Speaker 1: You're listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. Team. Welcome to the Freedom.
Speaker 1: On Thursday, August fourth edition of the program, we have
Speaker 1: Mayor Adams of New York City saying that the criminal
Speaker 1: justice system here is broken and dropping a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of stats and anecdotes about just how messed up it is,
Speaker 1: specifically with respect to recidivism, as in people that commit
Speaker 1: crimes and then commit them again and again and again
Speaker 1: and don't get punished. Why we will dive into that.
Speaker 1: Plus the hearings up on Capitol Hill about gain of
Speaker 1: function research with some pretty scary possibilities coming out of
Speaker 1: it given what we've seen from the COVID pandemic. Worth
Speaker 1: asking one, did this in fact come from a lab
Speaker 1: because it looks like it came from a lab? And
Speaker 1: two could it be a lot worse in the future
Speaker 1: unless we stop this stuff. We will dive into that,
Speaker 1: my friends, much much makes sense sense of. And then
Speaker 1: perhaps a little bit on the reconciliation bill that will
Speaker 1: now allegedly get past with the help of Kristen Cinema
Speaker 1: and some changes she is thinking about. We'll see what's
Speaker 1: up with that if we have time. Have you ever
Speaker 1: want an invest in real estate, but but you didn't
Speaker 1: know how to do it? Speak the English book. You
Speaker 1: gotta check out Done for your real Estate. I am
Speaker 1: a real estate investor now thanks to these guys. I
Speaker 1: have never done it before, and I'd never even bought
Speaker 1: a house before. Here's what happens. You reach out the
Speaker 1: Done for your real Estate, You make an appointment with them.
Speaker 1: You can do it via zoom. You don't have to
Speaker 1: show up in person, and via zoom. I know the founders,
Speaker 1: I know the people work for the company. They're great people.
Speaker 1: I trust them. I've given them a lot of business. Personally,
Speaker 1: you can trust them too. I've had tremendous success using
Speaker 1: their system, their approach. They just take you through every
Speaker 1: step of the real estate investment process. They make sure
Speaker 1: that you know what city you should think about investing
Speaker 1: in right, and then they help you I might I
Speaker 1: say city, I mean what region right, use of the
Speaker 1: city's the area. And then they have a team of
Speaker 1: brokers on the ground that they've worked with it. They
Speaker 1: know understand the market really well. They'll tell you why
Speaker 1: they think this is a growth market. So you learn
Speaker 1: a lot about the process, about the market in that area.
Speaker 1: You get expertise through their expertise. Then when you've picked
Speaker 1: out the house, they put you directly in contact with
Speaker 1: a mortgage mortgage lender and then you get you get
Speaker 1: the loan, you buy the house, and they'll put you
Speaker 1: in touch. At that point, they'll take you to the
Speaker 1: next step of a management company that they already have
Speaker 1: ready to go. They'll help you get a tenant in place.
Speaker 1: Handle anything. I just had a you know, an ac
Speaker 1: had to be replaced at one of the houses that
Speaker 1: I owned through done for your real estate management company.
Speaker 1: Handle the whole thing, right, I didn't even really know
Speaker 1: about it. Delay saw the end of months statements. It's
Speaker 1: just great. And I get that free cash flow company
Speaker 1: every month and I'm building up equity over time. Become
Speaker 1: a real estate investor. Do it the smart, safe stable
Speaker 1: way with done for your real estate. Good are done
Speaker 1: for you. Buck dot com to see how their system works.
Speaker 1: Done for you, Buck dot com. One more time. That's
Speaker 1: done for you, Buck dot com to become a real
Speaker 1: estate investor. I have been saying stuff about the criminal
Speaker 1: justice system in the era of progressive prosecutors. And I've
Speaker 1: been talking to you all about what has happened as
Speaker 1: a result of their decisions, what has happened in major
Speaker 1: cities and now even towns and royal areas across the
Speaker 1: country that are under the control of these progressive prosecutors
Speaker 1: for a long time. And everything I told you has
Speaker 1: been proven correct true. And now even the Libs the
Speaker 1: Democrats are having to admit this in some places, not everywhere.
Speaker 1: They're still fighting against it. You're gonna find someone, you know,
Speaker 1: former public defender, part of the Soros Institute, who says, oh,
Speaker 1: it's just we need to deal with all the racism
Speaker 1: and the criminal justice system, so let's just let people
Speaker 1: out of prison and not prosecute them in the first place.
Speaker 1: That's not that's not addressing root causes of racism. That's
Speaker 1: just undermining the law. That's all that is. Mayor Eric Adams,
Speaker 1: the African American mayor of New York City, has adopted
Speaker 1: a very clear tone of we need to knock this
Speaker 1: crap off, We need to stop this in America's largest city.
Speaker 1: And you could have this same conversation in any blue
Speaker 1: state in the country, any city, really in the country
Speaker 1: with only a few exceptions where there's a progressive prosecutor.
Speaker 1: You have this problem where there's a progressive prosecutor, it's
Speaker 1: an issue you have to handle. Here's some of the
Speaker 1: stuff that that Adams is saying. This is from a
Speaker 1: press conference that they did in this actually here we
Speaker 1: actually have some of this. Here's Eric Adams saying that
Speaker 1: the criminal justice system is broken. Our criminal justice system
Speaker 1: is insane, it is dangerous, it is harmful, and it's
Speaker 1: destroying the fabric of our city. Under the current law,
Speaker 1: judges are not allowed to consider whether someone is a
Speaker 1: threat to public safety when deciding whether or not to
Speaker 1: hold them in custody. This is a big mistake. As
Speaker 1: a result of this insane broken system, our recidivism rates
Speaker 1: have skyrocketed. Recidivism has skyrocketed. Now, this is completely contrary.
Speaker 1: The promise is made by the sorost progressive prosecutor types
Speaker 1: San Francisco, New York, Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta,
Speaker 1: Saint Louis, Houston. Go down the list, Go down the list, Milwaukee, Detroit,
Speaker 1: progressive prosecutors in all these places. Soros, it took him
Speaker 1: year seeded these progressive prosecutors everywhere, and the crime rates
Speaker 1: are way up, and the murder rates are way up,
Speaker 1: not you know, five percent, they're up thirty percent, fifty percent,
Speaker 1: depends on the category you're talking about. And speaking of
Speaker 1: the numbers, let's dive into the numbers here in New
Speaker 1: York City for a second. Mayor Adam said this, He said,
Speaker 1: let's look at the real numbers. In twenty twenty two,
Speaker 1: twenty five percent of the roughly fifteen hundred people arrested
Speaker 1: for burglary committed another felony within sixty days. That's three
Speaker 1: hundred and ninety three people who did the same thing
Speaker 1: in twenty seventeen, before the changes in the law, before
Speaker 1: the progressive prosecutors came along and got their way, seven
Speaker 1: point seven percent went on to commit another crime. For
Speaker 1: grand larceny. In twenty twenty two, the sixty day recidivism
Speaker 1: rate was sixteen point eight percent three hundred and ten people,
Speaker 1: compared with six point five percent in twenty seventeen. So
Speaker 1: you have for cidivism rates tripling, quadrupling just a matter
Speaker 1: of years. Why is that happening. It's not because of COVID,
Speaker 1: it's not because of you know, whatever, they're gonna throw
Speaker 1: your way with Oh, you know, it's it's just the
Speaker 1: system is having it. No, they change the system, and
Speaker 1: they made it worse, and they made it so that
Speaker 1: we aren't as safe as we were before. Mayor Adams
Speaker 1: keeps going here. Actually no, this is Chief Michael la Petri,
Speaker 1: Crime Control Strategies, Chief of the Police Department, the NYPD.
Speaker 1: He said, in New York City, we have identified seven
Speaker 1: hundred and sixteen individuals who are responsible for thirty percent
Speaker 1: of the shootings in the last year or so. We're
Speaker 1: a city in New York of eight million people. You
Speaker 1: have seven hundred people, give or take, who are responsible
Speaker 1: for a third of the shootings. I mean you could
Speaker 1: you could fit all these people in, you know, a
Speaker 1: high school gymnasium. I mean, this is not a lot
Speaker 1: of people friends her committing third. I know there there's
Speaker 1: other people that are commiting shootings too, but just give
Speaker 1: you a sense of how concentrated crime really is. There
Speaker 1: were twenty four hundred shooting incidents in New York City,
Speaker 1: and seven hundred and sixteen people have been responsible for
Speaker 1: thirty percent of those shootings. Each of the envision individuals
Speaker 1: are under investigation. He says, each one already have I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: fifty four percent of them already have a felony record.
Speaker 1: So point zero zero eight percent of the New York
Speaker 1: City population is responsible for thirty percent of the shootings.
Speaker 1: What do I keep saying? They say, Oh, the criminal
Speaker 1: justices him as racist. It's racist. So and then there's
Speaker 1: all these all these shootings are happening, and they say
Speaker 1: it's racist because there's a disproportionate number of individuals who
Speaker 1: are arrested for serious crimes who are black and Hispanic. However,
Speaker 1: what they leave out of all of this is that
Speaker 1: what about the ninety nine you know, ninety nine point
Speaker 1: you know whatever. I can't even do the math percent
Speaker 1: of black and Hispanic people in New York who aren't
Speaker 1: committing any crimes and just want to live their lives
Speaker 1: in safety. How about them? How about we focus more
Speaker 1: on their needs? How about we focus more on the
Speaker 1: ninety nine percent of black residents and Hispanic residents of
Speaker 1: New York who are law abiding and worry less about
Speaker 1: hurting the feelings of the less than one percent who
Speaker 1: are committing a huge percentage of the overall violent crime
Speaker 1: in the entire city. I mean, think about what's going
Speaker 1: on here. You've got thousands and thousands of burglaries and
Speaker 1: robberies and homicides and all these things together. How many
Speaker 1: people are really committing them in the whole city? Ten
Speaker 1: thousand committing a huge percentage of them, maybe twenty thirty
Speaker 1: thousand who are committing most of the really violent crimes,
Speaker 1: and rose are the really serious crimes, I should say,
Speaker 1: serious property crimes. Maybe here's an idea. We just focus
Speaker 1: on taking them off the streets, incarcerating them, and making
Speaker 1: life safer for the ninety nine percent of everybody else,
Speaker 1: including the ninety nine percent of minorities of black and
Speaker 1: Hispanic residence in the city of New York, who aren't
Speaker 1: hurting anybody and who are obeying the laws and want
Speaker 1: to live their lives in peace. It's just an idea,
Speaker 1: lives right. This is what the progressive prosecutors. Oh, they whine,
Speaker 1: They say, oh, but what about this. They find some
Speaker 1: case of somebody who you know, it was murky circumstances,
Speaker 1: three strike law, and everyone feels badly about it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there is good. It's not a perfect system, and where
Speaker 1: there is true injustice on an individual basis, we should
Speaker 1: rectify that, but you don't rerect if I injustice, but
Speaker 1: just singer. This guy's only done three armed robberies. I
Speaker 1: don't think he's going for it. He's only done fifteen burglaries.
Speaker 1: I don't think he's going for number sixteen. You know,
Speaker 1: he's stealing from people in his community. You know who's
Speaker 1: suffering from this, low income people who are trying to
Speaker 1: do the right thing every day. They're the ones being victimized.
Speaker 1: They're the ones being attacked, having things stolen from them.
Speaker 1: But people like Nancy Pelosi or the police, you can't
Speaker 1: trust the police from her mansion. She's such a fraud.
Speaker 1: CNN anchors, Oh BLM. I really support BLM and I
Speaker 1: live in a seven million dollars co op in New
Speaker 1: York City, But oh BLM, such frauds. They're such frauds.
Speaker 1: Can't we all see it? And may Or Adams even
Speaker 1: he's got to be tired of these idiots. He's saying
Speaker 1: the right things right now. You see. I always tell
Speaker 1: you this, I give credit where it's due. Adams has
Speaker 1: not done a good job so far in terms of
Speaker 1: the numbers, but he is saying the right things now.
Speaker 1: And we need other Democrats to say the right things
Speaker 1: and follow it with action. Hopefully Adams follows it with action.
Speaker 1: Is this would be major, all right? And there was
Speaker 1: the Gain of function hearings up on Capitol Hill just
Speaker 1: a couple of minutes on this. I mean, here's MIT
Speaker 1: professor Kevin, doctor Kevin s Velt, MT is pretty serious
Speaker 1: place on gain of function studies and the security risks
Speaker 1: from them. The question is, if they were not intending
Speaker 1: to determine whether a novel recombinant event between these coronaviruses
Speaker 1: could lead to something that might kill millions of people,
Speaker 1: then why were they doing it? If there was no
Speaker 1: chance that it would come up with a result that
Speaker 1: looked like it was more dangerous, what's the point? What's
Speaker 1: the scientific hypothesis? So again, whatever you call it, what
Speaker 1: they were trying to do was identify a biological agent
Speaker 1: that has a good chance of being able to kill
Speaker 1: millions of people if released. And they shared to the
Speaker 1: description of what they did, and they shared the genome
Speaker 1: sequence because they thought that this would make us safer,
Speaker 1: because they think that knowing which viruses in nature might
Speaker 1: cause pandemics makes us safer. They did not consider the
Speaker 1: security risks. Seems like kind of a big deal, doesn't it.
Speaker 1: They figured, hey, let's just mess around with a virus
Speaker 1: and gain a function research at places like the Wuhan
Speaker 1: Institute of Virology with American taxpayer funding in part, not
Speaker 1: all of it, but in part. They just figured, well,
Speaker 1: this will be a good thing for science to know.
Speaker 1: So they started tinkering with viruses to see if they
Speaker 1: can make them more dangerous so then they can put
Speaker 1: them more dangerous virus information out there so that we
Speaker 1: would be prepared in advance. Well, what happens if the
Speaker 1: virus gets out? Though? What happens if you create the problem?
Speaker 1: You think you're averting by getting ahead of it? Yeah,
Speaker 1: pretty serious. This MIT professor went on here play clip two.
Speaker 1: And it's worth noting that both USAID and NIH funded
Speaker 1: those particular coronavirus chimera studies. USAID, to my understanding, has
Speaker 1: since disavowed those chimeric recommindation studies and announced that they
Speaker 1: will only focus on finding natural pandemic capable viruses, which
Speaker 1: is at least a step in the right direction. But again,
Speaker 1: I would call that gain a function. Another reasonable scientists
Speaker 1: would say, no, that's not gain a function, because the
Speaker 1: term is so ill defined. Yeah, because the term is
Speaker 1: ill defined. Do you think maybe the bureaucracy was playing
Speaker 1: playing games here? I do. Do you think they decided
Speaker 1: they could get away with this? I do. Here's just
Speaker 1: one more on the possibility of these becoming WMDs. Here's
Speaker 1: Rutger's professor Ebright talking to Josh Holley about gain of
Speaker 1: function research of the kind that you know doctor Fauci
Speaker 1: through cutouts was helping to fund in China function research
Speaker 1: and bioweapons. What's the connection there? I mean, what role
Speaker 1: does gain a function play? As I mentioned, there are
Speaker 1: no civilian practical applications that are immense bioweapons practical applications,
Speaker 1: as you've heard from doctor Spelt. The potential pandemic pathogens
Speaker 1: that can emerge from such studies are potential weapons of
Speaker 1: mass destruction, inexpensive, accessible, easily distributed weapons of mass destruction,
Speaker 1: potential WMDs, the kind that would hit all over the
Speaker 1: world and kill hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people.
Speaker 1: Maybe we should have had more of a discussion about
Speaker 1: whether this should be something that anyone, anywhere, in any
Speaker 1: facility should be engaged in as research. A lot of
Speaker 1: people look in this though, and saying maybe, at least
Speaker 1: in this instance, it's too late. Thanks for rolling with team.
Speaker 1: Make sure you check out the Clay Travis and Buck
Speaker 1: Saxon Show today. I'm gonna be in solo because Clay
Speaker 1: is on vacation, so you got me for three hours
Speaker 1: on that podcast. It's doing my thing, Clay Travis and
Speaker 1: Buck Saxon Show. And if you don't already suscribe to
Speaker 1: that you listen to this, please subscribe there as well.
Speaker 1: Talk to you tomorrow, Shield Time