: burn a source. So though journalists will burn sources, they
Speaker 1: make a big deal out of that depends on what
Speaker 1: side of the all the sources on. Thanks for calling in, Charlie,
Speaker 1: Dean up in Boston. What's up Boston, Hey, brother Buck.
Speaker 1: Three things I personally took away from last night. The
Speaker 1: first is I noticed that the old GOP that all
Speaker 1: stepped aside the big masses, so do the media told
Speaker 1: them they were going to lose years ago, they said, okay,
Speaker 1: we're leaving. So the recognition wasn't out there, their war chest,
Speaker 1: money wasn't out there. So still we did as well
Speaker 1: as we did without all of that. The second part
Speaker 1: was we sent out a president with a record in
Speaker 1: two years, and that's all we sent out. They sent
Speaker 1: They put the Clintons in the closet, Bot Obama, OPRA, Hollywood,
Speaker 1: all of the money, you know, hundreds of millions of
Speaker 1: dollars from the mega donors the media, and still that's
Speaker 1: all they came up with. So now today they have
Speaker 1: to start run into You can't turn on the record
Speaker 1: of last night and go back to Omega donors and say, oh,
Speaker 1: we need another half a billion dollars for two years
Speaker 1: from now. At some point, these these people are gonna say,
Speaker 1: I don't know, I don't know this this I think
Speaker 1: I'm back in the wrong. We'll see it. Maybe I'll
Speaker 1: just sit this next one. Well, Dean, think about it.
Speaker 1: They's been seventy million dollars to lose one sentence seat
Speaker 1: in Texas. Ever to lose the race. What is that?
Speaker 1: This is crazy. Seventy million dollars that's just all going
Speaker 1: to media buys basically, so they saturated the Texas media
Speaker 1: market with Beto Betto, Oh we need Betto and then
Speaker 1: he loses Ted Cruise. By the way, it was too close,
Speaker 1: Ted Cruise. You know I've been saying he's going with
Speaker 1: my Ted Ted. Tedd needs to step up his game
Speaker 1: a little bit. He needed to make an example of
Speaker 1: Betto trying to trying to sneak into the Republicans kitchen
Speaker 1: there and and steal a seat. I mean, uh, he
Speaker 1: can't let that. He can't let that one goes. I'm
Speaker 1: a little I'm a little disappointed with with the marginal
Speaker 1: victory for Teddy. Yeah, he won, I'm happy for him,
Speaker 1: but he should have won by at least six or
Speaker 1: seven points. I mean, to win by I think he
Speaker 1: won by three maybe four. Not enough, not enough against
Speaker 1: a betto the billionaire who is a fake Latino essentially,
Speaker 1: and that's how he's running the whole thing. It's just
Speaker 1: it's just bizarre. But Dean, there'll be a lot of money, unfortunately,
Speaker 1: a lot of liberal billionaires who are trying to they're
Speaker 1: trying to buy their their their passage to Nirvana by
Speaker 1: you know, spending on these leftist candidates. Thank you for
Speaker 1: calling her from Boston, my friend. You know, Kelly and
Speaker 1: Conway made a very very important point. The media. You know,
Speaker 1: the media is such a funny relationship with her. They
Speaker 1: can have her on air enough, but they're always like, oh,
Speaker 1: I don't know about Kelly and Conway, you know, at
Speaker 1: CNN and and all these other places. But Trump did
Speaker 1: make the difference, and Kelly made that case play three,
Speaker 1: and there's no question that his presence on the campaign
Speaker 1: trail made the difference. In fact, he went five for
Speaker 1: five and just his stops from Sunday and Monday alone.
Speaker 1: I was with him yesterday. There's three stops on the Monday,
Speaker 1: all three of the candidates he stumps for in three
Speaker 1: very different states, for a governorship of Ohio and also
Speaker 1: two Senate seats in Indiana and Missoura, both of which
Speaker 1: are pickups from the Democrats. And I think when a
Speaker 1: president in power has the Senate, it's easier to get
Speaker 1: through judicial nominations. You've seen that's when I've been big
Speaker 1: mark of his success in the first two years in office,
Speaker 1: are these judicial nominations getting through and the U. S.
Speaker 1: Circuit courts and of course to the United States Supreme Court,
Speaker 1: and also the executive norms. The House looks like a
Speaker 1: local Democratic but not by the large margins that have
Speaker 1: happened in the past. We know that President Obama suffered
Speaker 1: sixty three losses in the House in two thousand ten,
Speaker 1: President Clinton fifty four losses his first mid terms. And
Speaker 1: these presidents, these two term presidents, found a way to
Speaker 1: work with the party out of power on things that
Speaker 1: matter to the country. This president is prepared to do
Speaker 1: that to work across the guide the President, the economy,
Speaker 1: and Kavanaugh. That is the the triumvirate, if you all.
Speaker 1: That is the trio, the the secret to the relative
Speaker 1: success of what happened last night. And the good news
Speaker 1: is that the president is clearly going to still be
Speaker 1: who he is for the for the the stretch now
Speaker 1: between where we are and where we're going in the
Speaker 1: in the presidential election, and then I'm hoping the economy
Speaker 1: continues to grow. There may be a reset, but as
Speaker 1: long as it's not a catastrophic reset right before the election,
Speaker 1: we'll be fine because the president's policies do promote growth.
Speaker 1: The president's policies are better than Obama's. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is this is the good news is we're right. But
Speaker 1: then also Kavanaugh. Remember that we are the side of
Speaker 1: honor and integrity, and remember that the other side is not.
Speaker 1: And that is who we are facing. That is what
Speaker 1: we are up against. Do not forget Kavanaugh, not now,
Speaker 1: not a year from now. We'll be right back. Oh.
Speaker 1: I think oversight is important in the sense that right
Speaker 1: now the system of checks and balances is non existent.
Speaker 1: I mean, look at all the cabinet secretaries that have
Speaker 1: been involved in wrongdoing and not announced of oversight from
Speaker 1: the Republicans. I mean that that's unconsortable. This is tax
Speaker 1: pair money that is being wasted. And oh, I'm sure
Speaker 1: we'll expect Herran's because we we have a constitutional duty
Speaker 1: um of oversight in the in the U. S. House.
Speaker 1: What would Senate Republicans to in the event of the
Speaker 1: House down produce trouble to obtain presidents from hots records? Well,
Speaker 1: you know, the whole issue presidential harassment is interesting. I
Speaker 1: remember when we tried it in the late nineties, we
Speaker 1: impeach President Clinton. His numbers went up, an hours went down,
Speaker 1: and we underperformed in the national election. So the Democrats
Speaker 1: in the House will have to decide just how much
Speaker 1: presidential harassment today. Thanks good strategy. I'm not so sure
Speaker 1: it'll work for them. I think Mitch is right. I
Speaker 1: think McConnell's onto something there that the American people overall
Speaker 1: will be displeased with the obvious political harassment and legal
Speaker 1: harass sman that we can expect from the Democrats from
Speaker 1: the hashtag resistance crowd. That doesn't mean they're not gonna
Speaker 1: do it, though, doesn't mean that the plan is not
Speaker 1: for the left two just go all out with everything
Speaker 1: they can to not just expose, you know, wrongdoing. I
Speaker 1: mean they're gonna say it's about that. It's it's not
Speaker 1: about that at all. It's just going to be what
Speaker 1: can they do to inflict irritation, anxiety, and possibly pain
Speaker 1: on the president and those around him, And that's what
Speaker 1: they will do. This is why the kavan A effect,
Speaker 1: I would notice, is also so important. What we saw
Speaker 1: with Cavanaugh was the unadulterated, distilled, pure version of left
Speaker 1: wing bile that they will unleash on anybody who stands
Speaker 1: in their way when they have the opportunity, when they
Speaker 1: really have a target. There is nothing they won't say.
Speaker 1: There's not there's nothing they won't do. There is no
Speaker 1: level to which the Democrats will not stoop if they
Speaker 1: think that it is in their political interests if they
Speaker 1: could try to turn Kavanaugh into a ruined gang rapists,
Speaker 1: if they can try to destroy his life based on
Speaker 1: the evidence that they presented there, which was zero evidence.
Speaker 1: What do you think when they have subpoena power in
Speaker 1: the House of Representatives, they're going to do to everybody
Speaker 1: around Trump, anybody who's ever been close to Trump, anybody
Speaker 1: who's supportive of Trump publicly in a way that they
Speaker 1: want to make an example of them. This is they're
Speaker 1: going to turn into a smear machine. Get ready for
Speaker 1: Pelosi lead Soviet styles show trials. That's what's coming for
Speaker 1: the next two years. That's why when the President today said, okay, well,
Speaker 1: the Senate also has subpoena power, So you want to
Speaker 1: you want to play games, we can play games. He's
Speaker 1: completely right. We have to raise the temperature in response
Speaker 1: to the heat we're going to get from the House
Speaker 1: of Representatives. There's no other way. They have to feel
Speaker 1: the pressure too. There has to be a punishment for
Speaker 1: their bad behavior, or else they're just gonna run wild.
Speaker 1: There's nothing that they will uh that. There's no ethics
Speaker 1: that will stop them. Right, There's no sense of duty
Speaker 1: to country or anything else. They just they think that
Speaker 1: their duty and they also have a very personal investment
Speaker 1: in it because they feel undermined by Trump, his success
Speaker 1: and his very existence. They think that they're their duty
Speaker 1: to country, if you will, is to destroy the president
Speaker 1: and the presidency. Everything else is secondary to that mission.
Speaker 1: They've made this clear. Now they may go after the
Speaker 1: president's finances, and that's going to be a particularly interesting,
Speaker 1: interesting fight because what does that have to do with anything.
Speaker 1: They may go after his tax returns, why just to
Speaker 1: try to humiliate him. Keep in mind that some of
Speaker 1: the same journals who tell us all that we must
Speaker 1: see Trump's tax returns even though they're under auded, we're
Speaker 1: completely fine with. We could not see and still to
Speaker 1: this day, have never seen Barack Obama's college records. Why why.
Speaker 1: It's not because I think he's a secret Kenyan or
Speaker 1: you know what, a Muslim, or any of those things
Speaker 1: that have been said. It's because I think he was
Speaker 1: a mediocre student at best, and I think that they
Speaker 1: didn't want people to know that the president, who was
Speaker 1: supposed to be the greatest genius who have ever lived
Speaker 1: in this country was just kind of an okay student
Speaker 1: and got to go to the best schools imaginable as
Speaker 1: a just kind of it okay student. That's my theory.
Speaker 1: No one can say I'm wrong because they don't know.
Speaker 1: But I'd be willing to bet a little bit of
Speaker 1: money on that one. But nobody was trying to Nobody
Speaker 1: in the in the media least was clamoring for the
Speaker 1: release of Obama's college records, but they are clambing for
Speaker 1: the release of and they'll use legal processes to get
Speaker 1: it if they can Trump's tax returns. And they'll weaponize
Speaker 1: the government. I mean, they're weaponize the bureaucracy. If that's
Speaker 1: what it takes for them, that's what they'll do. So
Speaker 1: we should just be ready for what's coming. Kavanaugh, Yes,
Speaker 1: save the Senate. Kavanaugh not only has given us a
Speaker 1: great Supreme Court justice for decades to come. And when
Speaker 1: I say we thank Kavanaugh, I don't mean just for
Speaker 1: being there. I mean for standing up and fighting. But
Speaker 1: and he gave us that Supreme Court seat. He saved
Speaker 1: the Senate for the Republicans too, I have there's no
Speaker 1: doubt in my mind that is what happened. But let's
Speaker 1: not forget that lesson of Kavanaugh. It's not just applicable
Speaker 1: to the left. Is crazy, don't give them power in
Speaker 1: the mid germs. Although that was certainly important, it's also
Speaker 1: important going forward that we remember how the left plays
Speaker 1: the game, what depths they will sing to, how completely
Speaker 1: unmoored they will be in their attacks, the perversion of
Speaker 1: truth that they will engage in the the smears, the
Speaker 1: character assassination, the kind of personal destruction that I mean
Speaker 1: this and I don't say this too to exaggerate. What
Speaker 1: they did to Kavanaugh could have driven somebody without his
Speaker 1: support network, without such a a a devoted and strong
Speaker 1: wife and family and friends around. What the Democrats did
Speaker 1: to Kavanaugh could have brought a person to suicide. And
Speaker 1: here's what I think you should all know about that
Speaker 1: if something like that had happened, there are many on
Speaker 1: the left, many Democrats, who, whether they would have publicly
Speaker 1: said so or not, would have felt that there was
Speaker 1: justice in that. That's how sick these maniacs are. That's
Speaker 1: how evil they are. And now they have subpoena power
Speaker 1: in the House. Now the left wing Pelosiites are going
Speaker 1: to be in a position to use the force of
Speaker 1: law to the same ends. Subpoena members of Trump's family.
Speaker 1: Try to, you know, try to get Ivanka on the stand,
Speaker 1: Try to get Donald Trump Junior before a committee, Try
Speaker 1: to pull their finances, try you to go after other
Speaker 1: members of the Trump family you don't really ever hear about.
Speaker 1: Just to create damage and mayhem and destruction and terror
Speaker 1: because they can't beat Trump. That's the underlying terror for
Speaker 1: the left that last night was made so clear. They
Speaker 1: can't beat him in politics. They will not be able
Speaker 1: to mount a candidacy that can overcome Trump. The only
Speaker 1: way they can beat Trump on the field of political
Speaker 1: battle is to cheat, is to get him before he
Speaker 1: can take the field, is to go after his family.
Speaker 1: They can't just face him and win in a fair fight.
Speaker 1: They're going to be underhanded. And we're going to live
Speaker 1: through this, my friend. So yes, we're gonna have to
Speaker 1: keep our shields high together for the next two years.
Speaker 1: It's coming everything, his taxes, the Mueller, pro Russia hystoria,
Speaker 1: all that. It's coming back in a big way. We
Speaker 1: must be prepared. I love black Rifle coffee. You know this.
Speaker 1: I tell you about it. I drink black Rifle every
Speaker 1: day because it's delicious. I mean, this is really high quality, delicious,
Speaker 1: roast order small batch coffee. I can get into some
Speaker 1: of the flavors of you go on. I mean, even
Speaker 1: when I'm drinking it black, I can really tell the difference.
Speaker 1: It's just better than other stuff cake up or ground
Speaker 1: or even if you're a whole being guy you like
Speaker 1: to grind it yourself. The coffee flavors are exceptional, and
Speaker 1: this is a great American company run by founded by
Speaker 1: veterans of the special operations community. These guys kick butt,
Speaker 1: love freedom, love veterans, love America. So please check them
Speaker 1: out these veterans Day. Get your coffee from Black Rifle
Speaker 1: Coffee and contribute to a company that's actually making a
Speaker 1: difference in the veteran community. Visit Black Rifle Coffee dot
Speaker 1: com slash buck and receive fift percent off your order.
Speaker 1: That's Black Rifle Coffee dot com slash buck for fifteen
Speaker 1: percent off again one more time, Black Rifle Coffee dot
Speaker 1: Com slash Buck. The President's agenda isn't gonna change regardless
Speaker 1: of whose party is there. We're still going to be
Speaker 1: uh an administration that's focused on lowering the taxes, growing
Speaker 1: our economy, creating jobs, defeating isis remaking the judiciary. Uh
Speaker 1: Thick saying that the tremendous opioid crisis that we have,
Speaker 1: I think we can work with Democrats on that. You know,
Speaker 1: we know what we believe in, and we know whose
Speaker 1: side we're on. We came to this movement to pick
Speaker 1: a fight a fight on behalf of millions of Americans
Speaker 1: who are getting ripped off in a rigged economy and
Speaker 1: ignored by a corrupt government in Washington. We came to
Speaker 1: this fight for families trying to stretch a paycheck and
Speaker 1: for people living one moment away from a medical bill
Speaker 1: that would send them spiraling over a financial cliff. This
Speaker 1: resistance began with women, and it is being led by
Speaker 1: women tonight. Take her, Elizabeth Warren at her word, my friends,
Speaker 1: the Democrats offer one thing, and one thing only for
Speaker 1: the next two years, yours resistance. They're going to wage
Speaker 1: political war on this president, on this presidency, on conservatives,
Speaker 1: on the Republican Party, and all who stand with them,
Speaker 1: all who convert into philosophies of limited government, individual liberty,
Speaker 1: basic rights enshrined in the Constitution. Those people are going
Speaker 1: to be treated very poorly by the other side. Be
Speaker 1: ready for it. There is not going to be any comedy.
Speaker 1: There's not going to be any coming together or uniting.
Speaker 1: It is. It is laughable when you hear Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: last night say that maybe there will be a bipartisan
Speaker 1: moment here play four teens. She actually said this pretty amazing.
Speaker 1: We will strive from bipartisanship. We believe that we have
Speaker 1: a responsibility to seek common ground where we can, but
Speaker 1: we cannot standard ground, but we must try, and so
Speaker 1: by part openness and transparency, accountability, by partisanship a very
Speaker 1: important part of how we will go forward. There will
Speaker 1: be none of that. Really, There is not any area
Speaker 1: that I could even think of her point to where
Speaker 1: they will work in a bipartisan fashion that will make
Speaker 1: a difference. I mean, sure, you know, though they'll nibble
Speaker 1: around the edges of some things. There's there's some possibility
Speaker 1: maybe that they'll do some Obamacare fixes which will just
Speaker 1: me in shoveling some money into some places and then
Speaker 1: assume that in they'll work out what really happens to Obamacare.
Speaker 1: In fact, Belosi specifically talked about healthcare right after the
Speaker 1: Democrats took the House. Here's what she said. In place,
Speaker 1: seventeen voters delivered and resounding verdict against Congressional Republicans attacks
Speaker 1: on Medicare, Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act and people
Speaker 1: with preexisting conditions and districts everywhere in America. They went
Speaker 1: in a new new direction. Yes, pre existing conditions. All
Speaker 1: we ever hear about Obamacare is, as I've told you,
Speaker 1: thousands of pages long, just because all it does is
Speaker 1: deal with pre existing conditions. Of course not, there's a
Speaker 1: lot more to it than that. It's about the redistribution
Speaker 1: of wealth via the health care system, and it's about
Speaker 1: putting us on a pathway to single payer, which people
Speaker 1: like me have been saying for the last seven years.
Speaker 1: Now they're open about it. They were telling us that
Speaker 1: it was a lie and it was a smear. Remember
Speaker 1: Obama said, remember the old Obama you lie thing, and
Speaker 1: people got so angry at that. Remember of Congress he yelled,
Speaker 1: you lie. Well, if Obama didn't lie, it was a
Speaker 1: lie that the Democrats would not try to give illegals
Speaker 1: Obamacare because that was Hillary's platform the last election, openly
Speaker 1: written out on our website, spoken about that was where
Speaker 1: they were going. So it was a lie, whether Obama
Speaker 1: knew it or not, and I think Obama probably knew it.
Speaker 1: He certainly knew it was a lie that you can't
Speaker 1: or you know, if you like your healthcare plan, you
Speaker 1: can keep it. He knew that was a lie. I
Speaker 1: didn't care. He had an agenda to deliver on. He
Speaker 1: had something that he had to to get done, no
Speaker 1: matter what he had to say in that process. McConnell
Speaker 1: pushed back on this a little bit fortunately, but look,
Speaker 1: the Senate's not gonna be able to do anything without
Speaker 1: a majority of the House now. In healthcare, and because
Speaker 1: of John McCain, we did not actually change anything substantive
Speaker 1: with from a legislative point of view, with Obamacare. We've
Speaker 1: only made some executive order fixes here and there, right
Speaker 1: removing the individual mandate, that sort of thing, But they
Speaker 1: just said they're not going to enforce it, the individual mandate,
Speaker 1: so it really still is there. So if you have
Speaker 1: a different administration, guess what visual mandate is back. But
Speaker 1: here's what McConnell said about healthcare, speaking of where the
Speaker 1: bipartisan this is. There is non play a team and
Speaker 1: there aren't any Republican attacks on Medicare or Social Security.
Speaker 1: That's all Democratic fantasy that they spend every years. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but with regard to healthcare, it's not working well. This
Speaker 1: is Obamacare, it's not working well. The American people are
Speaker 1: giving us divided government. The Democrats now have some governing
Speaker 1: responsibility being in the majority of the House. I think
Speaker 1: what they're saying to it is you guys get together
Speaker 1: and figure out a way to improve the health care system.
Speaker 1: Obamacare has not worked well, so they've given us divided government.
Speaker 1: We have to work together. We need to improve the
Speaker 1: health care system in America because it's not working well.
Speaker 1: That's all true, although it's not as true as Mitch
Speaker 1: says it in the sense that most people actually like
Speaker 1: their healthcare. Most people think that their healthcare is pretty good.
Speaker 1: Those who have employer provided healthcare satisfaction with us really
Speaker 1: you never hear about this. Satisfaction is really high. There's
Speaker 1: a percentage of the population and you know that works
Speaker 1: and can't really afford healthcare and gets caught up in
Speaker 1: dealing with crappy HMOs and all that. And that's why
Speaker 1: we've gotten into this crisis we're in with with the
Speaker 1: health care system, because people realize that it's you know,
Speaker 1: it's unethical that somebody would suffer horribly in a very
Speaker 1: wealthy country because they don't have the funds to pay
Speaker 1: for a disease that they've contracted just because you know,
Speaker 1: but there's not gonna be any bipartisan fixing any of
Speaker 1: this stuff. That's fantasy land stuff. So, as I've been
Speaker 1: saying to you. The Democrats took the house. It's time
Speaker 1: for us to batten down the hatches. Okay, so you
Speaker 1: need to hire somebody for a job opening. You know
Speaker 1: what's not smart just sort of hoping that the right
Speaker 1: resumes show up. You know what else isn't smart? Just
Speaker 1: posting somewhere online and assuming, well, this is getting in
Speaker 1: front of the best candidates. Forget all that stuff. What
Speaker 1: is smart is going to zip recruiter dot com slash
Speaker 1: buck to make sure you hire the right person. Zip
Speaker 1: recruiter doesn't depend on candidates you finding you, It finds
Speaker 1: them for you. It's powerful matching technology scans thousands of resumes,
Speaker 1: identifies people with the right skills, education, experience, and it
Speaker 1: invites them to apply. It goes for you to them. Okay,
Speaker 1: think of it like your online head hunter. That's what.
Speaker 1: Zip recruiter is rated number one by employers in the US.
Speaker 1: My listeners can try zip recruiter right now for free
Speaker 1: at this exclusive web address zip recruiter dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: That's zip recruiter dot com slash buck again one more time,
Speaker 1: zip recruiter dot com slash buck. Zip recruiter is the
Speaker 1: smartest way to hire on the other hand, you had
Speaker 1: some that decided to let's stay away. Let's stay away.
Speaker 1: They did very poorly. I'm not sure that I should
Speaker 1: be happy or say it, but if you'ld just find
Speaker 1: about it, okay. Carlos Cube, Lah, Mike Kaufman, too bad.
Speaker 1: Mike mea love. I saw me a love. She called
Speaker 1: me all the time to help her with a hostage situation,
Speaker 1: being held hostage in Venezuela. But Mia Love gave me
Speaker 1: no love and she lost. Too bad. Sorry about that,
Speaker 1: Maya and Barbara Compstock was another one. I mean, I
Speaker 1: think she could have won that race, but she didn't
Speaker 1: want to have any embrace. Peter Roscomb didn't want the embrace.
Speaker 1: Eric Paulson didn't want the embrace. Bob Hugan, I feel
Speaker 1: badly because I think that's something that could have been one.
Speaker 1: That's a race that could have been one. John Fasso.
Speaker 1: Those are some of the people that you know, decided
Speaker 1: for their own reason not to embrace. Whether it's me
Speaker 1: or what we stand for, but what we stand for
Speaker 1: meant a lot to most people. The President is just
Speaker 1: at press comments earlier today saying what's true. If people
Speaker 1: really got upset about this, people are calling him acting
Speaker 1: like a mafia boss over of course at you idiot
Speaker 1: Central CNN. But the President is just doing very clear
Speaker 1: election analysis where you had a lot of different candidates
Speaker 1: that probably had they not thought, had they not, you know,
Speaker 1: decided to go with the conventional wisdom of oh to
Speaker 1: win in this district, where to win in this area,
Speaker 1: you gotta you gotta distance yourself from Trump. Probably could
Speaker 1: have won you know, New Jersey. For a moment there
Speaker 1: looked like that was a winnable sentence seat. I'm talking
Speaker 1: more about Menendez later on. But Oi, I can't believe it. Well,
Speaker 1: I can't believe it's Jersey. Oh Jersey, Look at you, Jersey.
Speaker 1: Look what you got. Now, Look what you made me do? Jersey. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, but you you could have had the president
Speaker 1: really get involved in some of these races, and it
Speaker 1: might have. Look I I still think of Democrats probably
Speaker 1: win the House by some kind of majority, but it
Speaker 1: would have been less and the center majority. I mean,
Speaker 1: in a different world you might have had another I
Speaker 1: shouldn't say a different world and just a different night.
Speaker 1: I mean, in different dynamics, you could have had three
Speaker 1: or four more Republican pickups. I mean, hell are out
Speaker 1: in Nevada definitely could have gone GOP with a little
Speaker 1: bit more effort. New Jersey could have gone GOP with
Speaker 1: Hugen over Menendez. Um that there there were there were
Speaker 1: a few spots where oh, I mean you know, Tester
Speaker 1: and Montana. Uh, there are some places where we really
Speaker 1: could have but we did We did well. I mean,
Speaker 1: don't get me wrong, GPD. Well, I'm not trying to
Speaker 1: be greedy, but I just want to note that the
Speaker 1: President's gotten so much pushback over this, and I was like,
Speaker 1: why it's important that for the next election people know.
Speaker 1: And Trump goes on the record and saying, okay, establishment
Speaker 1: GOP types who thought you were too cool and too
Speaker 1: smart to tie yourself to the president. The leader of
Speaker 1: the party is the leader of the Republican Party. Now
Speaker 1: that's that's not debatable. That's not up for discussion. Do
Speaker 1: you want to be in the Republican Party and you
Speaker 1: want to get behind the leader or not? But there's
Speaker 1: nothing That doesn't mean you have to agree with them
Speaker 1: on everything. It doesn't mean you have to defend everything
Speaker 1: he says. Just means do you support him or not?
Speaker 1: Are you a part of his agenda? Are you a
Speaker 1: part of the implementation of his vision. And if you
Speaker 1: want to say no, we'll just remember that a bunch
Speaker 1: of people said no for this election and they got
Speaker 1: wiped out. Why why is this such a big deal?
Speaker 1: People are making such a big deal out of this
Speaker 1: today looking around and saying, well, what's what's the problem? So,
Speaker 1: you know, Trump, Trump is telling people what they should
Speaker 1: know about you don't run, you don't run. You know,
Speaker 1: with with Trump, bad things happen. I I don't really,
Speaker 1: I don't know. You get it. People well, they just
Speaker 1: they hate Trump. I mean, they just always want to
Speaker 1: make a big and make a big deal out of
Speaker 1: this um and and then there's there's this other issue
Speaker 1: I wanted to just get you for a moment here. Well,
Speaker 1: first of all, who qualifies as a woman that we
Speaker 1: should be excited about in politics is always an interesting thing.
Speaker 1: It's just like, who qualifies as a minority? What was
Speaker 1: there any embrace of uh Condoleeza Rice as a very
Speaker 1: high profile, very powerful minority under the Trump administration? Of course,
Speaker 1: the answer, you know is no, there was no embrace
Speaker 1: of Condoleeza Rice as a minority in that administration. In fact,
Speaker 1: people I think pretty openly questioned whether she counts as
Speaker 1: a minority whatever that means. You know, if you're not
Speaker 1: working with the left on this stuff, they decide that
Speaker 1: they can send you, send you off the team. I guess,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I mean, that's that's how the left
Speaker 1: does it. There's this there's this willingness to change one's
Speaker 1: identity politics on the left, based really on what the
Speaker 1: left says your identity is. They they just determined as
Speaker 1: you go along. But here is Mica who watches Morning Joe.
Speaker 1: So I mean, I really mean that, who thinks that
Speaker 1: they get insight and clarity and they're watching, you know,
Speaker 1: nice people by the way, people that you really people
Speaker 1: that I don't know. I will I won't. I won't
Speaker 1: go down there. There's the there's a whole path here,
Speaker 1: and I know I don't. I don't like the whole
Speaker 1: You work together, you both got families, but hey, let's
Speaker 1: abandon the family, you know, but let's let's go past that,
Speaker 1: because I look, I understand Republicans, no point to Republican
Speaker 1: point to the presidents. They look at his personalized I'll
Speaker 1: leave that out. I'll leave all that stuff aside. But
Speaker 1: I just in particular the whole Morning Joe thing, and yeah,
Speaker 1: I think it's unseemly, but okay, but here's Mica play
Speaker 1: clip five. I want to just share my thoughts in
Speaker 1: the eighteen midterms and women knowing their value. It's not
Speaker 1: a coincidence that some of the biggest winners of the
Speaker 1: night are women, many first time candidates inspired to run
Speaker 1: to put a check on Donald Trump. It's a vast
Speaker 1: majority of the history makers were Democrats. Dead Hallen, the
Speaker 1: first Native American woman elected to Congress, Ianna Presley, the
Speaker 1: first woman of color in Massachusetts, il hand Omar in Minnesota,
Speaker 1: and Rashida delib in Michigan. Muslim Americans breaking barriers, women
Speaker 1: breaking barriers, Johanna Hayes, who went from teacher of the
Speaker 1: Year to Connecticut's first African American Democrat in Congress. And
Speaker 1: there's also Nancy Pelosi that story this morning, likely getting
Speaker 1: back the gavel she left off. Young Kim was the
Speaker 1: first Korean American in Congress, a Republican from California's thirty
Speaker 1: ninth congressional district. So okay, you might say to me,
Speaker 1: all right, buck, hold on, hold on, Maybe it's in oversight.
Speaker 1: My shay. Well, okay, I could be persuaded that that dry.
Speaker 1: I could be persuaded that this time around it was
Speaker 1: in fact and an oversight. Um. But there's a I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that it was. I'm just saying you could
Speaker 1: persuade me. I'm open to that possibility. But then you
Speaker 1: look a little bit at what is going on here
Speaker 1: with the way the left is talking about this election,
Speaker 1: and there is a lot of when I refer to
Speaker 1: blue check Twitter by the way, for those of you
Speaker 1: who aren't Twitter people, which I know is a lot
Speaker 1: of this audience, because you know, why, why be on
Speaker 1: Twitter unless you work your media. Although those of you
Speaker 1: are on Twitter tweet at me, say hi, I like
Speaker 1: talking to you. Um. A lot of blue check media
Speaker 1: was pointing out that in the Cruise and O'Rourke race,
Speaker 1: as well as other races, there was a very clear
Speaker 1: split between um minority um my minorities across the board
Speaker 1: who went overwhelmingly for Democrats. I mean in the Ourora
Speaker 1: Cruise race, for example, Cruise is a Latino folks. By
Speaker 1: the way, this always gets lost Beato is a fake Latino.
Speaker 1: Cruise is an actual Latino, and Latino men went for
Speaker 1: m Latino women went sixty six percent for O'Rourke. White
Speaker 1: women went for Cruiz. And there's a similar dynamic in
Speaker 1: the Gillham race, where you had a pretty healthy percentage
Speaker 1: in terms of you know that the overall tally, a
Speaker 1: pretty solid percentage of white women went for de santiss
Speaker 1: and and did not go for Gillum. And the way
Speaker 1: that this has talked about by the blue check which
Speaker 1: means journalists, right, it means that people that are verified
Speaker 1: on Twitter um official Official Twitter were saying that white
Speaker 1: women are disappointment this one guy, Trayvon free Rope, Black
Speaker 1: women voted for betto white women did what white women do?
Speaker 1: What what is that supposed to mean? Well, what exactly
Speaker 1: is is you know, I'm I'm I'm trying to just
Speaker 1: get to the bottom of what that white women did. Well,
Speaker 1: what does that mean? Why is it all right? Why
Speaker 1: is it all right for white women to be called
Speaker 1: out in this way that that strikes me as crossing
Speaker 1: a line in a pretty profound way. You know, they're
Speaker 1: gonna they're gonna blame white females for the loss in
Speaker 1: some of these places. The Women's March, you know, the
Speaker 1: Women's March the pink hat wearers. They wrote, quote, there
Speaker 1: needs to be accountability and an honest reckoning. There's a
Speaker 1: lot of work to do white women, a lot of learning,
Speaker 1: a lot of growing. Uh, what do you mean that
Speaker 1: white women have a lot of learning to do? Oh,
Speaker 1: because white women went seventy six percent for Kemp, fifty
Speaker 1: for Cruise, for DeSantis, Black women went for O'Rourke, percent
Speaker 1: for Abrams, pent for for Gillham, and this one journalist
Speaker 1: here wrote white women gonna white? When does the hostility
Speaker 1: toward whiteness in the media we I know there are
Speaker 1: a lot of white people in the media that also
Speaker 1: do this, but they do it in a way that
Speaker 1: they think that they're essentially earning virtue signaling points all
Speaker 1: the time and they're not part of the bad whiteness.
Speaker 1: But when does the hostility to whiteness in the media
Speaker 1: and the culture more broadly become something we're allowed to
Speaker 1: talk about because it is pretty openly celebrated now in
Speaker 1: some corners. There are a lot of places where you
Speaker 1: can bash whiteness as almost a disease, as an affliction.
Speaker 1: We have to overcome whiteness, we have to d privilege
Speaker 1: whiteness that's not a big leap from We have to
Speaker 1: overcome whiteness too. There's a problem with white people and
Speaker 1: that leads us down a very very ugly path, and
Speaker 1: that's where the left is taking us. I think you
Speaker 1: should let me run the country. You run CNN, and
Speaker 1: if you did it, well a question, are you worried?
Speaker 1: That's enough? That's president as one of the other folks.
Speaker 1: That's enough part of me, ma'am, that's enough, this president.
Speaker 1: I had one of the ds I may ask on
Speaker 1: on the Russia investigation? Are you concerned that that you may?
Speaker 1: I'm not concerned about anything you have investigation because it's
Speaker 1: a hoax. Are that's enough? Put down the mic? This president?
Speaker 1: Are you worried about indictments coming down in this investigation? Mr? President,
Speaker 1: I'll tell you what. CNN should be ashamed of itself
Speaker 1: having you working for them. You are a rude, terrible person.
Speaker 1: You shouldn't be working for CNN. Go ahead. I think
Speaker 1: that's your very rude person. The way you treat Sarah
Speaker 1: Huckabee is horrible, and the way you treat other people
Speaker 1: are horrible. You shouldn't treat people that way. Go ahead,
Speaker 1: and Peter in Jim's defense. I've traveled with him and
Speaker 1: watched him. He's a diligent reporter who bustles. I'm not
Speaker 1: a big fan of yours either, So to be honest,
Speaker 1: ask your question, if I can you repeatedly start you
Speaker 1: are the best, Mr. President, You repeatedly over the course
Speaker 1: of just down place. Well, when you when you report
Speaker 1: fake news, No, when you report fake news, which CNN
Speaker 1: does a lot, you are the enemy of the people.
Speaker 1: Trump is completely in the right in this whole exchange.
Speaker 1: And and the video, by the way, which I know
Speaker 1: we're doing a radio show, so I can't show it
Speaker 1: to you, but the video is very uh worthwhile because
Speaker 1: it shows that not only do you have the usual
Speaker 1: Acosta crazy rude grandstanding going on, and just also is
Speaker 1: belligerents toward the president. I mean, the the press corps
Speaker 1: is seething with hostility toward the president all the time.
Speaker 1: I mean, not all of them. They are obviously some
Speaker 1: conservatives and some reasonably neutral members of the press corps
Speaker 1: do exist, at least in the questions they ask. I mean,
Speaker 1: I think they're still big libs, but they do ask
Speaker 1: real questions. But you get into the the acostas and
Speaker 1: the April Ryan's and some of these there's that they
Speaker 1: just take every opportunity to say, Mr President, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm from CNN, when did you stop eating your wife? Sir?
Speaker 1: And they wanted to stand up there and just take it.
Speaker 1: And thank god the president does not. I mean, Acosta
Speaker 1: should be ashamed of himself, but the guy is incapable
Speaker 1: of shame. I mean the guy. First of all, the
Speaker 1: guy's not very smart at all. It's not not even
Speaker 1: a little bit impressive. He's just he's just somebody who's
Speaker 1: played the game over at CNN kind of looks the part,
Speaker 1: sounds the part of the corresponding, and you know, CNN
Speaker 1: uses him for this purpose. CNN is is really a
Speaker 1: The whole thing is an act over there. There's all
Speaker 1: we're objective journalists. Oh, we're just bringing you the facts
Speaker 1: and the truth that this is all nonsense, it's all garbage,
Speaker 1: the whole place. It's really been overcome and really overtaken
Speaker 1: by the dark side. I mean not to get to
Speaker 1: star Star Wars on you here, but it has been
Speaker 1: overcome by an anti trump mania. It wasn't always Wait,
Speaker 1: people ask me Buck you work at seeing how can
Speaker 1: you have done that said, well, initially I was doing
Speaker 1: counter terroristm analysis and yeah, they're too left wing for
Speaker 1: my taste on that, but at least they would agree
Speaker 1: with me. Yeah, the the bombing of that bus or
Speaker 1: that vehicle attack or whatever that happened in Europe. You
Speaker 1: know that's really bad, Buck, tell us about it, and
Speaker 1: that I could do over there. The moment that I
Speaker 1: shifted over into the political world at CNN. Of but
Speaker 1: you know, conservative political commentator from the Blaze, all of
Speaker 1: a sudden, that's what they used to say. I'm like,
Speaker 1: actually got a nationally syndicated radio show, but slow your role, um.
Speaker 1: But you know, they would say these things that they
Speaker 1: bring me on, and then I realized, oh, this is
Speaker 1: all just a sham. They don't want a conversation, they
Speaker 1: don't want to dialogue. This is creating a false perception
Speaker 1: of open debate and dialogue and journalistic integrity for a
Speaker 1: left wing audience that can't handle the truth. That's what
Speaker 1: it is. That is CNN's mission, that is what it
Speaker 1: pedals day in and day out. But that press conference
Speaker 1: was by anyone objective standard, completely disgraceful. I mean utterly
Speaker 1: and completely abhorrently disgraceful. Jim Acosta, acting like a maniac,
Speaker 1: wouldn't give the microphone. There's a young White House staffer.
Speaker 1: The young woman looks to be about you know, and
Speaker 1: she comes over and the President of the United States
Speaker 1: is saying, Okay, I'm not taking your question anymore. Please
Speaker 1: pass the microphone. And she does as she is instructed
Speaker 1: by the commander in chief to take the microphone and
Speaker 1: pass to someone else. And Acosta grabs her by the
Speaker 1: arm and kind of pushes her arm away and grips
Speaker 1: the microphone like a toddler who doesn't want to give
Speaker 1: up a toy in the sandbox. It's not his toy.
Speaker 1: But Jim Acosta is a toddler. It's the very overpaid
Speaker 1: one who gets far too much of our attention. I mean,
Speaker 1: he immediately launches into this, Mr President, you know, you're
Speaker 1: what you said about the caravan is racist, Jim. That's
Speaker 1: opie me. That's editorializing. That's not a question. What he
Speaker 1: does is not posing questions to the Presidented States to
Speaker 1: get information for the American people. As a journalist. He
Speaker 1: is a pundit who is too cowardly to say that's
Speaker 1: what he is, because then he'd have to actually engage
Speaker 1: in intellectual debate. I would shred these clowns. For example,
Speaker 1: anyone at CNN, in any anchor chair on these issues,
Speaker 1: I would crush them. They're just not very smart. They
Speaker 1: all hide behind this facade of journalistic integrity. They all
Speaker 1: hide behind this I'm neutral. At least the Van Jones is.
Speaker 1: At least the UH I can't remember her name, the
Speaker 1: one who's I used to be on all the time. Anyway,
Speaker 1: I can't remember that. I can't remember some of the
Speaker 1: names of it. But you at least the opinion people
Speaker 1: that they call them analysts, which is to kind of
Speaker 1: elevate them as not being like, you know, pundits. They
Speaker 1: have to defend their ideas in some level. The worst
Speaker 1: are the anchors and the correspondence. I mean they're the
Speaker 1: ones that are really and now there's some nice correspondence
Speaker 1: over there too, and there's some nice anchors. It's not
Speaker 1: all of them, all right, you know this is there.
Speaker 1: There's some decent there's some decent folks on air over
Speaker 1: at CNN. So I don't want because some of you
Speaker 1: say Buck Wi, you know, I saw you with so
Speaker 1: and so. You're nicest, so and so I have some
Speaker 1: friends over there, you know, some of my friends over there.
Speaker 1: But you run down their main line up, you know,
Speaker 1: you run down the big names and the hashtag resistance
Speaker 1: over at CNN. Acosta, Tapper, Uh, Cooper Lemon, Cuomo camar Rosso,
Speaker 1: Allison Camarossa. Uh, They're they're all making assets of themselves
Speaker 1: on a regular basis, and none of them are particularly
Speaker 1: interesting or smart. And the whole thing is this facade
Speaker 1: of we're just journalists. Yeah right, please slow slow your
Speaker 1: role just journalists. Like when Jake Tapper was saying that
Speaker 1: nobody at CNN was holding a president responsible for those
Speaker 1: pipe bombs that God said hours after the president of
Speaker 1: CNN released a statement saying the president needs to the
Speaker 1: President Nited States needs to know that his words have consequences.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, but no one's holding Trump responses. It's just
Speaker 1: it's just slimy. It were just slimy, very very frustrating,
Speaker 1: very very annoying. Um, but I mean a Costa also
Speaker 1: get you know, he essentially man handles this this woman.
Speaker 1: I mean there's one person who referred to it as
Speaker 1: a karate chop, which is is pretty true. You know,
Speaker 1: Katie Pavlos over at Fox wrote, the only thing physical
Speaker 1: about this video is Jim Acosta slamming down the arm
Speaker 1: of a woman doing her job. She's took, Katie told
Speaker 1: me right. NBC News they reported it as quote White
Speaker 1: House aid grabs and tries to physically remove a microphone
Speaker 1: from CNN correspondent during a conscientious exchange with President Trump
Speaker 1: at a news conference. I think by the way, I
Speaker 1: think they changed that headline. I think that that was
Speaker 1: I think they stealth edited that headline because that's not
Speaker 1: what I remember. I mean, that's bad enough, but that's
Speaker 1: not what I remembered before. So that's, uh, that's what
Speaker 1: you're dealing with now with the mainstream media. That's how
Speaker 1: they operate here. And it is indeed very frustrating to
Speaker 1: watch this play out. But I just I am so
Speaker 1: thankful that President Trump will call these jokers out. And
Speaker 1: you know, look, he's he's not a despot. A despot
Speaker 1: would Saddam style. You know who's saying, not Barack Hussein,
Speaker 1: but Saddam Hussein. Uh, Saddam style, you know, march people
Speaker 1: out and no one knows where they go, right, I
Speaker 1: mean that that's a despotism, a despotism would be Trump
Speaker 1: revoking all the press credentials from these people and then
Speaker 1: telling them if they don't stop criticize them, they're gonna
Speaker 1: go to prison. And by the way, if Trump did that,
Speaker 1: I would vociferously and with all the the the platform
Speaker 1: I have denounced that and work against that. But Trump
Speaker 1: is never gonna do that. That's like saying, well, you know,
Speaker 1: would you guys still listen to me if I came
Speaker 1: in ans like, so, guess what, guys, I'm a huge
Speaker 1: lib now and actually I think that I'm a one
Speaker 1: legged Samoan from the seventeenth century. You might say, well, Buck,
Speaker 1: that doesn't really comport with reality. I don't think, you know,
Speaker 1: but you you probably wouldn't still think the show was great, right,
Speaker 1: But yeah, if if Trump was actually a despot, I'd
Speaker 1: have a problem with it. He's not, though, He's not
Speaker 1: a despot, and I'm not living in the seventeenth century,
Speaker 1: so we don't really have to worry about these things.
Speaker 1: We don't really have to be concerned about it. I did.
Speaker 1: I did see something as an aside, that there's a
Speaker 1: guy I think he's sixty nine and he wants Tinder,
Speaker 1: which is a dating app for those of you who
Speaker 1: don't know, uh so, it's an online dating service. He
Speaker 1: wants a judge to legally change his age. I don't
Speaker 1: even know the details here, but I knew this was
Speaker 1: coming because he wants to be in his forties because
Speaker 1: they'll have much more success, he thinks, getting dates with
Speaker 1: the kind of women he wants. I'm sure he wants
Speaker 1: to date thirty some things, or maybe even twenty some things,
Speaker 1: but he's sixty nine anyway. You know, the the delusions
Speaker 1: about gender or are soon to be extended to race
Speaker 1: and age as well, and the Libs are gonna have
Speaker 1: a really hard time parsing and explaining and defending their
Speaker 1: various positions on that. But I I have to say,
Speaker 1: I'm uh, I'm just so, I'm so pleased there the president,
Speaker 1: he had this press conference, he laid it all down
Speaker 1: and what he said needed to be said. And when
Speaker 1: he calls a cost to a rude, terrible person, He's right.
Speaker 1: Acosta is a rude, terrible person. It is such an
Speaker 1: honor and he and and and any CNN journal should
Speaker 1: feel honored to be given access to the President Nited
Speaker 1: States in this way, to be able to ask them
Speaker 1: the questions that they do to present the American people
Speaker 1: with information. You know, there is an important role here.
Speaker 1: It is important that our government is put on put
Speaker 1: in a position to answer questions. And but that doesn't
Speaker 1: mean that they have to take abuse their human beings too.
Speaker 1: You know, it's not that Jim Acosta and others, April
Speaker 1: Ryan and this other guy, Peter Alexander, that's the guy's name,
Speaker 1: one of these people who just he clearly he looks
Speaker 1: like what NBC thinks a news anchor should look like.
Speaker 1: Therefore he has this job. Other than that seems very unimpressive, fellow,
Speaker 1: But they don't understand how lucky they are. I mean,
Speaker 1: that's one of the big problems I have with a
Speaker 1: lot of these people in the media is that they
Speaker 1: think that they're they think they're really special and really important,
Speaker 1: and for most of them, they're just very lucky. I'm
Speaker 1: very lucky to do what I do, and I'm not
Speaker 1: getting paid millions and millions of dollars to do a
Speaker 1: job that hundreds and hundreds of other people could do
Speaker 1: just as well, right, I mean, doing a three hour
Speaker 1: radio show is distinct to the individual who does it,
Speaker 1: standing there and asking questions the President United States for
Speaker 1: a network network, cable show or a cable news channel
Speaker 1: is something that, yeah, some people do slightly better than others,
Speaker 1: but a lot of people can do that job, a
Speaker 1: lot of people. So people there should be a humility
Speaker 1: that comes with this profession. And there's just it's so lacking.
Speaker 1: It's so lacking over at scene, and it really is.
Speaker 1: And I mentioned this guy Peter Alexander by the way,
Speaker 1: he gives you more of this, more of what you
Speaker 1: would expect from the other side where he asks a
Speaker 1: question that's not a question, it's an editorial statement. I e.
Speaker 1: It's I think you're terrible. What do you think? Mr President?
Speaker 1: Play clip nineteen. It's the same press conference, Mr President,
Speaker 1: over the course over the course of the last several
Speaker 1: days of the campaign, Sir, Sir, at the end of
Speaker 1: the campaign, you repeatedly said that Americans need to fear democrats.
Speaker 1: You said Democrats would unleash a wave of violent crime
Speaker 1: that endangerous families everywhere. Why are you why are you
Speaker 1: pitting Americans against one another? SI? What are you trying
Speaker 1: to be him? Let me just tell you very simple,
Speaker 1: because they're very weak on crime, because they have often
Speaker 1: suggested members and people within the Democrat Party at a
Speaker 1: high level have six stid getting rid of Ice, getting
Speaker 1: rid of law enforcement. That's not gonna happen. Okay, we
Speaker 1: want to be strong on the borders, we want to
Speaker 1: be strong on law enforcement. And I want to I
Speaker 1: want to cherish Ice because Ice does a fantastic job.
Speaker 1: Notice how he was asking what could be considered a
Speaker 1: real question, and then he goes, why are you pitting
Speaker 1: Americans against each other? Well, you could always say that
Speaker 1: when one member of one political party criticized the other
Speaker 1: political party, this is a non question question. Why are
Speaker 1: you being so divisive? The media likes to do that too. Well,
Speaker 1: we're in a divided political atmosphere, don't mean, why are
Speaker 1: he being so divisive? So I was like saying, why
Speaker 1: are you so mean and disagreeing with the other side
Speaker 1: when when you really break this down, you can see
Speaker 1: just how transparent this whole thing is. I was glad.
Speaker 1: I was glad that Acosta got what was coming to
Speaker 1: him in this one. It was it was definitely what
Speaker 1: needed to happen. And unfortunately it benefits Acosta because the
Speaker 1: liberal idiots that watch him and the executives Zucker and
Speaker 1: co over at CNN who signed his paychecks think that
Speaker 1: it's great. This is great. They're all for it. So
Speaker 1: you know what, well, they both want to be They
Speaker 1: want to be pitied and they want to be considered brave.
Speaker 1: That's what these journalists are striving for. And it's just preposterous. Hey,
Speaker 1: producer Mike back in the house, I know you were.
Speaker 1: You were running some clips there for a second, so
Speaker 1: so you watched this in real time today too. I
Speaker 1: was thinking. I was like, I was like, oh, I know,
Speaker 1: producer Mike is loving the Acosta SmackDown here. Yeah. Man,
Speaker 1: we were going wild. It was amazing. It was it
Speaker 1: was epic. It was really one of the you know,
Speaker 1: it's almost jaw dropping when you could and you could
Speaker 1: see the tension. You could just see it through the
Speaker 1: TV and one of the TV angles. I'm sure you
Speaker 1: noticed that. How's called close day were it was just
Speaker 1: like I feel like I was like a boxing match
Speaker 1: was about to break out. Oh absolutely, you know, you know,
Speaker 1: I think by the way, you know, we've obviously got
Speaker 1: Jeff Sessions gone and and the other the other big
Speaker 1: name it's always been said, is is gonna you know,
Speaker 1: leave the White House of Sarah Huckaby Sanders. She's about
Speaker 1: to be out. According to me. That's according to my
Speaker 1: sources in the White House, and I've been but I
Speaker 1: mean it's been reported. I mean I've heard it. People
Speaker 1: have heard it from other people too. But I've also
Speaker 1: talked to White House folks and they said, that's that's
Speaker 1: coming for a long time. Uh. I think that the
Speaker 1: President is going to take on a lot more of
Speaker 1: these briefings himself. I think the President realizes that the
Speaker 1: best thing for him is is when the American people
Speaker 1: see the way these maniacs act and they're really doing
Speaker 1: it to the President of United States, what do you think, man?
Speaker 1: I couldn't I like it? Yeah, I couldn't agree more.
Speaker 1: He sees, you know, they're in their own little bubble
Speaker 1: in that room, and they still have no clue how
Speaker 1: the American people view what they're doing. And I think
Speaker 1: they see him as being attacked and he's you know,
Speaker 1: they were cornering him today and he fought back and
Speaker 1: his bass loves that and they I mean, if last
Speaker 1: night didn't get him reelected, that you know, that could
Speaker 1: have today. I mean, it was amazing when he was
Speaker 1: doing Oh, Yeah, that was great. I mean it comes
Speaker 1: after also the Democrat there was no blue wave. Clearly
Speaker 1: it's not what they were hoping for there. Some of
Speaker 1: them were basically crying about this thing and then they
Speaker 1: come in and you know what it was meant. They
Speaker 1: were just trying to they were just trying to, uh
Speaker 1: make a statement about how they're still gonna be hashtag
Speaker 1: resistance and Trump was kind of like, bring it, fools,
Speaker 1: what you got? Yeah, that was amazing. I'm glad. I
Speaker 1: knew you were a joy it today too. But I
Speaker 1: was like I was gonna start texting. My phone was
Speaker 1: low and choice. But I'm like, Mike, have seen this one.
Speaker 1: When we were talking at all, right, I told you
Speaker 1: like we were in like one of our offices here
Speaker 1: about three or four other people, and we just were
Speaker 1: like going back. We're like cheering like it was a
Speaker 1: sporting about. We're like, oh my god, and people are
Speaker 1: like walking by the office like sticking her head, like
Speaker 1: what's going on in there? And I love it? Man,
Speaker 1: all right, we got we got Harlan Hill. Guys gonna
Speaker 1: drop some knowledge on what happened last night coming up
Speaker 1: here in just a moment. It's a wonderful thing that
Speaker 1: you can send resumes anywhere, and you can post for jobs,
Speaker 1: you can apply for jobs, you can get involved in
Speaker 1: the job market. But when you're hiring people, how do
Speaker 1: you know that you're getting the individual that you think
Speaker 1: you are right? All you're looking at is a piece
Speaker 1: of paper, maybe an email. Guess what people write stuff?
Speaker 1: People present themselves in way. It's just not true. You
Speaker 1: need remember how small or large your company is. Those
Speaker 1: of you who are in the HR departments of huge,
Speaker 1: fortunate one companies, those of you've got ten employees. You
Speaker 1: gotta start up. You want to have a background investigation
Speaker 1: and vetting company you know you can trust. That's Global
Speaker 1: Verification Network. They're the only dual certified veteran owned company
Speaker 1: in this space, all right, they are the ones you
Speaker 1: want to go to. I know the CEO personally. He's
Speaker 1: an incredibly quality guy, uh and he will make sure
Speaker 1: that your questions get answered through this whole process call
Speaker 1: eight seven seven six nine five one seven nine eight
Speaker 1: seven seven six nine five one one seven nine. So
Speaker 1: a lot of big things happened after the results were
Speaker 1: finally tallied last night. We've had a lot in the
Speaker 1: news cycle to tackle. I want to bring in one
Speaker 1: of my favorite fellow Republican voices from here in the
Speaker 1: swamp to just help us make sense of it all.
Speaker 1: Our friend Harlan Hill is with us now. He is
Speaker 1: a Republican consultants also a member of the Trump twenty
Speaker 1: Board of Advisors. Harlan great to have you back, my friend.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Buck greaty with you. How are you feeling
Speaker 1: about all this and what what is your sense of
Speaker 1: where we are now? Yeah, we don't have to go
Speaker 1: through race by race, but okay, we gotta split split
Speaker 1: decision here house goes one way, set it goes the other.
Speaker 1: How are things looking in Mago world? We'll I'll be
Speaker 1: honest with you. I had fully prepared myself for a
Speaker 1: night that was much worse than well. We ended up
Speaker 1: getting um and all at all. I think it was
Speaker 1: mostly a watch between the Democrats and the Republicans, and
Speaker 1: we were promised the blue wave and what we talked
Speaker 1: with you know, I got a little small wave in
Speaker 1: the House for the Democrats, but a nice wave for
Speaker 1: Republicans in the Senate, and the fact that we were
Speaker 1: able to hold onto a couple of key governors races
Speaker 1: in Ohio and Florida votes extremely well for US as
Speaker 1: we looked at the President's reelection prospects. So I think
Speaker 1: it was all in all a pretty good night slid.
Speaker 1: And the President, as far as I can tell, I mean,
Speaker 1: he comes out and he says, look, people that in
Speaker 1: prickly in the house, who we're trying to distance themselves
Speaker 1: from me, there's a very there's a lot of clear
Speaker 1: data now that they got they got wiped out essentially.
Speaker 1: You know, Comstock in Virginia mea love and he mentioned
Speaker 1: a bunch of them by name. And in places where
Speaker 1: Trump showed up and and really campaigned hard, there were
Speaker 1: very tangible benefits for those Republican candidates. So I feel
Speaker 1: like Trump wasn't on the ballot but yet had a
Speaker 1: positive effect for the party, which means that when Trump
Speaker 1: is once again on the ballot, Democrats better bring more
Speaker 1: than their a game. They've better bring somebody else's game. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the party of Trump now. And
Speaker 1: if you were a Republican that it held on and
Speaker 1: tried to reflect the whole Republican party that had lost
Speaker 1: time and time again, you know, if you were one
Speaker 1: of those McCain acolytes or Romney and you you thought
Speaker 1: their brand of conservatism was going to save the party
Speaker 1: and and you know, lead us back to the White House. Um,
Speaker 1: you know you're irrelevant now and either you were primaried
Speaker 1: or you retired for last week you lost. And I
Speaker 1: think this is an important moment for the Republican Party
Speaker 1: as we reset. The President has assumed control and the
Speaker 1: Democrats have no leadership. To your point, I mean, it's
Speaker 1: it's unclear to me where that's going to even come from.
Speaker 1: Where's the next generation of talent for them? Where's the bench? Uh?
Speaker 1: You know, theoretically last night, going into last night, it
Speaker 1: was supposed to be Abrahams and Georgia. It was supposed
Speaker 1: to be a Gillum in Florida and Aurora, Texas. Those
Speaker 1: were the three saviors of the Democrat Party. And you know,
Speaker 1: people were speculating that some combination of them or them
Speaker 1: plus maybe a more establishment Democrat would make for a
Speaker 1: great ticket. All three of them lost. But even going
Speaker 1: beyond that, the leader of the Democratic Party in exile, uh,
Speaker 1: Barack Obama. Every single candidate that he supported that he
Speaker 1: went out in campaigned for lost last night. So while
Speaker 1: the President's popularity with his party is surging. The advocacy
Speaker 1: of his campaign is through the roof. Barack Obama is
Speaker 1: totally irrelevant. He couldn't pull any of these people across
Speaker 1: the finish line. The Democrats are in trouble. I think
Speaker 1: the Democrats are definitely in trouble. And when I saw
Speaker 1: we we did a poll at the at the Hill,
Speaker 1: and the top the top contenders for who should run
Speaker 1: against Trump are Biden, Sanders and and and I mean
Speaker 1: there's none of the above. And this is Democrats being
Speaker 1: so When none of the above is ist of the
Speaker 1: of the Democrat base in terms of who they think
Speaker 1: of the of the candidates that are currently under discussion
Speaker 1: should run against Trump, that tells you a lot. But
Speaker 1: you know, I've got to also say, I mean Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi is something of a walking talking ad for Republicans.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think that the more the more Pelosi
Speaker 1: we can see on the national stage in advance of
Speaker 1: the better. And I also think that we're heading toward
Speaker 1: a political stalemate here from a legislative point at least,
Speaker 1: where you know, there's all we're gonna be doing Harlem
Speaker 1: for the next two years is talking about investigations. You know,
Speaker 1: scandals real and imagined, and candidates because I don't think
Speaker 1: anything is really gonna get done. No, I mean not
Speaker 1: in the Congress at least. I mean, you know, Trump
Speaker 1: will do what he does. But right, well, and what's
Speaker 1: so frustrating about this is, you know, we're over three
Speaker 1: years into the Russia talk. I mean, this started before
Speaker 1: the president even got elected. They were trying to plant
Speaker 1: seeds of doubt about the President's legitimacy before he even
Speaker 1: became president. And um, now it's reached a fevered pitch.
Speaker 1: People are starting to really tune it out. In mainland
Speaker 1: America when you look at the polling, they don't care.
Speaker 1: They want to move past this. They love the economy,
Speaker 1: they love the direction of the country. And you know,
Speaker 1: until the Democrats can prove provide a shred of evidence
Speaker 1: to substantiate any of the claims that they made against
Speaker 1: the president in terms of Russian conclusion, then people aren't
Speaker 1: gonna care. And considering that we're two years into the investigation,
Speaker 1: we're three years into the talk of this, I don't
Speaker 1: I have no confidence the Democrats have any ability to
Speaker 1: produce any of that evidence because it doesn't exist. You know,
Speaker 1: it doesn't exist, and so they can talk about this
Speaker 1: all they want. Voters don't give arrests behind about it,
Speaker 1: and uh, this provides an opening for the president. And
Speaker 1: what I love most about Nancy poul being in a
Speaker 1: position of leadership is one her caucus is incredibly divided.
Speaker 1: They're over sixty Democrats in the House and said that
Speaker 1: they're going to oppose her her bid for leadership. There's
Speaker 1: gonna be a nasty fight. Um. And even if she
Speaker 1: is able to become secret she probably will be, her
Speaker 1: caucus is gonna be divided. They're going to be fighting,
Speaker 1: and her ability to keep this very slim majority that
Speaker 1: she has together is in question. And the President is
Speaker 1: going to take advantage of that, as he always does,
Speaker 1: because he does best when he has a foil, when
Speaker 1: he has somebody, uh you know, to to pin to
Speaker 1: pin against him. I feel like what we saw today
Speaker 1: Harlan in that wildly entertaining but also really kind of
Speaker 1: disturbing press conference where the press that they're they're not
Speaker 1: hiding it at all. I mean, it's been obvious that
Speaker 1: they're hostile to the president in a way where they
Speaker 1: are not just partisans, but they're rude and and they
Speaker 1: they really are making allegations in the form of questions
Speaker 1: ring press conferences. You know, so, sir, since you're a racist,
Speaker 1: what do you think about, you know, the price of
Speaker 1: of you know, soybeans right now? I mean that they'll
Speaker 1: just it's so clear that they're trying to grant stand
Speaker 1: and take swipes the president. But what I think we
Speaker 1: saw today and it wasn't just a Costa there are
Speaker 1: some others there too, is we are now just heading
Speaker 1: into this this bare knuckle political fight that is going
Speaker 1: to culminate in election, and that's gonna be the defining
Speaker 1: conversation in American politics, which is just the partisan battle
Speaker 1: over Trump. I don't see any unless there's some unforeseen
Speaker 1: unless we, you know, go to war with North Korea.
Speaker 1: I don't see something that's gonna distract from that or
Speaker 1: take us on a different path. Well, and look, we'll
Speaker 1: stop calling the media and people like Jim Acosta the
Speaker 1: enemy of the people when they stopped lying about the president,
Speaker 1: when they stopped slandering his supporters, um, when we stopped
Speaker 1: lying to their own viewers, um, which is exactly what
Speaker 1: CNN and other networks like them do. By the way,
Speaker 1: I'm you know, this firsthand. I'm sure because if you've
Speaker 1: been on CNN, you know that it's you know, typically
Speaker 1: seven Democrats against one Republican, which is the most dishonest
Speaker 1: portrayal of the country that you could provide to viewers possible.
Speaker 1: And they usually and they want the least effective Republican
Speaker 1: spokespersons that they can get. I mean, they either want
Speaker 1: to never trump er. I mean they want something like
Speaker 1: Anna Navarro, who's a joke in a clown. But you know,
Speaker 1: I mean even people that will at least try to
Speaker 1: take a not even necessarily pro Trump, just not anti
Speaker 1: Trump point of view on the right, they generally want
Speaker 1: people who are punching bags were clay pigeons, as we
Speaker 1: say in the business. And it's just it's just gross
Speaker 1: and Tapper and Cooper and all the rest of them.
Speaker 1: They're just frauds. The whole thing is dishonest. Yeah, it is.
Speaker 1: And um, I'm glad the president is fighting back. You know,
Speaker 1: I've had enough of this, and I think his supporters
Speaker 1: have too. He's got a mandate to do this, He's
Speaker 1: got a mandate to push back. I mean a cost
Speaker 1: was up there. Uh, This poor girl that works for
Speaker 1: in the White House com shop went to go retrieve
Speaker 1: the microphone because it was time for another reporter to
Speaker 1: ask questions, because you know, a cost had his chance
Speaker 1: to ask a question. The President answered it, and it
Speaker 1: was time to move on. And if you watch the video,
Speaker 1: looks like he assaulted this girl. He pushed her arm down,
Speaker 1: grabbed the mic back with two hands. He got very
Speaker 1: aggressive and physical with this young lady. And you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's reached the point where he is just out
Speaker 1: of control. He's rude, he's aggressive, and he's getting increasingly
Speaker 1: physical in these in these press conferences, and and TN
Speaker 1: in better wake up and start doing something about it,
Speaker 1: because they, i mean, they've lost their rating. Nobody watches
Speaker 1: that garbage, but they've they've they've also just totally squandered
Speaker 1: their brand too. If you, by the way, Harlan, you
Speaker 1: have you have real connections into the White House. I'm
Speaker 1: just wondering, how do you have any whether based on
Speaker 1: sources or just your own, your own sense of where
Speaker 1: this is heading. Do you have any thoughts on one
Speaker 1: on how the White House feels the day after this
Speaker 1: mid term and then also where we're going with the
Speaker 1: Attorney General situation? Yeah, I think it Houses is pleased. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, they know that the historical trends were working
Speaker 1: against us. You know, we should have given back some
Speaker 1: significant grounds in the mid terms. And I think that
Speaker 1: we fixed our expectations. And that's because the President and
Speaker 1: Vice President Pence and the rest administration vocalized for the
Speaker 1: last month going to every corner of this country to
Speaker 1: drive out the president supporters. And if the President the
Speaker 1: Vice President hadn't done that, last night would have been
Speaker 1: a very different story. It would have been much worse.
Speaker 1: So don't listen to any moderate Republican or somebody that
Speaker 1: is uh, you know, speaking you know, without giving their
Speaker 1: names to a reporter and saying that the President is
Speaker 1: the reason that, you know, uh, we lost the House
Speaker 1: last night. No, the President is the reason that we
Speaker 1: were able to pick up seats in the Senate and
Speaker 1: held on to as many of the seats as we
Speaker 1: did in the House, and were forty four Republicans retire, right,
Speaker 1: and we're gonna lose thirty two seats or something like that.
Speaker 1: And then're not some that's in a mid term year,
Speaker 1: that's a that's a resident. I'll take As for them,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, what was the second questions, Oh, the Attorney
Speaker 1: General Sessions is gone? Now what? Oh? Yeah, thank guy.
Speaker 1: You know, one of the president's promises was that, you know,
Speaker 1: we would drained the swamp, and and part of that
Speaker 1: is going after corruption that exists in the little Washington
Speaker 1: and it really permeates the Democratic Party. And um, you know,
Speaker 1: I was hopeful that when Jeff Sessions stepped into this
Speaker 1: role as Attorney general back in twenty seventeen that um,
Speaker 1: you know, he would he would chase that down. He didn't,
Speaker 1: and we're from that He's compromised the entire administration by
Speaker 1: advocating his role um and uh and and appointing that
Speaker 1: special prosecutors. So, uh, you know, he needed to go.
Speaker 1: He was ineffectual. He wasn't doing anything that what was
Speaker 1: he doing, What was he doing at d O J. Nothing?
Speaker 1: This guy, I mean, I think he's he's got a
Speaker 1: low I q Uh. He compromised the entire movement. Um,
Speaker 1: and the president had zero confidence in him. It was
Speaker 1: time to make a change. So uh, I think he
Speaker 1: was going on immigration, Harlan, I'll be honest with you,
Speaker 1: and I I think I think you're being a little
Speaker 1: harsh on Jeff. But as everybody who listen to the
Speaker 1: show knows, Jeff has actually called into the show a
Speaker 1: bunch of times. So I'm I got a little soft
Speaker 1: spot for the now former a g But nonetheless, man,
Speaker 1: I I appreciate your perspective on it. Everybody. If you're
Speaker 1: not already, you should follow Harlan on Twitter and you'll
Speaker 1: obviously see him popping up all the time on Fox News. Harlan,
Speaker 1: my brother down here in the swamp. Stay in the fight.
Speaker 1: All right. We say shields high on our team, So
Speaker 1: that's what you gotta do. Keep your shield high, all right,
Speaker 1: my friend, thank you. I gotta move around a lot
Speaker 1: of team, and that means that I end up using
Speaker 1: public WiFi, right, I got no choice. Sometimes on airplanes,
Speaker 1: on trains. You know, if I'm going out to see
Speaker 1: some of you across the country, trying to give a
Speaker 1: speech or trying to just do an interview, guess what
Speaker 1: I find myself at the mercy of whatever public WiFi
Speaker 1: is available. I don't want people able to access my stuff,
Speaker 1: whether at hackers or third party app users, individuals that
Speaker 1: are trying to sell my stuff. None of that express
Speaker 1: VPN protects you when you're online. It make sure that
Speaker 1: the stuff that you're doing, your documents, your activities are
Speaker 1: not accessible by these third parties. Cost less than seven
Speaker 1: dollars a month to protect yourself, and this is the
Speaker 1: number one VPN service out there according to tech Radar.
Speaker 1: Protect your online activity today and find out how you
Speaker 1: can get three months free at express vpn dot com
Speaker 1: slash buck. That's Express vpn dot com slash buck for
Speaker 1: three months free with a one year package Express vpn
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. It's unfair to the country and
Speaker 1: it's costing millions of dollars. Why don't you just give
Speaker 1: him the market place. I've answered the question. Go ahead,
Speaker 1: take the take. Well, I'll give you voters, so I
Speaker 1: will give you voter suppression. You just have to sit down.
Speaker 1: Please sit down. I didn't call you. I didn't call you.
Speaker 1: I didn't call you. I'll give you voter suppression. Take
Speaker 1: a look at the CNN polls. How inaccurate they were.
Speaker 1: That's called voter suppression. Go ahead, please thank you, Mr President.
Speaker 1: I'm not responding. I'm responding to Excuse me, I'm not
Speaker 1: responding to you. I'm talking to this gentleman. Would you
Speaker 1: please sit down? Would excuse me, excuse me, would you
Speaker 1: please sit down? Please go ahead? Thank you, Mr President.
Speaker 1: Now that the House of representing hostile, it's such a
Speaker 1: hostile media. It's so sad you asked me about no
Speaker 1: you rudely interrupted him. You rudely interrupted him. I love
Speaker 1: it when the President does this. It needs to be done.
Speaker 1: That was left wing political hacks slash journal April Ryan.
Speaker 1: I'm sure people are gonna say it's sexist and racist
Speaker 1: because she's a black female for the President to tell
Speaker 1: her that it is not her turn right, because anything
Speaker 1: that's President Jaws is sexist and racist. Even though he
Speaker 1: was trying to take a question from our friend and
Speaker 1: Deli caller reporters Saga and Jetty, who is South Asian
Speaker 1: so he is brown, but nonetheless trying to let one
Speaker 1: brown reporter speak and not letting an African American female
Speaker 1: reporter just interrupt and demand the floor is considered racist. Now,
Speaker 1: these are the new rules of journalism in the Trump era, apparently,
Speaker 1: and it's just so necessary. The President draws of of
Speaker 1: a firm a firm line on this one. I mean,
Speaker 1: really is clear that he won't allow people to act
Speaker 1: this way without Look, he's you know, This is what
Speaker 1: gets me so mad to journalists act up. And we
Speaker 1: obviously have talked about the Acosta thing, and I bet
Speaker 1: this is an acostas a performance artist. Now this is
Speaker 1: what he does. And Acosta just dear Diary. President Trump
Speaker 1: was mean to be. You know, he's more famous than
Speaker 1: he's ever been. I'm sure see an contract is fatter
Speaker 1: now with more cash attached to it than ever before.
Speaker 1: He's doing just fine. But these journal types cause a
Speaker 1: scene April Ryan Jim Acosta, that other guy who was
Speaker 1: you know, licking Acosta's boots today remembers from NBC. Uh,
Speaker 1: they cause a scene, and then they claim that the
Speaker 1: president is a despot. Then they claimed the president is
Speaker 1: acting in some totalitarian fashion and he's shutting down the
Speaker 1: First Amendment and how could he and it's so awful,
Speaker 1: all this stuff. All he does in response to say,
Speaker 1: can you not be rude? Can you not act like
Speaker 1: a spoiled little child? Can you not be a big
Speaker 1: baby about this? How about that? And the response to
Speaker 1: that from the people who are acting like huge babies
Speaker 1: is no surprise where and they claim that the president
Speaker 1: is ruining the country, destroying the First Amendment, and look
Speaker 1: at the media lost all credibility when it comes to
Speaker 1: objectivity under eight years of Obama? Are they lost all
Speaker 1: their Anybody who starts all the media's are there? Nonpartisan?
Speaker 1: Are neutral? They're either just delusional or stupid. Right, The
Speaker 1: mainstream media is over. The media in general in the
Speaker 1: news business is over lib them registers independence. By the way,
Speaker 1: I love that so funny. Oh, you're really fooling everybody
Speaker 1: with your independent that's the Don Lemon maneuver. Will excuse me,
Speaker 1: I'm an independent? Okay, you're an independent? No, now, I
Speaker 1: guess you're not a part as a hack. What a
Speaker 1: joke these clowns are. But they lost all of their
Speaker 1: claims to independence during the Obama years, no question about it,
Speaker 1: all right, They just they just got rid of all that.
Speaker 1: Now what we see is not only were they willing
Speaker 1: to just lie down take whatever Obama gave them, give
Speaker 1: Obama the verbal equivalent of a constant BackRub in the
Speaker 1: West wing. I mean, it was just an embarrassment. Not
Speaker 1: only were they willing to do that, but then under
Speaker 1: the Obama I mean, onto the Trump administration. Now what
Speaker 1: you see is there they are ferociously and childishly hostile
Speaker 1: to this president. I mean, they just throw tantrum after tantrum,
Speaker 1: and Jim Acosta is just the America's baby in chief
Speaker 1: right now, just doing this nonsense. He doesn't even ask
Speaker 1: smart questions. I mean, if Jim Acosta would actually ask
Speaker 1: an intelligent question once in a while, I'd give him
Speaker 1: a little bit more credit. And you know, I'd say,
Speaker 1: for every real question you get from a Costa, there
Speaker 1: are three speeches where a Costa is effectively grabbing the
Speaker 1: mic for himself to try to get all of the
Speaker 1: Libs who watch CNN excited. And it's just it's just terrible.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just I'm so sick of it, and
Speaker 1: thank Heavens that Trump just doesn't doesn't sit there and
Speaker 1: take it. If we had Romney as our president right now,
Speaker 1: which I know, I don't even I know he won
Speaker 1: the Senate, whatever we had Romney's are president right now,
Speaker 1: you just sit up there like, okay, everybody, can we
Speaker 1: be a little nicer? Please? Can we uh, let's come down.
Speaker 1: They would just steam roll him. The libs need to
Speaker 1: be taught a lesson, and none more so than the
Speaker 1: libs in the press, and none more so than CNN.
Speaker 1: I love it. When the President slaps them around verbally,
Speaker 1: unlike a Costa who gets a little rough physically with
Speaker 1: young women trying to take the mic from him. There
Speaker 1: was a dream tonight for Democrats, which was that early
Speaker 1: on they'd be able to say, Okay, we you know,
Speaker 1: we won a couple in Virginia, we want in Kentucky,
Speaker 1: and this is going to show that this wave is
Speaker 1: starting and you can't stop it. Now. There's no tsunami.
Speaker 1: There's there's no tsunami coming. I mean, winning the House
Speaker 1: by one vote, by one member is enough is enough
Speaker 1: for them. But there's a lot of disappointment that I'm
Speaker 1: hearing from people. The excitement, I think is the the
Speaker 1: cliche balloon is popping. This is heartbreaking. Though it's heartbreaking.
Speaker 1: The hope has been that the antibodies would kick in,
Speaker 1: that this sort of infestation of hatred and division would
Speaker 1: would would dry response from the American people willing in
Speaker 1: both parties to say no and no, no more. Uh.
Speaker 1: That does not seem to be happening tonight. It's not
Speaker 1: a blue wave, but it's still a blue war. We've
Speaker 1: got to continue the fight forward. We do have to
Speaker 1: continue to fight forward, but on the other side, and
Speaker 1: I think that the antibodies have kicked in. It's just
Speaker 1: the infection is leftism, state is um collectivism. The infection
Speaker 1: is what we refer to as liberalism today, which is
Speaker 1: really a form of sanitized insanity. That is what you
Speaker 1: have now on the left. These are people that you
Speaker 1: cannot have a normal, responsible conversation with on a whole
Speaker 1: host of issues. These are people who will say things
Speaker 1: that in any other time in human history, anyone with
Speaker 1: a normal functioning brain would say that is crazy. But
Speaker 1: now here we are now there are not two genders,
Speaker 1: there are thirty seven. Now we're all going to die
Speaker 1: unless we restrict c O two in the atmosphere by
Speaker 1: riding bicycles and eating less red meat. Now, we need
Speaker 1: to find ways to make the government even larger in
Speaker 1: our lives and more in control of our health care
Speaker 1: than ever before, because the government is so good at
Speaker 1: efficiency and the delivery of goods and services. This is insanity.
Speaker 1: And what you were shown last night without any hesitation,
Speaker 1: but left without any question, is that they have learned nothing.
Speaker 1: Since I really want to hammer home that point tonight.
Speaker 1: Nothing for them has changed. They do not stop and think, well,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, not only did Trump win that election,
Speaker 1: whether they want to pretend that Russia was involved that
Speaker 1: that doesn't even matter. I mean not only to do
Speaker 1: win that, but now if Trump has been president for
Speaker 1: almost two years and the American people that voted for him,
Speaker 1: then don't just think that was the right decision at
Speaker 1: that time, but want him to continue to be in
Speaker 1: charge and his party to be in charge because they
Speaker 1: think that they're doing a good job at governance. So
Speaker 1: while Van Jones and others at CNN can talk about
Speaker 1: the infestation of racism all the time without well, what
Speaker 1: specifics are we ever given about that? Because we want
Speaker 1: to secure border, that makes you racist. If wanting the
Speaker 1: border to be secure makes you a racist, then I
Speaker 1: suppose half the country is racist. If wanting the rule
Speaker 1: of law to be enforced irrespective of a person's skin
Speaker 1: color or national origin makes you a racist, then I
Speaker 1: guess half the country a racist. So if that is
Speaker 1: the case, then maybe they should just give up this
Speaker 1: talking point about how the country is so racist all
Speaker 1: the time, because we're not going to change on those points.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to change on rule of law. I'm
Speaker 1: not going to give up because of the moral blackmail
Speaker 1: they engage in on issues of immigration, acting like because
Speaker 1: we want sovereignty and rule of law were the equivalent
Speaker 1: of Plan members or something. All right, this is just
Speaker 1: unacceptable rhetoric from the left. But just remember I'm telling
Speaker 1: you this. They have learned nothing. They will change nothing,
Speaker 1: and now all we can do is win like soft
Speaker 1: butter on warm toast. Time to spread some freedom coast
Speaker 1: to coast. It's time for Roll call. Alright, team, it
Speaker 1: has been quite at twenty four hours or so, so
Speaker 1: we've got a lot, a lot to discuss here on
Speaker 1: Roll Call, and I appreciate hearing from from all of
Speaker 1: you as always. Man, it it was. It was wild
Speaker 1: last night. We did live coverage at at Hill TV
Speaker 1: and we were up until thirty and then I went
Speaker 1: to sleep at probably one and got back up at five,
Speaker 1: and yeah, it was. It was a tiring day. I
Speaker 1: managed to fall asleep about noon the next you know,
Speaker 1: today and just let all of the maga soak in,
Speaker 1: let all of the events that we've been discussing here
Speaker 1: on the show simmer a little bit in my mind.
Speaker 1: So it was. It's it's been quite a thing. I
Speaker 1: just as as I've said, prepare for battle. That's what
Speaker 1: we're in for for the next two years. It's just
Speaker 1: this is just gonna be an all out war in
Speaker 1: politics for control in But let's see what you think
Speaker 1: about all the things, Michael. By the way, this comes
Speaker 1: to us via Facebook dot com slash buck Sex, and
Speaker 1: Michael writes, so long to your buddy Jeff Sessions. I know, Michael,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm I'm very much of of two minds
Speaker 1: about this. I mean, the president needs to have somebody
Speaker 1: that you know, he can trust. The president needs to
Speaker 1: have somebody on his side that he you know, isn't
Speaker 1: isn't worried about falling into the the lib mentality on things.
Speaker 1: I mean, I I so, I I understand that. And
Speaker 1: the people say, oh, the Attorney general is supposed to
Speaker 1: be nonpartist, the Attorney John is supposed to here to
Speaker 1: the law everyone, But let's let's put on our big
Speaker 1: boy pants. I understand that, just like with the Supreme Court,
Speaker 1: there are ideological frameworks that people apply to the law
Speaker 1: and that matters, and we should not the other side
Speaker 1: is certainly aware of it. We should not pretend that
Speaker 1: we are not aware of it. Um. But yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: so I understand why he wanted somebody's a little more
Speaker 1: more of a fighter under the circumstances. I think Jeff
Speaker 1: Session is a very very honorable guy. I think he
Speaker 1: did everything that he could under the circumstances. Uh too,
Speaker 1: you know, be good the administration in terms of policy,
Speaker 1: but he clearly was not ready for this moment of
Speaker 1: all out street rowling with the Damns. All right. Next
Speaker 1: up here, Tom writes buck love the show. I'm a
Speaker 1: truck driver and listen on a few days a few
Speaker 1: days delay on podcast. I'm from New Jersey but recently
Speaker 1: moved to Kentucky to escape the liberal nonsense. I can't
Speaker 1: believe my old home voted in Menendez. It's unreal, all
Speaker 1: the brainwashed people in this country. Thanks for everything you do,
Speaker 1: Shields Tie well, thank you Tom for listening. Very much appreciated.
Speaker 1: And ask for New Jersey with Menendez. You know, they
Speaker 1: how do I how do I put it? They decided
Speaker 1: in the New Jersey they wanted, you know, guys got
Speaker 1: a little bit of dirt on them, you know, a
Speaker 1: little Menendez. They they understand they feel like a you know,
Speaker 1: he's a guy who uh he's a guy's guy because
Speaker 1: you know he's got problems. Maybe you can put a
Speaker 1: little leverage, put a little lean on him, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean. That's uh, that's the it's the New
Speaker 1: Jersey way. I mean there's a part of Look, I
Speaker 1: have so many friends and everything from New Jersey. I'm
Speaker 1: just as a New Yorker. I'm allowed to have fun
Speaker 1: in New Jersey. It's like when people in Texas say
Speaker 1: that we're deporting the wrong people. We need to be
Speaker 1: deporting Oklahoman's. I mean, that's not all me, that's what
Speaker 1: they say. But you know that's a Texas, Oklahoma thing.
Speaker 1: And with New York and New Jersey there's a special,
Speaker 1: a special relationship where we kid, you know, we make
Speaker 1: little jokes here and there, but I I I agree
Speaker 1: and me onto a serious point here, the fact that
Speaker 1: New Jersey who who votes for Menendez? I mean, he
Speaker 1: was so close to being indicted for felony corruption and
Speaker 1: that's the best, that's the best New Jersey can do.
Speaker 1: Never mind some of the other allegations against him, which
Speaker 1: if you go back to about twelve you'll see what
Speaker 1: they were. They were published, they they never approven, but
Speaker 1: sketchy stuff out there about him sketchy stuff. And I'm
Speaker 1: not you know, I'm not saying that he should go
Speaker 1: to prison for things that are improven. I'm just saying
Speaker 1: that's who you want to elect to be your senator.
Speaker 1: I don't know. That seems to me to be uh,
Speaker 1: it seems to be to be a problem. But people
Speaker 1: people get what they get. You know, you get what
Speaker 1: you get what you get, and you get what you want.
Speaker 1: That doesn't really make any sense, but you know what
Speaker 1: I mean, t J writes book. Possible Democrat presidential contender
Speaker 1: Joe Mansion thoughts, um, well, I he's a Democrat, t J.
Speaker 1: So I don't really like that idea. I do think though,
Speaker 1: this is an opening for me to say that what
Speaker 1: I would like to have happened is, um, I would
Speaker 1: like for us to convince Mansion to switch over. Mansion
Speaker 1: should switch parties. You know, he is no longer really
Speaker 1: a Democrat. And I think the Kavanaugh vote, as much
Speaker 1: as it saved his Senate seat for him, I think
Speaker 1: that will be held against him by the party for
Speaker 1: a very very long time. So it's this is not
Speaker 1: this is not something that they will forget either. I mean,
Speaker 1: I think it's it's tough to tell whether for Mansion
Speaker 1: it was a point of honor or a point of
Speaker 1: political self preservation. I think you make a case for
Speaker 1: Mansion that it was either. But he made the right move,
Speaker 1: you know, just like with Jeff Flake. Jeff Flake is
Speaker 1: as a whimp and Jeff Lake should not be representing
Speaker 1: Republicans anywhere. But he did the right thing at the
Speaker 1: end of the day. On Kavanaugh. It took him a
Speaker 1: while to get there, and he took a risk he
Speaker 1: didn't have to, I think in the one week extension.
Speaker 1: But there is an argument to be made that that
Speaker 1: week really did take a lot of the heat out
Speaker 1: of the argument from the other side that you know,
Speaker 1: it was a risk, and I think that, you know,
Speaker 1: I don't think it was a necessary risk, but you
Speaker 1: can't argue that the risk worked out in the long run.
Speaker 1: And obviously Kavanaugh. You know, All's well, that ends well
Speaker 1: as the short version of what I'm trying to say.
Speaker 1: Uh Keith writes, Hey, Buck, just curious, were the Republican
Speaker 1: congressmen that retired a bunch of never trumpers. I wonder
Speaker 1: how many of the seats we kept and if they
Speaker 1: were a lot of never trumpers and if we did
Speaker 1: lose a lot of those seats. Could losing the House
Speaker 1: be an intentional way of hurting the Trump agenda on
Speaker 1: their part? Uh? You know, Keith, I do think that
Speaker 1: there were people that didn't want to run again because
Speaker 1: they thought that they would they would lose, and they
Speaker 1: and they don't really want to be a part of
Speaker 1: Trump's Republican Party anymore. There also was this point that
Speaker 1: Trump brought up today in the press conference about how
Speaker 1: if you've been a committee chairman, you know, there's you
Speaker 1: can't continue to be a chairman after a period of time.
Speaker 1: So there's a number of factors. But there were a huge,
Speaker 1: relatively speaking, huge number of Republican retirements and that's a
Speaker 1: that's an issue. That's an issue for sure. Joe writes,
Speaker 1: no faith in Florida, Buck, no worries. We were sweating too,
Speaker 1: but we came through shields high oss, Joe, Joe. I
Speaker 1: gotta give it credit to my Republican brothers and sisters
Speaker 1: down in Florida. You guys turned out. You guys brave
Speaker 1: the rain storms that were up in the Tallahassee area,
Speaker 1: and I guess some other parts of the state too. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, I I think that you guys came through
Speaker 1: in a really important way because the big story they
Speaker 1: wanted last night were winds in the Senate and the
Speaker 1: Governor's House in Florida. For the Democrats, Gillham as the
Speaker 1: next generation of national level Democrat left wing political figure,
Speaker 1: those were the Those were the big stories they want. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they wanted Beto, but Beto was a Beto was a
Speaker 1: pipe dream. Okay, he didn't lose by ten, I know,
Speaker 1: I said that, but he lost by four I think. Uh.
Speaker 1: And they spent seventy million dollars on it, So you know,
Speaker 1: at what point do you say, Okay, well, he would
Speaker 1: have lost by ten if they hadn't thrown more money
Speaker 1: into this Senate race than any other Senate race in history,
Speaker 1: in history to try and go right into GOP stronghold
Speaker 1: of Texas and take a seat there. I mean, it
Speaker 1: was bold, but it was foolish, brave but dumb. I
Speaker 1: think it's how you could describe it. Jenna right sad night.
Speaker 1: For Wisconsin, Scott Walker is one politician who says what
Speaker 1: he's going to do and then does it. I'm shocked
Speaker 1: at Wisconsin went so Democrat, but I live far from
Speaker 1: Madison listening to you when some other conservatives bring sanity.
Speaker 1: My hope remains in odd not in people. Jenna, Jenna,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for writing and writing and and
Speaker 1: uh yeah, I mean, you know, I think with Wisconsin
Speaker 1: there was just eventually the desire for change overcomes better
Speaker 1: judgment of the general population in a place people think, well,
Speaker 1: you know, we we how many times have we had
Speaker 1: to pull the lever for Walker? I know people would
Speaker 1: argue the other side of this is, well, when you're
Speaker 1: used to pulling the lever for somebody, you keep doing it.
Speaker 1: It even reminds me of that pretty mediocre Eddie Murphy
Speaker 1: movie back in the day they distinguished gentleman Jeff Johnson
Speaker 1: a name you know, where he just runs on the
Speaker 1: name of a deceased congressman and he wins because that's
Speaker 1: who everyone's used to voting for. And it's it's really
Speaker 1: the whole movie is kind of a one trick pony
Speaker 1: and that Okay, that's kind of a funny concept, but
Speaker 1: the rest of the movie is pretty boring, kind of sucks.
Speaker 1: But you know, I do think that with Walker, people
Speaker 1: just they just got worn down by the progressives who
Speaker 1: really would never let it go that he took on
Speaker 1: the public sector unions in that state. And I mean
Speaker 1: that was a crazy story. Back in twelve what was
Speaker 1: going on there that was really Uh you have people
Speaker 1: taken over the state capitol there in Wisconsin with these
Speaker 1: really these kind of riot like situations. I mean, these
Speaker 1: sit ins and everything. It was just nuts all because
Speaker 1: you know, we figured, well, maybe the taxpayers shouldn't be
Speaker 1: completely punished with gold plated benefit programs for public sector unions.
Speaker 1: Maybe that's something that they should address. Uh, next we
Speaker 1: have up. Alright, Hey, Buck, I call your brief message
Speaker 1: about how Americans really don't want government telling them who
Speaker 1: they can be. That is so true. They don't hurt
Speaker 1: anybody by breaking laws. They need to back the hell
Speaker 1: away and let freedom ring warts and all. I agree up,
Speaker 1: and your name is cool. Thank you for writing in.
Speaker 1: Uh yohann Hello Buck me again. Let's try this. I
Speaker 1: have a bad habit of hitting the enter key listening
Speaker 1: to the show tonight, and at the end you were
Speaker 1: reading listeners messages. You said that you wanted to read
Speaker 1: a critical one, and I thought that had to be mine.
Speaker 1: I hope you're changed your mind about thinking I was
Speaker 1: being critical. I just have a bit different take on
Speaker 1: one thing, you know, man buxter Um, Well no I don't.
Speaker 1: I wasn't actually thinking of yours. Okay, Well here we go, Johan.
Speaker 1: Here here's what you wrote. Buck. This is an earlier
Speaker 1: message that I just missed. Johan, by the way, just
Speaker 1: so you know, uh, I get We're getting hundreds and
Speaker 1: hundreds of messages in all the time, and so it's
Speaker 1: just I can't get to all of them. And some
Speaker 1: people have figured out the times that I tend to
Speaker 1: look at these and pick out messages to read on air.
Speaker 1: They've gamed the system a little bit, so their names
Speaker 1: appear a little more frequently in the roll call. But hey,
Speaker 1: I appreciate the enthusiasm, you know. I gotta yeah, I
Speaker 1: gotta people are gonna you know, they're gonna play the game. Well,
Speaker 1: you gotta respect the respect the player. But Johan, the
Speaker 1: critical message was this, Buck, you're the best. I can't
Speaker 1: take the other talk show host for more than a
Speaker 1: few minutes. I almost or I always agree with you,
Speaker 1: but it's not. You said a few things I could
Speaker 1: not get behind. First, calling the military the warrior class.
Speaker 1: I think that is dangerous thinking that they are a
Speaker 1: separate class. I prefer to think they are Americans that
Speaker 1: server are serving. I retired after more than thirty years active, reserved, Navy,
Speaker 1: and Army. Um. I hated the military, but by no
Speaker 1: stretch of my lefty what I did like about being
Speaker 1: in with some of the people I lived and work with,
Speaker 1: the cool things I did places I went. I didn't
Speaker 1: like the mickey mouse stuff that seemed more important to
Speaker 1: some folks, like tucking in your shirt during PT. I
Speaker 1: also didn't like taking orders, which I think is basically
Speaker 1: an American kind of thing. Um. Uh, none that anyway, Buck,
Speaker 1: you are still the best from Johannio, Y know. And
Speaker 1: I mean sure, that's by the way, it's completely wouldn't
Speaker 1: even say a criticisms, just a different opinion, but it's
Speaker 1: completely valid. Uh. And when I refer to the Warrior class,
Speaker 1: I mean I don't mean to separate them out as
Speaker 1: in their distinct or different from Americans. That just mean
Speaker 1: that they have served in a way that is just different. Uh,
Speaker 1: just different, gosh, Buck, distinct or different, just different, It's
Speaker 1: just different. Another bucket is m I'm really letting them
Speaker 1: fly these days, So that's gonna be it. For the
Speaker 1: Hut today. My friends, we got a lot ahead of us,
Speaker 1: so thanks for being here, Shields High. Guess what I
Speaker 1: just did, Team I had a moment where I was
Speaker 1: thinking about something I want to share a thought. Oh
Speaker 1: that's right, I logged in to snippy dot com. You
Speaker 1: may have heard me talk a little bit about snippy
Speaker 1: if this new social media site, and it's filling a
Speaker 1: very important need because, as you know, the big social
Speaker 1: media platforms out there have been engaged in all kinds
Speaker 1: of censorship. And you know that excuse against conservatives. They
Speaker 1: do shadow banning. You don't even know if they're censoring you.
Speaker 1: That's what's so crazy, right, But if you just want
Speaker 1: to post things and know that the conversation is what
Speaker 1: it is and that your thoughts, your opinions matter, snippy
Speaker 1: dot com is the unbiased social media platform that you've
Speaker 1: been waiting for. It's all about conversation and community. You're
Speaker 1: free to express your thoughts there. Well, this is totally free,
Speaker 1: all right. I'm telling you to go to snippy dot
Speaker 1: com um set up an account like thousands of members
Speaker 1: of Team Buck already have, and just start posting and
Speaker 1: use the interface. They've got new updates. There's no shadow betting,
Speaker 1: no suppression of conservative thought. Snippy dot com again, snippy
Speaker 1: dot com