Speaker 1: Mr garbutsch Off teared down this wall. Either you're with
Speaker 1: us or you were with the terrorists. If you've got
Speaker 1: healthcare all it, then you can keep your plan. If
Speaker 1: you are satisfied with Trump is not. When the President
Speaker 1: of the United States take it to a bank together,
Speaker 1: we will make America great again. You'll never send It's
Speaker 1: what you've been waiting for all day. The Buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: Join the conversation called Buck Toll Free at eight four
Speaker 1: four nine hundred Buck that's eight four four nine hundred
Speaker 1: to eight to five The Future of talk radio Buck Sexton.
Speaker 1: I say to Congress, I will never sign another bill
Speaker 1: like this again. I'm not gonna do it again. Nobody
Speaker 1: read it. It's only hours old. Some people don't even
Speaker 1: know what At one point three trillion dollars, it's the
Speaker 1: second largest ever. President Obama signed one that was actually larger,
Speaker 1: which I'm sure he wasn't too happy with either. But
Speaker 1: in this case it became so big because we need
Speaker 1: to take care of our military, and because the Democrats
Speaker 1: who don't believe in that, added things that they wanted
Speaker 1: in order to get their votes. There's a matter of
Speaker 1: national security. I've signed this omnibus budget bill. There are
Speaker 1: a lot of things that I'm unhappy about in this bill.
Speaker 1: There are a lot of things that we shouldn't have
Speaker 1: had in this bill, but we were, in a sense
Speaker 1: forced if we want to build our military, we were
Speaker 1: forced to have. There are some things that we should
Speaker 1: have in the bill. But I say to Congress, I
Speaker 1: will never sign another bill like this again. I'm not
Speaker 1: gonna do it again. Nobody read it. It's only hours old.
Speaker 1: Some people don't even know what it is. At one
Speaker 1: point three trillion dollars, it's the second largest ever President
Speaker 1: Obama signed one that was actually larger. Welcome to the buck,
Speaker 1: Sex and show everybody. Great to have you here. Look,
Speaker 1: I told you yesterday. You gotta give you gotta give
Speaker 1: the Buxter credit for keeping it real. I told you
Speaker 1: yesterday it's not it's not a good it's not a
Speaker 1: good budget. It's not Okay, alright, you could I could
Speaker 1: take the reflective you know, well whatever, you know. Trump
Speaker 1: is gonna do the right thing here and there. I
Speaker 1: trust the Republicans in Congress, and Nope, not only do
Speaker 1: I think it's a bad at Trump I thought it
Speaker 1: was a bad bill, but he said look, I got
Speaker 1: no choice because I gotta fund the military. Um I go.
Speaker 1: I have a lot of thoughts on this thought For
Speaker 1: one thing, that there's the there's the Rand Paulian view
Speaker 1: of all this stuff. I think this is why people
Speaker 1: are so upset with politics, because when the Republicans are
Speaker 1: out of power, when they're in the minority, they are
Speaker 1: the conservative party. But then when they get in the majority,
Speaker 1: there is no conservative party. Democrats don't care about spending
Speaker 1: any of the time. Republicans seem to care about it
Speaker 1: when they're criticizing Democrats. But now the Republicans are in
Speaker 1: your arch Republicans are like Katie bar the door. He
Speaker 1: talked about border security. I'm I'm flipping through the pages
Speaker 1: today reading the bill. I find out there is money
Speaker 1: for border security in Tunisia and Jordan's. We have border
Speaker 1: security money in the Middle East, putting hot border security
Speaker 1: money for the US. Now, I think that everything that
Speaker 1: Ran Paul says, the Senator Paul says here is is correct.
Speaker 1: I don't think any of you disagree with it. What
Speaker 1: is there really to disagree on? Clearly there is something
Speaker 1: something happening here where How different is this really than
Speaker 1: what we would have expected if you had, if you
Speaker 1: had a Democrat Congress. Well, actually here Senator Paul said
Speaker 1: that too. You know, I'm kind of old school. I
Speaker 1: think you ought to read the bills, you know, before
Speaker 1: we vote on them. This is bill. We got it
Speaker 1: last night at midnight. I've been working all day diligently
Speaker 1: through the bill, and I'm up to page six hundred.
Speaker 1: But you know, I've still got quite a bit of
Speaker 1: ways to go to read the bill. As far as
Speaker 1: the content of the bill, this could have been written
Speaker 1: by President Obama and liberal Democrats. When I ran in
Speaker 1: two thousand and ten, when we had that Tea Party hideaway,
Speaker 1: we were opposed to President obama spending, and we were
Speaker 1: opposed to President Obama's trillion dollar deficits. This bill will
Speaker 1: give us a trillion dollar deficit this year. And there
Speaker 1: you have it. Trillion dollar deficits this year, twenty one trillions.
Speaker 1: Where we are that's gonna get worse. Now. I know
Speaker 1: how this how this goes in a conservative on the
Speaker 1: conservative media side of things. So let me just let
Speaker 1: me dispense with that for a moment. Here. What people
Speaker 1: are gonna say, You're gonna hear a lot of like, oh,
Speaker 1: I'm so I'm so disappointed at the Republicans. Oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: what are the Republicans doing this? And and particularly people
Speaker 1: throwing throwing shade at the Republican Congress and not so
Speaker 1: much at the president because President Trump right now is
Speaker 1: very popular and he's the leader of the Republican Party.
Speaker 1: It's a lot of different media folks are gonna say
Speaker 1: all of the Congress is just disappointing us. It's all
Speaker 1: about It's all about, you know, Mitch McConnell or Merchant McConnell.
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell sounds a little bit like David Gergan apparently,
Speaker 1: but different, same but different, Carl. It's all our southern
Speaker 1: and southern version of southern version of David Gerham. Um.
Speaker 1: But here's here's what I want to tell you, because,
Speaker 1: as I say, I like to just just spew truth
Speaker 1: from the freedom of whenever I can. And this is
Speaker 1: what we want, folks, this is what we all want.
Speaker 1: Other people aren't gonna tell it to you straight. I
Speaker 1: am telling it to you straight. This is what we want. Now.
Speaker 1: You may not, I may not, but we, as the
Speaker 1: American people right now in general, do want this and
Speaker 1: here's what I mean by it. We want to spend
Speaker 1: more then we take in. Nobody wants to say that
Speaker 1: the debt is a problem. Everyone wants to say that
Speaker 1: their projects are too important. Everyone wants to say that
Speaker 1: the military needs more money than even Trump asked for,
Speaker 1: tens of billions, more than he asked for. This is
Speaker 1: the It's like the old, the old Santa Claus situation.
Speaker 1: Nobody wants to say there's no Santa Claus, especially when
Speaker 1: they're all getting presents. So I'm here to tell you
Speaker 1: there is no Santa Claus. Unless you're a kid who's
Speaker 1: listening to the show who's under the age of ten.
Speaker 1: Then there is a Santa Claus. And I'm being a jerk.
Speaker 1: Don't listen to me. Kids under ten, Little team Little Team,
Speaker 1: Buck Squad. You have mom and dad tell you that
Speaker 1: this part of it, it's different. Um, you know, Bucks
Speaker 1: just having a bad day. Mom and Dad will explain.
Speaker 1: But for the rest of you, we want this. We
Speaker 1: want entitlements to remain untouched. We think we can spend
Speaker 1: more than we take in and continue to do so
Speaker 1: when we're already twenty one trillion dollars in debt. Spending
Speaker 1: is popular. Free stuff, goodies, government programs, they're popular. Cuts
Speaker 1: are not popular. Less spending is not popular. People say, oh,
Speaker 1: you know, buck the six six billion dollars for the
Speaker 1: opioid crisis. What am I gonna say? We I talked
Speaker 1: to you about the opioid crisis here all the time,
Speaker 1: or frequently, not all the time, but I certainly have
Speaker 1: been raising the alarm about it. It's terrible what's going on.
Speaker 1: But as I've tried to tell you, it's about the
Speaker 1: illegal drug war much more so than prescription drugs and
Speaker 1: prescription drug treatment. So no one wants to hear that
Speaker 1: we don't have money for that important thing fill in
Speaker 1: the blank. No one wants to hear that eventually this
Speaker 1: is going to be too much. And now I can't
Speaker 1: tell you when. If I could, by the way, i'd
Speaker 1: prepare my you know, i'd prepare my portfolio and try
Speaker 1: to play the markets that you know, there's all kinds
Speaker 1: of ways you could probably try to capitalize off of
Speaker 1: a massive economic collapse, although the collapse could be so
Speaker 1: big that there's no such thing as a safe haven, really, right,
Speaker 1: that's also a thing that you have to be aware of.
Speaker 1: But right, however, everybody wants we want. We want the
Speaker 1: markets to be have, we want robust growth, jobs, all
Speaker 1: this stuff. Everything. We want to let the good times roll.
Speaker 1: Nobody wants to hear about how we can have all
Speaker 1: these things. What's the real problem with our budget right now?
Speaker 1: The real problem is now there's gonna be a whole
Speaker 1: other focus we'll talk about at a moment, which is
Speaker 1: different pet projects of members of Congress and on the
Speaker 1: left and fine right. Discretionary spending. That's an issue too,
Speaker 1: because the politics involved in what's going on here. But
Speaker 1: the real problem is entitlement spending. The real problem is
Speaker 1: that we don't want to raise the age of retirement,
Speaker 1: we don't want to change social security, we don't want
Speaker 1: to do means testing. We all want to take out
Speaker 1: about twice what we pay in over the course of
Speaker 1: our lives to medicare. And you can't and neither neither
Speaker 1: side of the al will touch it. Trump says he's
Speaker 1: not going to touch it. That's the real problem Medicaid spending.
Speaker 1: I don't really want to touch that either. You're gonna
Speaker 1: let that keep on more and more free healthcare, more
Speaker 1: and more free healthcare for more and more non Americans too.
Speaker 1: You're gonna see illegal is getting more and more free
Speaker 1: healthcare in the years ahead. Just wait, you have a
Speaker 1: Democrat Congress and now the military, and I understand the
Speaker 1: argument for this, and this is what Trump was really
Speaker 1: focused on. He's saying that, you know, this is uh,
Speaker 1: this is necessary to rebuild our military. It's been he
Speaker 1: says decimated. I think that's a bit strong, but uh,
Speaker 1: he says it's been underfunded in very important ways in
Speaker 1: recent years. Okay, but what are we allowed to cut? Then?
Speaker 1: What can we do less spending? I'm not saying cut
Speaker 1: like we're not going to have it anymore. What can
Speaker 1: we spend less on as a country or what changes
Speaker 1: can we make the future spending? The answer right now
Speaker 1: is nothing. The answer is that Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell,
Speaker 1: all the rest of them don't want this to change.
Speaker 1: And I have to ask the question, or are we
Speaker 1: really just gonna rely on having uh, some slightly better
Speaker 1: federal judges in place as the explanation for what we've
Speaker 1: really gotten from a Republican Congress. That's it. That's good,
Speaker 1: but is that really enough? Is that going to get
Speaker 1: you out to the polls in the mid terms to vote.
Speaker 1: I don't know, I don't know. Uh, this is this
Speaker 1: is the situation, folks. We have two political parties that
Speaker 1: understand that the route to power, to both achieving and
Speaker 1: maintaining power is by spending public money, which is your
Speaker 1: money and my money. But they want to spend it.
Speaker 1: Spending gets votes. You're giving people stuff all under the
Speaker 1: pretense that it's just coming from somebody else. But most
Speaker 1: of you realize that that's always a false a false bargain.
Speaker 1: It's a false bargain or a faustian bargain, depends on
Speaker 1: how we are going to frame it. So this is
Speaker 1: this is disappointing. There's there's no way around that. It's disappointing.
Speaker 1: Trump said he was gonna veto at Lord said he
Speaker 1: might veto it last night. I'm like, all right, here
Speaker 1: is here's the fight here that we have. What's the
Speaker 1: words that have sensitive to send it back with a veto?
Speaker 1: Where's the wall funding? We were promised the wall. We
Speaker 1: weren't promised a few miles of wall that's like a
Speaker 1: monument and an ugly one. I want an actual wall. Nope,
Speaker 1: no wall or thirty three miles of the couple of
Speaker 1: thousand miles of the US Mexico border. It'd be much
Speaker 1: better to spend the six six billion dollars they're talking about,
Speaker 1: in addition for opioid treatment to stopping the inflow of
Speaker 1: illegal drugs in the country, because then you can actually
Speaker 1: stop the heroin overdoses and the fence and the overdoses
Speaker 1: that are happening. Better to, you know, deal with the
Speaker 1: problem at at the route if you can. But I
Speaker 1: don't know what the president honestly, you know he's saying that.
Speaker 1: He said, I started out the show, I will never
Speaker 1: sign a bill like this again. If that's how the
Speaker 1: President feels about it, why is he signing in the
Speaker 1: first place. His base would stay with him, the party
Speaker 1: would stay with him if you sent this back and
Speaker 1: he said, no, dice, no go. We can we we
Speaker 1: can do better than this. And then there's some other
Speaker 1: parts of this too that I'm not even clear where
Speaker 1: what the President's going for me. And this is what
Speaker 1: he said about DOCTA recipients. DOCTA recipients have been treated
Speaker 1: extremely badly by the Democrats. We wanted to include DOCCA.
Speaker 1: We wanted to have him in this bill. Eight hundred
Speaker 1: thousand people, and actually it could even be more. And
Speaker 1: we wanted to include DOCCA in this bill. The Democrats
Speaker 1: would not do it. I wanted to include DOCTA. Does
Speaker 1: he mean he's saying we wanted to have an amnesty
Speaker 1: in exchange for wall funding, because that was what was
Speaker 1: talked about a while ago. But okay, that's not that's
Speaker 1: not particularly encouraging either, folks. Look, I if you if
Speaker 1: you think there's a way, if you think there's a
Speaker 1: way to to look at this so that it doesn't
Speaker 1: seem like a capitulation something of a of a defeat.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, in September, right before the mid terms, then
Speaker 1: political courage is gonna happen. Then disruption is going to
Speaker 1: be the order of the day. Where we all know
Speaker 1: that's not the case. This was it, This was it
Speaker 1: to have a different budget. There's not gonna be another
Speaker 1: shot like this unless Republicans beat all expectations in the
Speaker 1: mid terms. But even then, even then, I'm not sure
Speaker 1: you're gonna see a change. I think Republicans are the
Speaker 1: Republican party. The Congress is complicit in this. Spending is popular,
Speaker 1: cuts are not. It's as simple as that. And until
Speaker 1: there's a real until we feel the pain of our overspending,
Speaker 1: of the government's overspending. This does not stop because foresight, wisdom,
Speaker 1: preparing for the future, those are not sexy. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: make it rain in here. Who wants some cash? That's sexy,
Speaker 1: That gets people excited, And that's what this budget it
Speaker 1: is really a reflection of. And then there's some other
Speaker 1: problems in it that I'll get to in just a second.
Speaker 1: I wish I could say that, you know, I know
Speaker 1: it's Friday. I want to be in a good movie too.
Speaker 1: So well, but we've got other things we're talking about
Speaker 1: as well. Uh, talk the terrorist attack and well that's intense.
Speaker 1: But the terroristtack in France. Got a couple of authors
Speaker 1: joining us later in the show, because I like to
Speaker 1: mix things up. On Friday's we'll talk about the never
Speaker 1: Again movement with David Hogg at the head of it,
Speaker 1: and uh, a whole lot more. Oh it is, it
Speaker 1: is Friday. So as as per our tradition, people keep
Speaker 1: asking if I'm back, and I haven't really had an answer,
Speaker 1: but now yeah, I'm taking I'm back. You have a
Speaker 1: right to be dead. Friday, don't come food eight four
Speaker 1: four nine hundred to eight to five eight four nine
Speaker 1: buck your thoughts. Welcome here, my friends, and how much
Speaker 1: more stay with me? Scene in the Senate Budget Committee
Speaker 1: this past week was a disappointing when I think for
Speaker 1: the American people, they seem to be in full scale
Speaker 1: retreat from spending cuts and are talking about raising people's
Speaker 1: taxes again when push comes to show, I guess it's
Speaker 1: always easier to let the taxpayer take the fall, no
Speaker 1: matter well, let them be forewarned, no matter how well
Speaker 1: intentioned they might be, no matter what their illusions might be.
Speaker 1: I have my veto pen drawn and ready for any
Speaker 1: tax increase that Congress might even think of sending up.
Speaker 1: And I have only one thing to say to the
Speaker 1: tax increases. Go ahead, make my day. The President Reagan
Speaker 1: getting in a little action movie quote Friday, with go ahead,
Speaker 1: make my day, Go ahead, make my day. There you go,
Speaker 1: I said. I think Reagan said it best. Actually I
Speaker 1: think the Reagan version is even better than the Eastwood version.
Speaker 1: That's right, Um, all right, So this is not a
Speaker 1: new fight. The president has been well a Republican presidents
Speaker 1: have been trying to deal with this for a long time.
Speaker 1: Dynamics have played out before. But Reagan wielded that veto
Speaker 1: pan a lot. I think, I think didn't Reagan seventy
Speaker 1: eight times or something. Vito a lot of a lot
Speaker 1: of Reagan vitos over his time, So you can check
Speaker 1: me on that one, producer, Mike. But I think we
Speaker 1: both know that whatever comes up, whatever comes up from
Speaker 1: the from the buck cranium, tends to be has to
Speaker 1: be backed up by the facts. Now I'm really stepping
Speaker 1: on it if I get this one wrong. Up Bam,
Speaker 1: Thank you, John. We got a lot of calls. Let's
Speaker 1: take some here. Greg in Mississippi, Hey, Greg, Greg, Hey,
Speaker 1: can you hear me? We can, sir, very good? Are
Speaker 1: all doing today? All right? What's in your mind? It's
Speaker 1: it's not good day for us, I don't think. But anyway,
Speaker 1: I think the I think the Democrats pulled a coup
Speaker 1: today on the genuss we got for on our side.
Speaker 1: I think in in at the end of six months
Speaker 1: when they're we're in this position again, which is going
Speaker 1: to be right before election, that the uh Democrats are
Speaker 1: gonna have the upper hand. And I think the I
Speaker 1: think the Republicans capitulated the the majority in the Senate
Speaker 1: today on the Democrats evidently don't need to win anything now. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I just have to wonder if the Democrats can get
Speaker 1: the budget priorities they want through the legislature when they
Speaker 1: don't have the House or the Senate. They're in great shape.
Speaker 1: Works for them, right, exactly exactly what do they need?
Speaker 1: They they are, They got the high grounds, they got
Speaker 1: everything they could possibly imagine. How because we've got a
Speaker 1: bunch of good this worse the spineless people. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know TOMPs setting up here saying that I signed
Speaker 1: this bill for eight eighty billion dollars, I signed this legislate.
Speaker 1: It look, it's it's uh. You can never get too
Speaker 1: excited about something the president signs into law when he's like,
Speaker 1: I never want to do this again. Right, So that's
Speaker 1: not good. Greg. I think we're I think we're on
Speaker 1: an agreement on that, one Shield said, And thank you
Speaker 1: for the call from now in Mississippi, folks, lines are open.
Speaker 1: We got some calls in. We could take some more
Speaker 1: if you want. Eight four four, eight to five. I've
Speaker 1: got to talk some more about this, and then I'll
Speaker 1: have some other updates for you, including on that terrorist
Speaker 1: attack in France. The Islamic State inspires yet another. He's
Speaker 1: holding the line for America, buck sex in his back.
Speaker 1: We funded the initial down payment of one point six
Speaker 1: billion dollars. We're going to be starting work literally on
Speaker 1: Monday on not only some new wall, but also fixing
Speaker 1: existing walls and existing acceptable fences. There are some areas
Speaker 1: that you have to see through. You have to be
Speaker 1: able to see through the other side in order to
Speaker 1: see what's coming. And in many cases it's not a
Speaker 1: pretty picture. Uh, this is a short term funding, but
Speaker 1: it's immediate. This is the premier issue he ran on,
Speaker 1: and he's getting nothing at the end of the year,
Speaker 1: and this is our big leverage moment. And the folks
Speaker 1: back home may not know. The Senate put in the
Speaker 1: last budget that they're not even going to do a
Speaker 1: budget next year, so no chance for wall funding, no
Speaker 1: chance to get the Good lad Bill, and the major
Speaker 1: immigration piece of legislation in the House that addresses the
Speaker 1: DOCCA brings the kids out of the shadows, but in
Speaker 1: exchange for rational policy going forward that the Asident believes him.
Speaker 1: So yeah, he gotta he gotta end this thing until
Speaker 1: he gets something of what he asked for as president.
Speaker 1: When we have the House and the Senate. It's quite
Speaker 1: amazing your President Trump there and then Representative Dave Bratt.
Speaker 1: I look, I can't get excited at one point six
Speaker 1: billion dollars for the wall. That's, like I said yesterday,
Speaker 1: that's uh, saving for your house and putting a few
Speaker 1: quarters in the piggy bank. Technically, it is saving for
Speaker 1: the house. It'll take you a few hundred years though,
Speaker 1: and at at one point six billion a year, it's
Speaker 1: you're you're looking at well beyond a Trump presidency to
Speaker 1: actually get a wall built. And that's if he wins
Speaker 1: both terms. So just keep that in mind. Another part
Speaker 1: of this that I I mentioned it yesterday, I wanted
Speaker 1: to give you some more specifics now there is there's
Speaker 1: five hundred five hundred million dollars funding for planned parenthood
Speaker 1: in this budget. The difference between the Republicans the Democrats
Speaker 1: on a lot of issues is very murky. Life is
Speaker 1: supposed to be one of the only ones that's clear, right,
Speaker 1: and and it is clear at least on a policy level.
Speaker 1: You cannot be a Democrat now and not be pro choice,
Speaker 1: pro abortion. You can't, and you're not welcome in the
Speaker 1: Democrat party. More In fact, I saw some statistics early
Speaker 1: in the week about how you know, back in the
Speaker 1: seventies and then the in the eighties, almost half of
Speaker 1: Democrats were pro I'm talking about in Congress, we're pro life.
Speaker 1: So you had a lot of pro life Democrats. And
Speaker 1: then it's just less and less and less, and now
Speaker 1: the Democrat Party has signed on to be a party
Speaker 1: of abortion extremists. There can be no limitations, no nothing,
Speaker 1: nine months, anytime, any reason, that's it. And then special
Speaker 1: privileges for abortion clinics about all you can't you know,
Speaker 1: no standing in the pathway and all all. You know,
Speaker 1: the First Amendment be damned right, because people need to
Speaker 1: people need to get abortion. According to Democrats, it's a
Speaker 1: it's a I was gonna say, a god given right,
Speaker 1: but that's actually the the opposite of what it is. Um,
Speaker 1: that's how Democrats view it though, that it's a it's
Speaker 1: a I was gonna say, it's sacred to Democrats, but
Speaker 1: even that it's not sacred, I don't know, it's it's
Speaker 1: coming from the other direction. Um. Here's what Alexandra de
Speaker 1: Sanctus put out today, and I wanted to go through
Speaker 1: it with you quickly. On what this budget does for
Speaker 1: Planned Parenthood and what's really at stake here she's a
Speaker 1: National review and at the National Review Institute, um so
Speaker 1: here's what she writes about the five million dollars. Here
Speaker 1: are some quick facts on what Planned Parenthood, which will
Speaker 1: receive half a billion dollars from the Omitibus bill our
Speaker 1: our Republican Congress just passed, was up to last year.
Speaker 1: Planned Parenthood clinics performed three h than eighty four abortions
Speaker 1: last year. That's over one third of all abortions in
Speaker 1: the US annually. Abortion is not just three percent of
Speaker 1: what Planned Parenthood does. The group fabricates that statistic by
Speaker 1: conflating the number of clients with the number of services
Speaker 1: to downplay the group's provision of abortion. Planned Parenthood performed
Speaker 1: eighty three abortions last fall for every one adoption referral.
Speaker 1: It offered fewer than eight thousand prenatal services to pregnant
Speaker 1: mothers last year, compared to three hundred and twenty one thousand,
Speaker 1: three hundred and eighty four abortions. Planned Parenthood does not
Speaker 1: provide crucial healthcare that women can't get anywhere else. There
Speaker 1: are just over six hundred Planned Parenthood clinics across the
Speaker 1: country compared to over thirteen thousand federally qualified healthcare centers,
Speaker 1: which offer a wide array of services without providing abortions.
Speaker 1: These federally qualified healthcare centers out numbered Planned Parenthood clinics
Speaker 1: twenty to one, and yet we're supposed to believe that
Speaker 1: Planned Parenthood is somehow serving millions of women who will
Speaker 1: have nowhere else to turn. In California alone, the state
Speaker 1: with the most Planned Parenthood clinics by far, it's not
Speaker 1: surprising there are just a hundred and fourteen Planned parent
Speaker 1: locations compared to one thousand, nine hundred I'm sorry, one thousand,
Speaker 1: six hundred and nine federally qualified healthcare centers. Planned Parenthood's
Speaker 1: net assets at the end of last fiscal year told
Speaker 1: them more than one point six billion dollars. The group
Speaker 1: spent hundreds of millions on movement building, which is just
Speaker 1: pouring money into electing Democrats who will keep directing money
Speaker 1: to Planned Parenthood. Despite all these facts, and despite Planned
Speaker 1: Parenthood's intense loyalty to the Democrat Party, a Republican Congress
Speaker 1: and Republican president just directed yet another half a billion
Speaker 1: dollars to Planned Parenthood to fund its abortion business. This
Speaker 1: is completely unacceptable that all from Alexandra Dissanctus of National Review,
Speaker 1: Every single Republican that I'm aware of in the Congress
Speaker 1: is pro life. I have not heard or seen a
Speaker 1: single one of them in the last twenty four hours.
Speaker 1: Make if they've made noise over this, not nearly enough,
Speaker 1: not nearly enough. They do not have to fund Plant Parenthood.
Speaker 1: They do not, but they did. Why can't have a
Speaker 1: fight over this because we're gonna lose a shutdown at
Speaker 1: some point. We are making too many excuses under the
Speaker 1: guise of political calculation and with Plant parent and I
Speaker 1: think we are well beyond that. This is not you know,
Speaker 1: can we fix DOCCA later or figure something out. This
Speaker 1: is a matter of urgency. It is now, It is
Speaker 1: every day, it is every passing hour. And say, oh,
Speaker 1: buck well, they could continue with private donations, Yeah they could.
Speaker 1: What if it what if that number of three thousand,
Speaker 1: three eighty four was cut down by twenty or thinking
Speaker 1: how many lives that would be and just as a
Speaker 1: as a function of funding and access, how many lives
Speaker 1: to be saved? It seems seems more than worth it
Speaker 1: to me. But you know, a lot of Republican cowardice
Speaker 1: on display, especially on this issue. I think it's because
Speaker 1: they know that the Republican who actually stands up and
Speaker 1: says he wants to do something about this, the elected
Speaker 1: representative who really wants to fight on this issue, the
Speaker 1: entire fire and fury of the left. Pardon the expression.
Speaker 1: They've ruined that now with that book, but the entire
Speaker 1: venom of the progressive left will be brought to bear
Speaker 1: on that person, Dell. They will nothing outrageous Democrats now
Speaker 1: more than anyone who who who is not just talking
Speaker 1: tough about stopping abortions, but actually tries to do something
Speaker 1: about it anyway. So I I see no, I see
Speaker 1: no excuse for this. I don't understand what they think
Speaker 1: the excuses. Uh. And there is there is a shame here.
Speaker 1: There is shame in this, and uh it's frustrating, it
Speaker 1: really is. All right. I want to I want to
Speaker 1: take some calls here because it is Friday, and I've
Speaker 1: been saying we would, um Chuck in Virginia. Welcome, sir Chuck.
Speaker 1: You there, Yeah, we're here. We're here, you buddy. What's up?
Speaker 1: I'm calling about this budget? Um, and I'll listen to
Speaker 1: you saying I listened to the guy from Mississippi say
Speaker 1: it about the Republicans being fearful. They're not afraid. If
Speaker 1: they were, they wouldn't fund land parenthood because I am
Speaker 1: ready to go to war with them over it. It's
Speaker 1: not pro choice. It's killing babies. That's what's happening. And
Speaker 1: now my tax money, again with the party that I
Speaker 1: have supported, is going to kill babies. And I'm a
Speaker 1: religious man, and God clearly says that he hates the
Speaker 1: hands that shed innocent blood. And I'm to a point
Speaker 1: now where I'm almost ready to sign over all my
Speaker 1: property just to my wife and stop paying taxes. So
Speaker 1: let's see if the First Amendment will cover me, because religiously,
Speaker 1: it's an abomination for my tax money, my money to
Speaker 1: be killing children that are unborn. Of our money is
Speaker 1: now ask form of slavery in the United States. It is.
Speaker 1: It is all of our money. Now, Chuck. You know
Speaker 1: they're they're they're taking five million dollars from taxpayers to
Speaker 1: do this under the pretense that it's for health care.
Speaker 1: It's a lie. It's a lie. I know, you know it.
Speaker 1: I know it. But people need to hear it more.
Speaker 1: That is a lie. We are paying for that, we
Speaker 1: are paying for those procedures. But the real lie is
Speaker 1: that the Republicans are afraid. They're not afraid. Well, I
Speaker 1: think I think the answer, Truck, is actually what what
Speaker 1: are they afraid of? I think you're saying they're not
Speaker 1: afraid of their voters, and they're not afraid of, you know,
Speaker 1: of selling us out and funding planned paradode right, and
Speaker 1: they're not afraid of continuing to spend in this out
Speaker 1: of control fashion. So yeah, the same as the Democrat Party.
Speaker 1: The Democrat Party in the inner circle of the Republican
Speaker 1: Party both want the same thing. I think they are
Speaker 1: way too close. They are too they are too close
Speaker 1: for comfort. Chuck. I share your passion. I very much
Speaker 1: appreciate your call and thank you for staying with us.
Speaker 1: Uh Paul, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Hey Paul, Hey buck shield tie. Okay,
Speaker 1: So a few weeks ago I called you about game
Speaker 1: theory and the prisoner's dilemma and Trump's successful use at
Speaker 1: T for TATA as a strategy. Well, I think Congress
Speaker 1: gave him a tat last night, and he did not
Speaker 1: give them a tip they deserved. He didn't even show
Speaker 1: it to him. Did I just get beeped out? No,
Speaker 1: you didn't get but I don't really, So what are
Speaker 1: you trying to say? I don't understand. He should he
Speaker 1: should have he should have vetoted. Oh he should have Vito. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: they they challenged him. He should have given him. He
Speaker 1: should have given him a tip for the tat they
Speaker 1: gave him. He should have been tip. Okay, let's listen
Speaker 1: to different analogy or whatever. It's like, it's too crazy
Speaker 1: that one. Alright, Paul, No, no, it's all right, go
Speaker 1: ahead of you, but just you know, well, well, I
Speaker 1: think that he's also kind of showing that he's totally
Speaker 1: ready to be in the Republican Rhino leadership because like,
Speaker 1: instead of whining about the line item Vito, he should
Speaker 1: have recognized that he had he has more tools than
Speaker 1: he says. Now. I'm sure that somebody told him he's
Speaker 1: got a pen, but maybe he doesn't realize he's also
Speaker 1: got a pocket, which I think the Haberdasher Coolidge invented.
Speaker 1: It's done a pocket veto. Yeah, thank you for calling him, Paul.
Speaker 1: The by the way, I said seventy eight Reagan vitos correct,
Speaker 1: But that's if you add the the general general veto
Speaker 1: to the pocket veto, right, it was like thirty six
Speaker 1: and well the numbers nine. There we go, So that
Speaker 1: was correct, by the way, just just pulling that one
Speaker 1: out there, you know, just doing what I do. Uh,
Speaker 1: let's talk about some other stuff though here for a moment.
Speaker 1: We we have and the possibility of changing some of
Speaker 1: the Senate rules so that you'll actually get nominees through
Speaker 1: maybe going so called nuclear option on this. I like
Speaker 1: the idea we should the filibuster. We should talk about
Speaker 1: the filibuster. We come back, and then also we'll discuss
Speaker 1: this a terror attack in France, a reminder of the
Speaker 1: thread the Islamic state that is still out there. And
Speaker 1: we've got a lot more stuff. We're gonna switch it
Speaker 1: off a bit though, So Team quick Break coming and
Speaker 1: we'll be right back. We have to get rid of
Speaker 1: the filibus to rule and go to fifty one votes
Speaker 1: in the Senate. If we're going to have really sustained
Speaker 1: continued success, we have to get a lot of great
Speaker 1: legislation approved, and without the filibuster rule, it'll happen just
Speaker 1: like magic. He is one hundred right about the filibuster.
Speaker 1: The filibuster is the root cause of this mess. There
Speaker 1: is a reason that it's just one giant No one
Speaker 1: reads it, omnibus bill to fund everything in the government,
Speaker 1: and if you don't sign it, the whole government shuts down.
Speaker 1: It's because the minority party and both parties have done
Speaker 1: it threatens to filibuster each of the individual appropriation bills
Speaker 1: that are supposed to fund the government. Our system actually
Speaker 1: can work if it's not filibustered. But because you can
Speaker 1: get leverage over filibustering at one bill at a time,
Speaker 1: so the government doesn't get his money that the proper
Speaker 1: the Department of Agriculture gets this money, the Department of
Speaker 1: Commerce gets its money. If you don't do it one
Speaker 1: at a time, you can get leveraged by holding the
Speaker 1: entire government funding hostage. And that's what the filibuster does.
Speaker 1: I agree. I think you gotta get rid of the filibuster.
Speaker 1: I think that this is nonsense. What what ends up happening,
Speaker 1: and you've probably already seen some of this today, is
Speaker 1: that you have a you have a situation where everyone's
Speaker 1: gonna say, well, you know, we just need to elect
Speaker 1: more Republicans. Well, we also have to be realistic. You
Speaker 1: have a Republican House, Republican Senate, and a Republican president.
Speaker 1: You have a unified GOP government. If the if, what
Speaker 1: we're gonna be told now is oh, sorry, it's not enough.
Speaker 1: We need to have supermajorities and all you know, No,
Speaker 1: that's not how this works, and that's not what's supposed
Speaker 1: to happen. That's not the way the Constitution set all
Speaker 1: the stuff up. You need supermajorities to get anything done.
Speaker 1: Get rid of the filibuster, absolutely, get rid of it.
Speaker 1: It is um, it is abused, and it is slowing
Speaker 1: things down. And no minority party should be able to
Speaker 1: do exactly what Ari Fleischer there. They former a White
Speaker 1: House Press secretary under Bush stairs they do, which is
Speaker 1: they'll just make sure you can't do it. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I say get rid of it because I don't want
Speaker 1: to hear about how we need to. You know, if
Speaker 1: only we had more Republicans, then they'd finally get things done.
Speaker 1: Does it? Remember every time someone says that, I want
Speaker 1: to say, really did we did we not repeal or
Speaker 1: it wasn't even a full repeal, but did we not
Speaker 1: change Obamacare? Because we didn't have enough Republican votes. No,
Speaker 1: we just didn't have enough Republicans who would vote to
Speaker 1: do it. Remember last summer, Yeah, I remember it. I
Speaker 1: remember how that went down. Not that we needed more Republicans,
Speaker 1: we were more Republicans, we just needed more real ones
Speaker 1: we're willing to stand and actually do something. So I
Speaker 1: get a little sick of the goal post shifting and
Speaker 1: all the changing of changing around with this stuff. Charlie
Speaker 1: and Ocean City, Maryland. Good to have you, sir, a
Speaker 1: shield Bucks outside. Charlie, Hey, I was, I was a
Speaker 1: little disappointed with the President not vetoing. But I think
Speaker 1: this weekend he's going to change his mind grastically because
Speaker 1: I guarantee you his Twitter account is blowing up. So
Speaker 1: what do you think what will happen this weekend? His
Speaker 1: Twitter account will blow up, meaning that he's gonna I'm
Speaker 1: not I'm not following you here. Ye. People are going
Speaker 1: to tweet him. Oh he people are gonna tweet him
Speaker 1: about how they're unhappy. Okay, And I blame two people,
Speaker 1: K Street, Ryan in H Street, McConnell. Hm. That's that's
Speaker 1: they're They're the drag on Arab But don't you think
Speaker 1: Trump should veto it to force their hand. I mean
Speaker 1: the shot I wish you would. Last night when I
Speaker 1: went to bed, I was happy. Yeah, me too. I
Speaker 1: thought he was gonna do it. Yeah, And then he didn't,
Speaker 1: and I thought, Man, he couldn't knocked this thing out
Speaker 1: of the park. He could have made those rhinos come
Speaker 1: back and do their job. Man. I agree, Charlie, thank
Speaker 1: you for calling him. My friend got to talk to
Speaker 1: you from Maryland. Uh, Team, I'm gonna just bring up
Speaker 1: to speed on what happened in France. There was a
Speaker 1: standoff terrorist inspired by ISIS. We'll get to that more
Speaker 1: coming up. He's back with you now, because when it
Speaker 1: comes to the fight for truth, the fuck never stops.
Speaker 1: You are now entering the Freedom Technical Operations Center. All
Speaker 1: sensitive programs must be kept strictly. Need to know Team
Speaker 1: Buck is cleared and ready to the Buck brief. According
Speaker 1: to the local mayor who is speaking to the Roys
Speaker 1: News agency. He says, all those hostages have been released,
Speaker 1: but the gunman is now holding a police officer as
Speaker 1: a hostage, so the hostage situation is ongoing. But the
Speaker 1: shoppers who are inside that supermarket have been released and
Speaker 1: a police office is that was earlier today, Um and
Speaker 1: that was a hostage situation that has actually been resolved
Speaker 1: in France, resolved with the shooting of the terrorist. The
Speaker 1: Islamic State inspired this terrorist. I'll give you some of
Speaker 1: the details of it now. Just a reminder that isis
Speaker 1: is still out there as a group but also as
Speaker 1: a as an ideology. Their propaganda often uses the phrase
Speaker 1: remains and expands, the Caliphate remains and expands, and that
Speaker 1: is what they put out after this particular incident. So
Speaker 1: you had a gunman named red wah on Loch Deem.
Speaker 1: He is a Moroccan um Moroccan national who moved to France,
Speaker 1: I believe, although he might have been born in France
Speaker 1: and to check on his nationality originally of Moroccan descent. Um.
Speaker 1: He walked into a supermarket in trebe Trebez in France
Speaker 1: and he took hostages. He killed a member of staff
Speaker 1: and a customer and then he he sees hostages there
Speaker 1: a local member of the police and Francis gendar named
Speaker 1: Lieutenant Colonel ar No bell Trump, who was forty four
Speaker 1: years old, offered to take the place of a female
Speaker 1: hostage in the supermarket, to swap himself for the female
Speaker 1: hostage and so she UH. She was able to get
Speaker 1: to safety unharmed, and the UH Lieutenant Colonel here Beltrum,
Speaker 1: the French gendarme, left his phone on so that law
Speaker 1: enforcement could hear exactly what was going on inside the
Speaker 1: supermarket during the hostage standoff, and then somehow it seems
Speaker 1: the terrorists perhaps became aware that the phone was on.
Speaker 1: Something happened and he started shooting. The gendarm hit him
Speaker 1: three times. He's now fighting for his life in the hospital.
Speaker 1: But once that shooting started with the UH, well, I'm
Speaker 1: sure they could hear it outside anyway, but he had
Speaker 1: the phone on him and law enforcement immediately swooped in
Speaker 1: and eliminated this terrorist gunman red Juan lock Deem, So
Speaker 1: yet another jee hottest incident. It's amazing, you know, on
Speaker 1: some of these news stories about it. They also have
Speaker 1: him in The Guardian. They have a whole rundown of
Speaker 1: the major Isis inspired terrorist attacks in France. And you
Speaker 1: have the the Cowache brothers who gunned down eleven people
Speaker 1: at Charlie Ebdom magazine in January. A knife attack against
Speaker 1: soldiers guarding a Jewish community center in Nice in February,
Speaker 1: a car attack in January a guy ran into four soldiers.
Speaker 1: UH police officer and his partner were stabbed to death
Speaker 1: in the outskirts of Paris June. I mean, I just
Speaker 1: keep reading down and then you had the Bata Klan massacre.
Speaker 1: You've had some very very horrific terror attacks in France
Speaker 1: and just the last couple of years, all isis inspired
Speaker 1: or isis directed, and it is a reminder of the
Speaker 1: threat that we continue to face. The Islamic stay it
Speaker 1: has already claimed this attack and they are saying, of
Speaker 1: course there will be more. Not clear yet whether this
Speaker 1: red one lochtem fellow was a member of the Islamic
Speaker 1: State or just as the as ISIS propaganda calls it
Speaker 1: a lie in acting on behalf of the Islamic State.
Speaker 1: But this is still very much out there, my friends,
Speaker 1: and something we have to keep an eye on. One
Speaker 1: more thing that I have not touched on that this
Speaker 1: is reminding me of. It's not it's really a separate story,
Speaker 1: but it has to do with what the Turks have
Speaker 1: been up to in Syria. The Turks are engaged in
Speaker 1: military operations in northern Syria, clearing out areas held by
Speaker 1: our Kurdish allies who have been taking the fight to
Speaker 1: the Islamic State in the area of what was the Caliphate,
Speaker 1: and we are hearing barely a peep about it in
Speaker 1: this country. And the Turkish government led by Ritwan, who's
Speaker 1: really rather anti American and very problematic from our respective
Speaker 1: and a and a despot in the making, if not
Speaker 1: a despot already is saying that he's going to go
Speaker 1: into a rock even and clear out Kords from some
Speaker 1: of the areas where they have retaken ground from the
Speaker 1: Islamic State in Iraq. This is a this is a
Speaker 1: big problem that we should all be more aware of.
Speaker 1: And the media silence on this, I mean it is
Speaker 1: it is should be such an embarrassment that CNN and
Speaker 1: just runs night after night, story after story about women
Speaker 1: claiming to have had affairs with Trump over a decade ago,
Speaker 1: any number of stories more important than these. And beyond that,
Speaker 1: the Kurds are facing some really uh, really dangerous situations
Speaker 1: in Syria on on our behalf, and they are us
Speaker 1: allies and have been for a long time, and we're
Speaker 1: not doing nearly enough for them. So you know, the
Speaker 1: news media is focused on some very superficial stuff that
Speaker 1: should not be getting anywhere near the coverage and attention
Speaker 1: that it does. And it just frustrates me. And here
Speaker 1: here I am as I'm literally talking to you. They've
Speaker 1: got they've got Karen McDougall alleged affair with Trump on
Speaker 1: the screen again. CNN has turned into the the Trump's
Speaker 1: alleged affairs channel. It was the Russia Collusion channel, now
Speaker 1: it's the Trump's alleged affairs channel. I mean, I really
Speaker 1: do think the places is a disgrace. Now. It used
Speaker 1: to be that I didn't want to be affiliated with
Speaker 1: it because it had gone. Look these channels change over time,
Speaker 1: and there's a but they they have just gone into
Speaker 1: the sewer over there. It was always left a center,
Speaker 1: but it used to be a place where you could
Speaker 1: have a debate and discussion maybe and now it has uh,
Speaker 1: it has just lost it. It has lost it. I
Speaker 1: am I am appaulled, even though I should expect it,
Speaker 1: I suppose anyway. That's but that's the update that I
Speaker 1: have for you. On France. This gendarme very heroic stuff
Speaker 1: and more of what we expect from law enforcement. Uh
Speaker 1: here and in our Western European allies right putting themselves
Speaker 1: in harm's way. And doing the right thing. Eight four
Speaker 1: four to five. You want to chat with me, by
Speaker 1: all means, call eight buck. We have a lot more
Speaker 1: to get to, including a discussion later this hour of
Speaker 1: David Hoggs latest and we'll get to that. And third hour,
Speaker 1: I've got a couple of wonderful authors will be joining
Speaker 1: talk about their latest books, including Peter Schweitzer has got
Speaker 1: a book on just how how brazen some of the corruption,
Speaker 1: the high level corruption, including some Biden family members. What
Speaker 1: a shock. We'll get into that as well. So we've
Speaker 1: got much more. Come and stay with me. Vice President,
Speaker 1: do you care to respond to the President's tweet? Sir? Oh, no,
Speaker 1: no response. Would you really fight the president? Sure? I
Speaker 1: was talking about high school. Go back and read what
Speaker 1: I said. I said high school. Apparently Biden's feeling the
Speaker 1: sting from the Trump tweet there a little bit. He
Speaker 1: sounded very aggravated with that female reporter asking about the
Speaker 1: whole exchange with Trump. You know, I always say it, uh,
Speaker 1: don't don't wrestle gators and to buy you you know,
Speaker 1: don't try to don't try to mess with Trump on Twitter.
Speaker 1: You're gonna you'renn get slapped down I mean, you're gonna
Speaker 1: get a a buck slap, extraordinary Trump slap if you will.
Speaker 1: And that is what happened with Biden. So he's backing
Speaker 1: off it. They're they're they're delusional if they think the
Speaker 1: Biden really has a shot in I know, people like
Speaker 1: to do you'd like to put these ideas out there
Speaker 1: and they go, oh yeah, Biden. Biden. Biden's is the
Speaker 1: guy to get the job done, the really really unimpressive dude.
Speaker 1: Not nothing about him to write home about. Um, lots
Speaker 1: of people say he's he's a little creepy a little bit.
Speaker 1: It can be a little bit weird though sometimes a
Speaker 1: little creepy. We'll we'll touch you grabby in photos. I'm
Speaker 1: not just saying, I mean, do you see the photos,
Speaker 1: You're like, whoa. So there's there's that. Um, we'll have
Speaker 1: to see if Biden learns his lesson. Then there's also
Speaker 1: by the way, um bennon making an appearance these days.
Speaker 1: Here's what here's Mr Bannon had to say in the
Speaker 1: New Cycle this week. John Down is a good man,
Speaker 1: and I think that's why essentially more aggressive attorneys got
Speaker 1: brought in that are now you know, I think President
Speaker 1: Trump's going to war. I think it's very obviously He's
Speaker 1: going to go to war in this This is about
Speaker 1: John Dowd leaving, who was Trump's chief counsel, and the
Speaker 1: whole Russia collusion matter. And we now see that it
Speaker 1: looks at least like Trump doesn't want to take the
Speaker 1: advice of I'm not gonna testify for Mueller. He's he's
Speaker 1: gonna do it, which I gotta say, I think it's
Speaker 1: probably a bad idea, but you know what, do I know?
Speaker 1: I can't pardon myself. So Trump may want He's lining
Speaker 1: up for a very aggressive approach on a number of fronts.
Speaker 1: Bolton now as his National security advisor. By the way,
Speaker 1: you think this stuff about firing Carson was true? I
Speaker 1: saw those reports today that he's gonna fire Ben Carson.
Speaker 1: I don't know over over a thirty thou dollar Dinet set.
Speaker 1: That's expect I get my Dinet sets off of Amazon.
Speaker 1: I'm not a I'm not a fancy guy. Odds aren't
Speaker 1: in his favor. The odds are not his favor. If
Speaker 1: you're when we look at that chart of all the
Speaker 1: different people who have left this administration, you're like, WHOA
Speaker 1: this is it's just like an NFL team of people
Speaker 1: that are very senior who have left administration. Terms of
Speaker 1: how many people there are, it's been been very, very substantial. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So Dowd dropped dropped out of being Trump's chief counsel.
Speaker 1: People say it's because Trump doesn't want to take a
Speaker 1: cautious approach. He want he wants. As Bannon said, I
Speaker 1: think Bennon might be right about this with it. Trump
Speaker 1: wants to go to war with Muller. That'll be interesting.
Speaker 1: I don't I have no idea how that's gonna shake out.
Speaker 1: I don't think anybody does. Um, it will be. It
Speaker 1: will be entertaining, though, that much is for sure. Brent
Speaker 1: in New Mexico, you've been very patient and on hold,
Speaker 1: how you doing, Brent Hey about Chilili. Now, My point
Speaker 1: is is, uh, this is entirely irresponsible. And you know,
Speaker 1: I didn't vote for I didn't vote for Trump in
Speaker 1: the UH in the primaries, but I've stood buying through
Speaker 1: this stuff because I'm looking at actionable results and I'll
Speaker 1: put up with all of this other craps, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean, all of the shenanigans and stuff, but
Speaker 1: this is important to me. You know what I mean.
Speaker 1: As as a husband, I can't go to my wife
Speaker 1: and say, well, I pay the mortgage, but I spent
Speaker 1: the rest of my paycheck on Peyton Manning Jersey in
Speaker 1: a box of beard, you know what I mean. But
Speaker 1: don't worry about little Susan is gonna take care of
Speaker 1: it on the credit card when I die, You know
Speaker 1: what I mean. This is important stuff to be You know,
Speaker 1: we're standing in from taking the arrows, but he starts
Speaker 1: signing stuff like this. Congress is definitely in trouble. Everybody's kissed. Man.
Speaker 1: This is not good. Yeah, I think it's a big
Speaker 1: problem because there's not gonna be a better opportunity in
Speaker 1: the future. And I've gotten very tired. This discussion with
Speaker 1: Republicans and tackling the debt has been going on in
Speaker 1: earnest well you could say for decades, but ever since
Speaker 1: the Tea Party. This is supposed to be something that
Speaker 1: conservatives in America understanding, are united on, and we keep
Speaker 1: getting told by the Republican Congress, next time we'll fight,
Speaker 1: next time we'll fight. Well, at what point is it
Speaker 1: clear that it's just never, It's not next time, It's
Speaker 1: never time, it's not gonna happen. No, I'm definitely My
Speaker 1: congressman's in deep trouble here. You know. We I've been
Speaker 1: to the town halls and stuff, and I've heard the
Speaker 1: whole same drum over and over and over again. And
Speaker 1: I guarantee voted for it. And people are fed up. Man. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I I agree, and I understand why they are. I
Speaker 1: can't tell them. I can't tell them this is a
Speaker 1: good thing, you know. I come here, I tell you
Speaker 1: guys the truth. This is not what should have happened here.
Speaker 1: Trump should have vetoed it forced their hand. You know,
Speaker 1: if they lose a shutdown battle, fine, the midterms are
Speaker 1: far our long ways away. There's plenty of time to regroup, Brent,
Speaker 1: thanks for calling from New Mexico. Shield High. Plenty of
Speaker 1: time to regroup. They keep pushing this as though, oh,
Speaker 1: you know, national script, and they gave more. There's more
Speaker 1: money spent for the military than Trump even even asked for.
Speaker 1: It's a matter of national security. I've signed this omnibus
Speaker 1: budget bill. There are a lot of things that I'm
Speaker 1: unhappy about in this bill. There are a lot of
Speaker 1: things that we shouldn't have had in this bill. But
Speaker 1: we were in a sense forced if we want to
Speaker 1: build our military, we were forced to have. There are
Speaker 1: some things that we should have in the bill. But
Speaker 1: I say to Congress, I will never sign another bill
Speaker 1: like this again. I'm not gonna do it again. Nobody
Speaker 1: read it. It's only hours old. Some people don't even
Speaker 1: know what it is. At one point three trillion dollars,
Speaker 1: it's the second largest ever. President Obama signed one that
Speaker 1: was actually larger. Yeah, it's one point three trillion dollars,
Speaker 1: all right. I played a Fleisher clip befour for you.
Speaker 1: By the way, he also spoke about the military aspect
Speaker 1: of this bill. I wanted to play this in the
Speaker 1: last hour to get to it, so I just wanted
Speaker 1: to return for one second. Here. Uh, the benefits the
Speaker 1: president had today and being able to create a suspense.
Speaker 1: He brought people's attention to the problems of military cutbacks
Speaker 1: and how dire it has been. But remember it only
Speaker 1: got that way because the two parties couldn't agree on
Speaker 1: spending initiatives before, so by default, they set up this
Speaker 1: system of draconian cuts in both domestic and military spending.
Speaker 1: Those draconian cuts actually went through in two thou and
Speaker 1: eleven and now they're undone here in two thousand and eighteen,
Speaker 1: they went too far in terms of the military. Um
Speaker 1: so if you were pro military, it's a good day
Speaker 1: to see its signed. Uh. You know, I'm as pro
Speaker 1: military as anybody. I have a tough time accepting the
Speaker 1: the Leisher analysis here on this that's calling them draconian cuts.
Speaker 1: I remember it was called the sequester. You guys will
Speaker 1: remember that, the sequester, and it was a decrease in
Speaker 1: the increase in spending. It was not actually really much
Speaker 1: of a cut of anything. So it's we're gonna spend
Speaker 1: you know this much more than we're already spending. The future. Well,
Speaker 1: now we're gonna spend a little less of what we
Speaker 1: are of the increase of what we're planning to spend
Speaker 1: in the future. We're told things I heard Trump today say, oh,
Speaker 1: we've got fewer surface ships in the navy. Well, it's
Speaker 1: not really comparable to say that a you know, a
Speaker 1: Nimits class carrier should be counted the same way as
Speaker 1: now a couple of era battleships. Right, we can do
Speaker 1: a lot more with it. And I don't I don't
Speaker 1: see this as the victory that people are saying it is.
Speaker 1: I see it as pretty pretty disconcerting. Really, when when
Speaker 1: are we gonna have to fight? What are we gonna
Speaker 1: have that fight over Obamacare? Everyone? When are we going
Speaker 1: to have the fight over immigration? And when I say
Speaker 1: have the fight, I mean the the dust up that
Speaker 1: will happen when they take real action. Right. We got
Speaker 1: Kenny in Boston who thinks this is all calculated. Kenny,
Speaker 1: Good to talk to you, Hi, Buck, How you doing.
Speaker 1: You went to Amherst College. I went to U Mass Amhers.
Speaker 1: I think I was there when you were there. But anyway,
Speaker 1: I need to ask you. Do you want to Amhers College?
Speaker 1: You played chess? Right? Yeah? Of course, all all us
Speaker 1: amorous nerds played chess. Of course. Well I played chess,
Speaker 1: and I played pretty good. I had a friend of
Speaker 1: mine who everyone, all of the other friends thought was adult.
Speaker 1: You know, he was a stupid stuff. Well, when he
Speaker 1: played chess, he would make some seemingly the stupidest move
Speaker 1: you could ever. Oh my god, what an idiot. But
Speaker 1: you know what, he ends up winning the match. And
Speaker 1: I'm wondering if Trump's uh signing of this bill has
Speaker 1: something to do with that. Um certainly his changes of
Speaker 1: staff and attorneys probably does. I mean, you know, this
Speaker 1: makes another word of making it look like, oh my god,
Speaker 1: he's gonna go to war. You're gonna he's gonna uh
Speaker 1: fire Muller. But in reality he isn't. In other words,
Speaker 1: it's a it's a it's a diversion of sorts and Kenny,
Speaker 1: I, I I hope you're right. I hope that this has
Speaker 1: been a thing for a long time. I hope that
Speaker 1: Trump is playing the proverbial four D chess that everyone's
Speaker 1: been talking about for a long time. We'll have to see.
Speaker 1: Thanks for calling her from Boston, my friend, have a
Speaker 1: good weekend up there. Oh is this moost? Is this
Speaker 1: most to snow on this Sunday again? No? I heard that.
Speaker 1: That's a bad rumor. Don't don't let me start that
Speaker 1: rumor today. Oh wait, one thing before we go in
Speaker 1: the break. Today's today's National Puppy Day. That should make
Speaker 1: everyone happy. Actually gonna puppy this weekend because I love poppy.
Speaker 1: He's holding the line for America. Buck Sexton his back.
Speaker 1: I think the president is assembling a war cabinet to
Speaker 1: actually have a real war. He's got John Bolton, and
Speaker 1: the only question is when we find ourselves in a
Speaker 1: military conflict. He's in the North Korea or Iran or both,
Speaker 1: We're going to be in for a very rough, if
Speaker 1: not calamitous time ahead. Nominate a warhawk as her third
Speaker 1: national security advisor in fourteen months. John Bolton being national
Speaker 1: Security Advisor will push the president and the nation in
Speaker 1: a more dangerous course. He's a hawk on North Korea.
Speaker 1: I think it raises the stakes for military reaction around
Speaker 1: the world. I don't think there's any doubt about that.
Speaker 1: He's a warmonger. He has no problem thinking about starting
Speaker 1: a war there. You have a bit of a media
Speaker 1: reaction to Ambassador Bolton or a c Ann refers to
Speaker 1: him a guy who sometimes appears on Fox News, but
Speaker 1: you had an Ambassador Bolton is. He's got them all
Speaker 1: very upset. Now they're all they're all very much bothered
Speaker 1: by the fact that Trump has a warhawk, and you
Speaker 1: know he's the national security advisor. Okay, And what we
Speaker 1: need to understand is that the first of all, the
Speaker 1: media's response to anything national security related after the eight
Speaker 1: years of obama Ism, we remember Obama escalated dramatically U
Speaker 1: S troops in Afghanistan, not a peep, not a peep
Speaker 1: from the media about that being warmongering or anything else.
Speaker 1: And I would note that he as It's not like
Speaker 1: he escalated and said we're gonna win. We have a
Speaker 1: debt to the Afghan people that we're gonna pay pay
Speaker 1: here or you know, whatever we've got, and we've made
Speaker 1: a promise, we're gonna honor it. No, no, he says,
Speaker 1: you know, we're gonna work to search, we're gonna buit
Speaker 1: more troops and they're gonna come home on exactly this time.
Speaker 1: So Telebone, you understand to wait, you need to wait.
Speaker 1: You know, the Taliban was very capable of just laying
Speaker 1: low for a bit while we had a surge in place. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they falled over Samarias, I understand that. But truth of
Speaker 1: the matter is that surging at the same time that
Speaker 1: you're saying you're gonna withdraw is letting domestic politics determine
Speaker 1: battlefield considerations. And that is what the obamainistration did. But
Speaker 1: they didn't even criticize him for being a war marker.
Speaker 1: Right now you're hearing this, which is such a such
Speaker 1: a pejorative and unfair and nasty way to describe a
Speaker 1: guy who has been a been in this era of
Speaker 1: uh national security, this area of national security and and
Speaker 1: and diplomatic service for decades. Um. People are saying that
Speaker 1: they should be terrified, horrified Bolton is dangerous all this stuff,
Speaker 1: you know, I will I want to give some credit
Speaker 1: to David French, who's you know, we have him on
Speaker 1: the show. I like David. He's a very very good
Speaker 1: writer and a good guy. He's written a great piece
Speaker 1: on Bolton. He says Bolton is not crazy. The world is.
Speaker 1: And what we saw. One of the things we saw
Speaker 1: from the Obama years is that sitting back and thinking
Speaker 1: that doing nothing is some brilliant policy is actually dangerous.
Speaker 1: That watching Syria descend into an an absolute hell hole,
Speaker 1: which I know, we shouldn't have landed the eighty second
Speaker 1: airboard and decided to take over the country. I'm not
Speaker 1: advocating for that, but there was basically nothing done. And
Speaker 1: as we see from what Trump has done now to
Speaker 1: defeat the Islamic State, there are ways to do things
Speaker 1: there without a lot of US casualties, without a lot
Speaker 1: of US risks that would have slowed down or stopped
Speaker 1: Isis from becoming the monstrosity that it was. That would
Speaker 1: have saved thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of lives, that
Speaker 1: would have stopped terror attacks in Europe and here at home. Remember,
Speaker 1: the Islamic state became this clarion call to jihoti is
Speaker 1: m because of its success and because or it's perceived success. Right,
Speaker 1: that was why people would self radicalize and take it
Speaker 1: upon themselves to be jihadis without any formal training of
Speaker 1: any kind, because they wanted to that they were ideologically
Speaker 1: aligned with this notion of a caliphate. Overseas, Obama did
Speaker 1: very little on North Korea. The situation North Korean nukes
Speaker 1: and the possibility of nuclear proliferation and missile proliferation technology
Speaker 1: got worse. For eight years under Obama, these things got worse.
Speaker 1: So why is it that we are in this position
Speaker 1: where we have to pretend at having somebody who takes
Speaker 1: a more aggressive approach to these foreign policy problems. By aggressive,
Speaker 1: I mean not just sit back, relax and let the
Speaker 1: good times roll, you know, let things happen. That was
Speaker 1: what Obama did, That was what his people, That was
Speaker 1: what Susan Susan Rice's approach, except in Libya, where for
Speaker 1: reasons that still remain kinda huh under our two p
Speaker 1: responsibility to protect in Libya. That was the doctrine. That
Speaker 1: was Samantha power, that was Susan Rice. They built careers
Speaker 1: on that. Under that premise we intervened in Libya but
Speaker 1: not in Syria. Why because that was the decision that
Speaker 1: they made o Libya became a failed state and disaster afterwards,
Speaker 1: and also a haven for the Islamic State. In fact,
Speaker 1: for a while, the only place that isis really controlled
Speaker 1: territory in any meaningful sense was Ras or the Ira
Speaker 1: Syria world or the original one, and then on the
Speaker 1: coast of Libya. So this notion that things were great
Speaker 1: under Obama's for Obama's foreign policy was failure. You looked
Speaker 1: at a place in the world, You looked at any
Speaker 1: spot on a map where there was trouble. You look
Speaker 1: at a hot spot where people are shooting each other,
Speaker 1: bad things are happening. He got worse under Obama's years.
Speaker 1: Any problem, any national security challenge, he got worse under
Speaker 1: the eight years of Obama. And look at the people
Speaker 1: that he had around him. Meant the power, you know,
Speaker 1: very very much. A humanitarian internationalist Susan Rice, same thing,
Speaker 1: humanitarian nationalist Hillary Clinton, cold bloodless, self indulgent, self gratifying,
Speaker 1: frightening human being. I mean, you know, but I guess
Speaker 1: technically uh supposed to be a technocrat of they were
Speaker 1: unable to do it. John carry Yeah, John Carrey, he's
Speaker 1: a model for the peace process. Couldn't even get in
Speaker 1: the door. But they're all free, Oh John, John Bolton's
Speaker 1: gonna lead us in a war. This is just this
Speaker 1: is just for ratings on TV, Folks that there's no
Speaker 1: there's no honesty and there's there's no truth behind it
Speaker 1: at all. Both In is more than qualified for the role.
Speaker 1: He'll do a very good job, and he understands the
Speaker 1: world's a dangerous place. There's going to approach it as such.
Speaker 1: And maybe that's what makes the left so upset about him.
Speaker 1: All right, we've got we've got to talk about David
Speaker 1: Hogg coming up here. I got more stay with me.
Speaker 1: One more about school. You mentioned your backpack. What do
Speaker 1: they do with your backpack there? I think after we
Speaker 1: come back from spring break, they're requiring all of us
Speaker 1: to have clear backpacks. I think one of the most important,
Speaker 1: one of the other important things to realize is many
Speaker 1: students want their privacy there. There are many um for example,
Speaker 1: females that are school when they had when they go
Speaker 1: through their mentoral cycle, they don't want people to see
Speaker 1: their tampons and stuff, and it it's just it's unnecessary.
Speaker 1: It's embarrassing for a lot of the students, and it
Speaker 1: makes them feel isolated and separated from the rest of
Speaker 1: American school culture, where they're having essentially their First Amendment
Speaker 1: rights infringed upon because they can't freely wear whatever backpack
Speaker 1: they want, regardless of what it is. It has to
Speaker 1: be a clear backpack. What we should have is just
Speaker 1: more policies that make sure that these students are feeling
Speaker 1: safe and secure in their schools. So that's David Hogg
Speaker 1: the single most prominent member of the Never Against Student
Speaker 1: movement against school violence. But it's really against guns. So
Speaker 1: let's understand that it's decided that it has decided that
Speaker 1: guns are the problem. But here you have what is
Speaker 1: the eighteen by the way, is the eighteen r he's eighteen?
Speaker 1: Do you have a teenager who has been thrust forward
Speaker 1: by the national media. He's now got a huge social
Speaker 1: media following, Anderson Cooper has him all. Rachel Matto, we
Speaker 1: played it last night like I'm star struck by some
Speaker 1: of the never end people. I mean, she's literally pandering
Speaker 1: to these kids, because in doing so, Mattow panders to
Speaker 1: her audience. And here he is, after telling us all
Speaker 1: that if you won't abandon the Second Amendment, you don't
Speaker 1: care about dead kids. Now he's all like, whoa, whoa.
Speaker 1: You can't mess with high school backpack choices. This isn't
Speaker 1: North Korea. Man. It's like, well, exactly, you either understand
Speaker 1: that there are trade offs for some of these security
Speaker 1: measures or you or you're just being dishonest, you know
Speaker 1: he's saying. And I would note his claim here is
Speaker 1: that he there's a First Amendment right to not have
Speaker 1: the First Ament right in school to have the kind
Speaker 1: of backpack you want. And I would be like, well,
Speaker 1: first of all, there is a Second Amendment right to
Speaker 1: bear arms, and I do not think that there is
Speaker 1: a First Amendment right to carry whatever kind of parcel
Speaker 1: you want into school as an means of expression. So
Speaker 1: I think his constitutional jurisprudence needs quite a bit of work,
Speaker 1: needs quite a bit of additional thinking here. But this
Speaker 1: is par for the course. None of this surprises me
Speaker 1: that you have this kid going around grandstanding, and the
Speaker 1: stuff he said yesterday, which we played for you, was
Speaker 1: just absolutely it was absolutely terrible. Uh, should be discrediting,
Speaker 1: But how do you discredit somebody who whenever he shows
Speaker 1: you who he is, the responses, Oh, but he's he's
Speaker 1: just a kid, and he's a victim, and he's trying
Speaker 1: to save other kids. Why do you hate kids so much?
Speaker 1: How much of a slander? How much nastiness? Um do
Speaker 1: we have to accept from this kid? I mean, remember,
Speaker 1: this is a reminder, all right, this is he's going
Speaker 1: around giving interviews Anderston. By the way, I was an
Speaker 1: employee at CNI for two years. Anderson Cooper's people never
Speaker 1: wanted to have me on the show. Why I don't know,
Speaker 1: Probably because I take everybody to school. It is buck
Speaker 1: slaps of plenty. But nonetheless they put this kid on
Speaker 1: notice spew a bunch of nonsense. And here's what he
Speaker 1: sounds like in some of his interviews. They're pathetic funds
Speaker 1: that want to keep killing our children. They could have
Speaker 1: blood from children spattered all over their faces and they
Speaker 1: wouldn't take action. When you're oldest parents like I don't
Speaker 1: know how to send an eye message and just like
Speaker 1: give me the phone and you take in You're like, okay,
Speaker 1: let me handle it, and you get it done in
Speaker 1: one second. Sadly, that's what we have to do with
Speaker 1: our government because our parents don't know how to use
Speaker 1: the democracy. So we have to we think what sectors
Speaker 1: are out there that want to continue to sell more guns,
Speaker 1: murder more children and honestly just get reelected. What type
Speaker 1: of person are you when you want to see more
Speaker 1: money than children's lives? This type of person does that.
Speaker 1: He's not he's not even a smart teenager. He's actually
Speaker 1: just not smart and he's disrespectful. So that's why I'm
Speaker 1: I'm I've had enough of this. I'm not playing like, oh,
Speaker 1: but be guys to because at all they're traumatised. There
Speaker 1: are a lot of kids are traumatized. Well, CNN was
Speaker 1: supposed to have on um Kyle Kyle Kaschev, right, I'm
Speaker 1: I might might be mispronouncing his last name, but he's
Speaker 1: one of the Parkland survivors who takes a very different
Speaker 1: tone and approach to these things. And CNN was supposed
Speaker 1: to have him on and they canceled him and they're
Speaker 1: gonna have him on a month afterwards, right, So the
Speaker 1: the impact of his appearance would be much less than
Speaker 1: what we've already had with the Parkland kids. Kyle kashev right. Yeah,
Speaker 1: even want to think I'm wrong, I'm right. And they
Speaker 1: canceled on him. And this is from his Twitter account.
Speaker 1: By the way, they canceled on Kyle because he had
Speaker 1: retweeted something where someone referred to a CNN story as
Speaker 1: fake news. So they invited this kid on and then
Speaker 1: because of that they got rid of him. Notice how
Speaker 1: no one's gonna cancel any media appearances for David Hogg,
Speaker 1: even though he's he's saying, I played to the audio.
Speaker 1: He's saying explicitly, the n Ray is going to keep
Speaker 1: killing children. You're going to keep killing Chill. The n
Speaker 1: Ray didn't kill anybody. You know, he's gonna keep killing children.
Speaker 1: He's cursing, and I mean some of the other things,
Speaker 1: by the way that you're you're old asked parents don't
Speaker 1: know how to use and also that parents don't know
Speaker 1: how to use democracy. No, actually, you disrespectful, little ingrate.
Speaker 1: People who were older than you know a lot more
Speaker 1: about democracy. And we live in a republic, which is
Speaker 1: the distinction that I doubt he'd be able to grasp
Speaker 1: even if I tried to explain it. But nonetheless, this
Speaker 1: is who is being held up now by the left
Speaker 1: as some kind of a sage on the issue of
Speaker 1: gun control and stopping violence in schools. This is all
Speaker 1: just mobilization because progressivism has become a fashion statement. It
Speaker 1: is an identity as much, if not more so, that
Speaker 1: it is a system of political beliefs. Progressivism is something
Speaker 1: that you sign on for because of what it says
Speaker 1: about you, not for what it means for the country,
Speaker 1: and not really for the policies that implements either. You
Speaker 1: want to be a progressive now because that's what this
Speaker 1: mark cool. Nice people are the good people, not the mean,
Speaker 1: white Christian racist people. That's what the Republicans are. This
Speaker 1: is what it's turned into. And pop culture has just
Speaker 1: become a megaphone for this and has been for a
Speaker 1: long time. But they the complete lack of respect that
Speaker 1: some of these never again kids. And I even told you,
Speaker 1: I think it's disrespectful that they've appropriated a term, and yeah,
Speaker 1: that's what I'll say it appropriation borrow from a leftist lexicon.
Speaker 1: They've appropriated a term meant to mean no more genocide,
Speaker 1: from the Holocaust, and they're saying that this is this
Speaker 1: is not a hollow. We do not have a holocaust
Speaker 1: of children in school violence going on. We do not.
Speaker 1: We have isolated incidents over a period of decades of despicable, evil,
Speaker 1: cowardly violence in a society of three million people, and
Speaker 1: we have fewer of them if you look at the
Speaker 1: long term trend now than we had in the nineties.
Speaker 1: So it's actually going down. It's not the problem that
Speaker 1: people have been led to believe it is in recent months.
Speaker 1: But I know we're not supposed to say that. We're
Speaker 1: not supposed to push back on mr Mr Hoggs nonsense here.
Speaker 1: I mean, he is an adult, right, so you know
Speaker 1: if he's putting on big boy pants and wants to
Speaker 1: be on the national stage and wants to call other
Speaker 1: people murderers, which is really borderline, uh slanderous. I think
Speaker 1: that once you start referring to people as murderers when
Speaker 1: they've killed no one, that's a that's a bit of
Speaker 1: a Now you'd say the n RAS and organization and
Speaker 1: he's I understand there's a First Amendment argument there, but
Speaker 1: I'm just saying it is pushing the limits it is
Speaker 1: pushing the limits of free speech and moving toward character assassination,
Speaker 1: which is really what this whole outfit is about. And
Speaker 1: I've seen this before with the left. This is how
Speaker 1: they do things, This is how they engage with these movements.
Speaker 1: They try to put either sympathetic usually sympathetic victims at
Speaker 1: the front of a movement, and then everyone around it
Speaker 1: gets to just be the apparatus of the Democrat Party,
Speaker 1: the Democrat left in action, pushing for whatever they want,
Speaker 1: and whenever they meet resistance, they go, oh, a lot up.
Speaker 1: But here here's you know, they're they're they're hiding behind
Speaker 1: the skirts, so to speak of the vanguard here. Oh,
Speaker 1: I don't want to fight. I don't want to No, no,
Speaker 1: you be mean to those people, the victims. They won't
Speaker 1: engage in the battle of ideas. So anyway, this is
Speaker 1: hog kid. I'm I'm I'm done with being patient with
Speaker 1: the whole thing. He's acting. He's acting like a child.
Speaker 1: He is, So maybe we can all agree that that's
Speaker 1: that's to be expected here. But that's why CNN should
Speaker 1: not make a mockery of itself by giving a platform
Speaker 1: to a high school kid who is acting poorly even
Speaker 1: for a high school kid. All Right, we got our
Speaker 1: three coming up here with Peter Schweitzer. He's got a
Speaker 1: really interesting book out about how corruption in this country
Speaker 1: for the elites really works. Peter is the guy from
Speaker 1: He's the Clinton Cash author. He's to throw them, throw
Speaker 1: them all out about how I still tell people this
Speaker 1: and they don't believe it. I'm like I used I
Speaker 1: had Peter on my show when I did Real News
Speaker 1: with the Blaze years ago, when I was part of
Speaker 1: a Real News I was one of the hosts and
Speaker 1: we'd have Peter on and he told about how insider
Speaker 1: trading Congress exempted itself from insider trading laws. You know,
Speaker 1: you can't make this stuff up. People go, no, way, Buck,
Speaker 1: oh no, but way, dude, way, it is in fact
Speaker 1: what they did. And he's he's great, you'll like that.
Speaker 1: And we've got Kristin Tate as well, who's a uh
Speaker 1: an up and coming author. You see her on Fox
Speaker 1: News sometimes, real nice ladies. She's written about taxes, which
Speaker 1: I hate, and we're gonna bash taxes together. That's gonna
Speaker 1: be fun. Our three coming up in just a few
Speaker 1: He's holding the line for America. Buck Sexton his back.
Speaker 1: All right, everybody, we have an author with this now
Speaker 1: who's got a fantastic new book that you were all
Speaker 1: going to want to hear about and read, Secret Empires
Speaker 1: How the American political class hides corruption and enrichest family
Speaker 1: and friends. The author is Peter Schweitzer. He's an investigative journalist, novelist,
Speaker 1: and political consultant. And Peter, thank you so much for joining.
Speaker 1: Great to have you, Hey, great to be on with you, Buck,
Speaker 1: thanks for having me. All right, walk us through. Peter,
Speaker 1: what do you what do you deal with this time around? Well, look,
Speaker 1: a corruption is a never changing, evolving thing. And when
Speaker 1: most people think of corruption, they think of you know,
Speaker 1: Congressman Jefferson who had the ninety dollars cash in as freezer,
Speaker 1: you know, cold hard cash Jefferson. They called him. Um, well,
Speaker 1: that's the old school corruption. The new school is what
Speaker 1: I call offshore in corruption. They don't take the money themselves.
Speaker 1: They funnel the money through family members or maybe a
Speaker 1: best friend. And the amounts of money are asked phonomically
Speaker 1: larger than say ninety thousand dollars, and they oftentimes involve
Speaker 1: you know, foreign entities like the government of China, or
Speaker 1: you know Ukrainian oligarchs who want to curry favor with
Speaker 1: American decision makers. So this is the new frontier of corruption. Uh.
Speaker 1: The amounts of money are large, and uh, it's it's
Speaker 1: really not just about politicians getting rich. It's actually warping
Speaker 1: our policies. Now you have to tell us, Peter about
Speaker 1: some of the actual case studies you deal with in
Speaker 1: the book. Is that certainly this all sounds like stuff
Speaker 1: that people need to hear. Well, yes, thanks Bucks. Um.
Speaker 1: So one example, um that's in the book involves Joe
Speaker 1: Biden and in December, blue collar Joe no where. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this one surprises a lot of people because they may
Speaker 1: have the criticisms of Biden, but they don't think for
Speaker 1: financial impropriety fits into it. But you know, he is
Speaker 1: vice president. In December, he flies over on air Force
Speaker 1: too to Beijing to meet with Chinese officials to talk
Speaker 1: to them about the South China see trade issues, technology transfer,
Speaker 1: you name it, on and on the point with him.
Speaker 1: Uh is his son Hunter Biden. Now, Joe Biden is
Speaker 1: criticized when he leaves Beijing by a lot of people
Speaker 1: in the region for going soft on China. Uh. And
Speaker 1: what we find is that ten days after they leave Beijing,
Speaker 1: his son, who was on the trip with him, scores
Speaker 1: a one billion dollar investment deal with the Chinese governments,
Speaker 1: not with the Chinese company, but with the Chinese governments.
Speaker 1: And what makes his troubling, Buck, is that not only
Speaker 1: is it the Chinese government giving this large deal to
Speaker 1: the son of the vice president with whom they're negotiating,
Speaker 1: but Hunter Biden has absolutely no background in private equity whatsoever.
Speaker 1: There's no logical explanation at all as to why he
Speaker 1: got this money other than the Chinese were seeking to
Speaker 1: pay off the bidens. How is that not criminal? I mean,
Speaker 1: is there some kind of carve out here that he
Speaker 1: was abusing or is this just people don't know about it? Well,
Speaker 1: it's that people don't know about it. I mean this
Speaker 1: this was a story that took us about a year
Speaker 1: to research. You know, we follow the money, and we've
Speaker 1: got the corporate documents, We've got photographs of Hunter Biden
Speaker 1: on Chinese language government websites where he's meeting with the
Speaker 1: Chinese officials discussing these deals. So people don't know about them. Um,
Speaker 1: that's the first thing. And the problem is, Buck, We've
Speaker 1: got disclosure laws in our country, but they don't deal
Speaker 1: with this kind of corruption. So you know, take Joe
Speaker 1: Biden when he's vice president, he has to disclose you know,
Speaker 1: a thousand dollar campaign contribution. If he's got a thousand
Speaker 1: dollars in g E stock, he needs to disclose that too.
Speaker 1: But if his son scores a billion dollar deal from
Speaker 1: a foreign government, that's not required to be disclosed. So
Speaker 1: one of the things I call for is we've got
Speaker 1: to have transparency on the kinds of deals that family
Speaker 1: members of politicians are engaging in with foreign governments. Don't
Speaker 1: that doesn't that apply for spouses because I remember when
Speaker 1: the former governor of Virginia, Bob McDonald, was brought up
Speaker 1: not on state but federal corruption charges, eventually throw overturned
Speaker 1: by the Supreme Court, by the way, for everyone listening, um.
Speaker 1: And at the time, I said, it looked like they
Speaker 1: were overreaching. They went after his wife for accepting gifts
Speaker 1: as though she were a public official guilty of corruption
Speaker 1: to although she held no office. Yeah. No, that's that's
Speaker 1: a great point, buck. Look a bribery, If you're charging
Speaker 1: somebody with bribery, it makes no difference if you're giving
Speaker 1: it to the politician or if you're giving it to
Speaker 1: a family member in exchange for something, the losses both
Speaker 1: of those as briberies. So just because money or a
Speaker 1: deal is routed through Hunter Biden instead of going directly
Speaker 1: to Joe Biden, it does not make it any less bribery.
Speaker 1: It's you know, proving that in a court of law,
Speaker 1: you've got to try to show some level of a
Speaker 1: quid pro quo or a tradeoff that was done. And
Speaker 1: you know, these politicians are very sophisticated about this. They
Speaker 1: they they're never are rarely going to explicitly say, you know,
Speaker 1: you give me this and I'll give you that, but
Speaker 1: it's implied and it's noticed. And in the case of Biden,
Speaker 1: there were actually three major deals that his son did
Speaker 1: with the Chinese government. Some of those deals involved, uh,
Speaker 1: the son of or the stepson of John carry in
Speaker 1: a close carry aid named Devin Archer. So the Chinese really,
Speaker 1: i would argue, did an amazingly damaging job of subverting
Speaker 1: our political leadership between ten when it came to our
Speaker 1: diplomacy which with China, because they were essentially, you know,
Speaker 1: funneling money to family members and getting them to go
Speaker 1: soft on Chinese policy, just as an aside I've been
Speaker 1: saying for for a while now that it's fastening to
Speaker 1: watch the media get so angry about all things Russia
Speaker 1: and somehow never see any kind of ominous similarities with
Speaker 1: what the Chinese are doing in terms of buying off people, influenced, influence,
Speaker 1: purchasing not really influenced, battling all the things that Chinese
Speaker 1: are up to. But that's an aside. I want to
Speaker 1: ask you, do you have anything on Russia specifically in
Speaker 1: the book. Uh, not so much Russia, but Ukraine close enough.
Speaker 1: We'll take it. And you know, and I hate to
Speaker 1: pick on Hunter Biden, but again it's Hunter Biden and
Speaker 1: this uh carry aid named Devin Archer who become business
Speaker 1: partners with a guy named Igor Kolimowski who is really
Speaker 1: the most notorious of Ukrainian oligarchs. And as you know,
Speaker 1: buck to say that somebody is the most notorious Ukrainian oligarch,
Speaker 1: that that is quite in accomplating out some competition for sure, exactly,
Speaker 1: but um, you know, they they strike a deal with him.
Speaker 1: We don't know how much money they made, but you
Speaker 1: can imagine it's quite a bit they're not going to
Speaker 1: throw their name around and associate with somebody like that.
Speaker 1: But here's the problem. So they go into business with
Speaker 1: Igor Kolamowski. Kolamowski owns Privat Bank in the Ukraine, through
Speaker 1: which the Obama administration, led by Joe Biden uh sends
Speaker 1: one point eight billion dollars in I m F money,
Speaker 1: a billion of which disappears, and a lot of Ukrainians
Speaker 1: believe that Igor Kolimowski has something to do with that
Speaker 1: money disappearing. So you've got this bizarre situation of somebody
Speaker 1: who allegedly is involved in the disappearance of a billion
Speaker 1: dollars in taxpayer money, whose business partners with the son
Speaker 1: of the Vice president and a close associate of the
Speaker 1: Secretary of State um and and this is just how
Speaker 1: this business gets done. And and you know it's it's
Speaker 1: got to be exposed and it's got to be challenged.
Speaker 1: We're speaking to Peter Schweitzer. He's the author of the
Speaker 1: fantastic Clinton Cash, which I have read cover to cover,
Speaker 1: and also his latest secret Empires, How the American political
Speaker 1: class hides corruption and enriches family and friends. It is
Speaker 1: in my hand right now. It is also in my
Speaker 1: read pile. Uh, Peter, tell me just somebody that's not
Speaker 1: a Biden, who you or some other uh, some other
Speaker 1: component of this story you want to share before I've
Speaker 1: let you get back to the rest of your book tour. Well,
Speaker 1: I would say the other example of involving China would
Speaker 1: be Mitch McConnell to sendate majority leader and his wife
Speaker 1: Choo Um. You know her. Her family has a long
Speaker 1: history UM in China, which there's nothing wrong with that,
Speaker 1: But the problem is is that their businesses is really
Speaker 1: tied up with the China States ship Building Corporation, which
Speaker 1: is UH, a Chinese government run company which is also
Speaker 1: really the largest military contractor in Beijing. UM and UH
Speaker 1: that company, that entity has helped make the family very
Speaker 1: wealthy and and some of that money has flowed to
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell. So it's a question again of the Chinese
Speaker 1: pursuing this policy what I call the princelings strategy. We've
Speaker 1: heard of the Chinese princelings, which are the children of
Speaker 1: Communist Party officials that you do business with to curry
Speaker 1: favor in Beijing. They are mirroring that they are doing
Speaker 1: that in the United States and seeking out commercial ties
Speaker 1: with the family members of American politicians and hoping that
Speaker 1: it's going to bend or shape our policy in a
Speaker 1: more favorable direct for themselves. This would all have to
Speaker 1: be prosecuted by d O J anti corruption, Is that right?
Speaker 1: I mean? Who does this? Who could do something about this? Well,
Speaker 1: you know, the first thing you would want to do
Speaker 1: is you would want to investigate any communication, any favors
Speaker 1: or things that might have been offered in these cases.
Speaker 1: We just don't know. What we've done is followed the
Speaker 1: paper trail. We know the timing of these transactions, we
Speaker 1: know the nature of them, we know who they did
Speaker 1: them with, and that's troubling enough. So it's got to
Speaker 1: be investigated. And then if you know, a grand jury
Speaker 1: or prosecutors believe something could be prosecuted, it would be
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice that would do it on public
Speaker 1: corruption charges based on what you know of the law
Speaker 1: around this issue. Right now, Peter, if if I were
Speaker 1: a let's say I were the governor of a state,
Speaker 1: and or now let's have more fun, if I were
Speaker 1: the president and my wife decided that she were the
Speaker 1: first lady, who by the way, is very lovely, very talented, uh,
Speaker 1: and in this fictional story we're telling. And if she
Speaker 1: decided she were an artist and she were going to
Speaker 1: start selling her paintings in the open market, uh, Chinese government,
Speaker 1: Chinese investors, any number, if they started paying a whole
Speaker 1: lot of money for them, but they couldn't prove that
Speaker 1: I did a quid pro quo. Would I be in
Speaker 1: in uh? In the clear? In terms of corruption? You
Speaker 1: probably would. I mean, that's the problem within one of
Speaker 1: the thing, because you mean, that's what Hillary Clinton's speeches were.
Speaker 1: By the way, that's just what I'm trying to think of,
Speaker 1: or Bill Clinton speeches rather when Hillary was secretary of State.
Speaker 1: That's exactly right. His speaking fees went up threefold the
Speaker 1: day she became Secretary of State from foreign entities. So
Speaker 1: you're exactly right. Yes, I mean, look that the challenge
Speaker 1: in all of this is the way that the laws
Speaker 1: are written. Think about this. We have a Foreign Corrupt
Speaker 1: Practices Act which ensnared JP Morgan because JP Morgan was
Speaker 1: hiring the children of Communist Party officials in China to
Speaker 1: get favorable treatment there. They were charged under federal law
Speaker 1: and paid a three million dollar fine. That's the foreign
Speaker 1: corrupt practice If a Chinese company does the same thing
Speaker 1: in the States that has hired the children of American politicians.
Speaker 1: That's not against the law. How crazy is that we
Speaker 1: have laws to prevent American companies, I think rightfully so
Speaker 1: from doing that in China, but foreign companies and foreign
Speaker 1: governments can do that in the United States and there's
Speaker 1: no law against it. So I think we need to
Speaker 1: change the laws as well. Peter Schweitzer is the author Everybody.
Speaker 1: His book Secret Empires, How the American Political Class Hides
Speaker 1: corruption and in richest family and friends is out. I
Speaker 1: am going to read it. You should too. It's on
Speaker 1: Amazon dot com. Peter, thank you so much for your work,
Speaker 1: and thank you for joining us. Hey, thanks so much
Speaker 1: for having me Buck, I appreciate it. Good luck with
Speaker 1: everything with the book. Alright, team, we're gonna run into
Speaker 1: a quick break here. We actually have another author who's
Speaker 1: gonna be joining us here for a second. It's it's
Speaker 1: book Friday, everybody if the party. We're gonna come back
Speaker 1: and be joined by Kristen Tate in just a few minutes.
Speaker 1: She's gonna talk to us about invisible taxes. Get excited, arts.
Speaker 1: We have Christen Tate with us now. She is a
Speaker 1: political columnist and author. She writes a weekly opinion column
Speaker 1: for The Hill, which is a fantastic website you should
Speaker 1: all check out. She also appears on Fox, CYNN, and MSNBC.
Speaker 1: She's got a new book, though, which is why we
Speaker 1: have a joining us right now, How do I tax thee?
Speaker 1: Let me count the ways? Christain, great to have you,
Speaker 1: so good to be here, thanks for having me on.
Speaker 1: All right, so tell me how dost thou taxes me? Well? Okay,
Speaker 1: taxation is such a hot political topic right now, right,
Speaker 1: But when we have these discussions about taxation, we tend
Speaker 1: to focus on income taxes. But a lot of Americans
Speaker 1: don't understand is that income taxes make up less than
Speaker 1: half of our personal tax burden. There are hidden taxes
Speaker 1: embedded in nearly everything we do, every bill, we pay,
Speaker 1: every activity, every purchase. So I wrote, how do I
Speaker 1: tax be? To expose all of the other ways that
Speaker 1: various levels of government are siphoning money out of our
Speaker 1: bank accounts in the city coffers, All right, give us
Speaker 1: some of the most egregious ones. Well, I think the
Speaker 1: most offensive are probably the taxes in our cell phone
Speaker 1: and electric bills. Just because almost everybody needs to have
Speaker 1: those services, So it's something that affects everybody. In New
Speaker 1: York City, which is where we live, there's uh taxes
Speaker 1: on electric bills. That's a huge amount of money, UH,
Speaker 1: and the taxes are not being put to good use.
Speaker 1: For example, in every electric bill, there's something called a
Speaker 1: nine one one fee. Well would assume that a nine
Speaker 1: one fee would go towards emergency services, right, Well, that's
Speaker 1: what they used to go to. And the fees were
Speaker 1: created in the ninety nineties and then upgrades to the
Speaker 1: to the emergency services were completed, but they kept the
Speaker 1: fees in the electric bills and now they're just funneled
Speaker 1: into the general fund where the city or state can
Speaker 1: spend it however they please. So there are lots of
Speaker 1: these fees that make up twenty percent of our electric bills. Likewise,
Speaker 1: cell phone bills are about seven percent taxes, And again
Speaker 1: the taxes are not usually put to good use. They're
Speaker 1: usually funneled into general funds. So I would say that
Speaker 1: those are the most offensive just because they affect everyone.
Speaker 1: And of course these taxes hurt the poor more than
Speaker 1: they hurt the rich. But then there are like weird
Speaker 1: hidden taxes too that may not be as costly, but
Speaker 1: they're just sort of weird, like, for example, pet license fees.
Speaker 1: Do you have a dog, buck, My parents do, so
Speaker 1: they pay a pet license fee. That's just wrong when
Speaker 1: you when you when you adopt a dog, you have
Speaker 1: to pay this thing to the government called a pet
Speaker 1: license fee, and you kind of assume that the fee
Speaker 1: goes towards something to help animals, like animal shelters or something,
Speaker 1: but really it's just the penalty for saving a dog.
Speaker 1: That's terrible. They're penalizing you for saving a pup. Pup, yes,
Speaker 1: and every year you have to renew this license. And
Speaker 1: you know what's crazy. If you don't renew your pet
Speaker 1: license fee, in most parts of the country, it's a misdemeanor.
Speaker 1: So there are real stories of people being arrested for
Speaker 1: refusing to renew their pet license. I feel like, if
Speaker 1: I had a pet wallaby, maybe I gotta pay a
Speaker 1: license just because I'm I'm you know, I'm skating outside
Speaker 1: the edges a little bit. But but saving a pet
Speaker 1: puppy to me, that's like what you're story. And I
Speaker 1: say puppy just meaning any dog. But I feel like
Speaker 1: We're always told that, you know, adopt, don't shopping all
Speaker 1: that stuff. Well, the government's taking a penny out of
Speaker 1: your pocket whether you adopt or shop. Right, And in
Speaker 1: most parts of the country, the money from the pet
Speaker 1: license fee does not go towards helping dogs. It does
Speaker 1: in some parts of the country, but in most it
Speaker 1: does not. It is just a sheer penalty for helping
Speaker 1: adopt the dog. That's it to folks listening right now, Kristin,
Speaker 1: and we're speaking to Christin Tate. She's an author. Her
Speaker 1: latest book is How Do I Tax the which is
Speaker 1: just out now for people who live and say a
Speaker 1: state like Texas right where they have no no state
Speaker 1: income tax, but they've got to pay property taxes they
Speaker 1: own property. But what is the additional hidden tax bill
Speaker 1: that you're paying? Have you been able to compile some
Speaker 1: sense of what those numbers to be? So if you're
Speaker 1: somebody who's paying of your income to the government right now,
Speaker 1: let's just say, do these non income based taxes when
Speaker 1: you add them together, is it another ten percent fift?
Speaker 1: Do you give us any sense of that? It's actually
Speaker 1: far more than that. So the Heartland Institute did a
Speaker 1: study that showed when you add the ELF taxes to
Speaker 1: your income tax the average American is paying around fifty
Speaker 1: percent of their income to the government. Now, of course
Speaker 1: that can vary greatly. Some people don't pay income taxes
Speaker 1: because they get their earned income tax credits. But for
Speaker 1: the average American, they're paying about half of what they
Speaker 1: make to the government. And this should really terrify people
Speaker 1: back because think about it. If the government is profiting
Speaker 1: more off of your labor than you are, I mean,
Speaker 1: that's socialism right there. And how do we fix it? Christie,
Speaker 1: We've all got about thirty seconds or so, but what's
Speaker 1: what's the quick version the elevator pitch to fix? Well,
Speaker 1: my book shows people how to kind of alter their
Speaker 1: spending habits to avoid some of these hidden taxes, because
Speaker 1: it is possible to save a little more money with
Speaker 1: different spending habits. But I also want to stress that
Speaker 1: most of these taxes are implemented on the state or
Speaker 1: local level, so it's pretty easy to get rid of them.
Speaker 1: We just need to be aware that they're there, and
Speaker 1: then we can hold our politicians accountable. See everybody that
Speaker 1: the book pays for itself literally, because you'll learn how
Speaker 1: to get out of some of these taxes, How do
Speaker 1: I tax? The is the book? Kristen Tate is the author. Kristen,
Speaker 1: great to have you hanging out on the Freedom Up.
Speaker 1: Please come back soon and best of luck with the book.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much, Buck. I love joining your show.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Have a great weekend team. We're going to
Speaker 1: roll into a break. We'll be right back. He's back
Speaker 1: with you now, because when it comes to the fight
Speaker 1: for truth, the fuck never stops. I want to introduce
Speaker 1: this next clip with a proviso with some prefacing here.
Speaker 1: I don't know if it is actually from the news cycle.
Speaker 1: I saw it on a bar Stool Sports feed, so
Speaker 1: Barstool Sports is obviously about sport. I don't know much
Speaker 1: about it's about sports. It's like a website and it's
Speaker 1: making the rounds. It's gone, it's gone viral. And here's
Speaker 1: what I know about the clip. And I don't know
Speaker 1: if it's recent or not. I can't tell you the problems.
Speaker 1: I do know it was on Good Morning America and
Speaker 1: Barstool Sports shared this under the headline that that this
Speaker 1: gentleman is probably it's quite possibly the greatest storyteller of
Speaker 1: our generation. So I immediately had to to look at
Speaker 1: this and before we go off the weekends, I wanted
Speaker 1: to share something special with you. So this falls into
Speaker 1: that category. The segment is about burglarias and and home
Speaker 1: invasions and what you can do during it. And g
Speaker 1: M A approaches this gentleman and he has a story
Speaker 1: about about being at home when a burglar comes in,
Speaker 1: so that that would be a home invasion. And he
Speaker 1: proceeds with with tremendous flair and and skillful or the
Speaker 1: skills of a rack con tour to share what it
Speaker 1: was like when he heard a burglar. Remember this was
Speaker 1: on Good Morning America. Yeah, and see that's what the
Speaker 1: was because I heard him first, I said, hold on,
Speaker 1: I said, hold up, wait a minute, something ain't right.
Speaker 1: Because then I started to taste them, I say, and
Speaker 1: then I started to smell him. So it's like the
Speaker 1: smell that taste like, so I knew something was wrong.
Speaker 1: I knew something special about it, you know. So, so
Speaker 1: what did you do when you heard the intrude him?
Speaker 1: I ran up stairs. I had to run and I
Speaker 1: had to do. What that little girl, what's that little girl? Uh?
Speaker 1: In the Holocaust? She had Uh she was a hathaway
Speaker 1: at Frank Frank and Beavan, and Frank I said, hadn't
Speaker 1: I had to get up the stairs, so he had
Speaker 1: so much rhythm when he was walking them, says that Doom,
Speaker 1: Doom Doom. I started the almost beat box up in
Speaker 1: the closet. Boom boom, boom boom. But I couldn't do
Speaker 1: it yet because I couldn't die. I got caught to
Speaker 1: them all. So I'm just a little shook up. That's
Speaker 1: all that is. Oh man, that's going viral um. And
Speaker 1: you know there's there's some He makes some points there
Speaker 1: about how you know, you you want to make sure
Speaker 1: that you can take shelter inside your home during droughing
Speaker 1: a home invasion situation, and you know you want to
Speaker 1: be you want to be able to hear whatever is
Speaker 1: going on. And uh, yeah, you know, look, I've been
Speaker 1: home before. And it's when I've been home before, good story, buck,
Speaker 1: I've been home. That's I've got weekend on the brain here, folks. No,
Speaker 1: but when uh, when I'm upstate with my family, my
Speaker 1: family has uh my family's house is upstate, or my
Speaker 1: family is a home upstate. And and I know to
Speaker 1: those of you who live way upstate, and to our
Speaker 1: friends in Albany, You're like, Buck, that's not even up
Speaker 1: Duchess County is not really upstate. It's like a it's
Speaker 1: like an extended suburb of New York City. It's it's
Speaker 1: a hundred miles from New York City. And and I
Speaker 1: when I'm up there and you hear I hear anything,
Speaker 1: you know, I hear an owl, and I'm like, oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, it's a home invasion owl. They train them,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm really scared. I'm pretty sure Duchess County
Speaker 1: had I think it was one murder last year. I mean,
Speaker 1: they actually have a murder rate that is in the
Speaker 1: point something level, because they don't even average one a year.
Speaker 1: And you know, like once a year there's a you know,
Speaker 1: a domestic dispute where like an elderly couple just finally
Speaker 1: can't take each other anymore or something, and someone reaches
Speaker 1: the first shotgun. That's the only homicides that I've ever
Speaker 1: really known about in in Duchess County. And uh, Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: in New York City, though, if I'm home, I could
Speaker 1: hear I mean, in the hallway of my building, I
Speaker 1: could hear chainsaws. I could hear people like move, move, move,
Speaker 1: and I'd just be like, yay, you know, having a party.
Speaker 1: You know, it's not a big deal. It goes to
Speaker 1: show you what a difference in And you know, New
Speaker 1: York is very safe actually, but it's not safe like
Speaker 1: the countryside is safe. But as as a city slicker,
Speaker 1: you're out in the country, you hear something, you know,
Speaker 1: some animal makes a noise, and you're like, eat, god, man,
Speaker 1: what is that? Good? Heavens? It definitely gets you. And
Speaker 1: then I look for like, where's the safest place in
Speaker 1: the in the house to hide? And you know, people
Speaker 1: always want to hide. People always want to hide in
Speaker 1: the closet. And I'm like, there's gotta be a better place,
Speaker 1: you know, There's gotta be a safe for him somewhere
Speaker 1: that you you're all ready to rock. And hopefully I
Speaker 1: know many of you listening like buck, I don't my
Speaker 1: entire house is a safe for them, because you are
Speaker 1: probably well fortified with firearms and and and all the
Speaker 1: rest of it. Anyway, we're gonna get into some I
Speaker 1: just wanted to share that viral clip with you, though
Speaker 1: I have no idea if it's even from this week,
Speaker 1: this month, or it might have been from a few
Speaker 1: years ago, but it was quite a story that gentleman told.
Speaker 1: And uh, I'm gonna come back in just a couple
Speaker 1: of minutes here and talk to you about all things
Speaker 1: roll call, which is really where I just get to
Speaker 1: voice your thoughts, which is a lot of fun. So
Speaker 1: stay with me for that. A great way to start
Speaker 1: the weekend coming up. Well, it's been a long week
Speaker 1: and I've got a glass of tequila waiting for me somewhere,
Speaker 1: so let's get right to it with some roll call
Speaker 1: team Buck, it's time for roll call Google funky beats.
Speaker 1: I guess it's not it's more of like old school rock,
Speaker 1: but some of you complained about the dub step roll call,
Speaker 1: so off off there it is. We have it. Don't
Speaker 1: think that we don't have it. Don't think that it
Speaker 1: can't make an appearance at some point. So I wanted
Speaker 1: to get into your insights, uh, quips, witty and concisely
Speaker 1: analysis and all the rest of it here. So first
Speaker 1: up here we have Buck. That's my name. Gosh, sorry,
Speaker 1: he's writing too, or he's writing to me and it's
Speaker 1: from Mike. I'm an old Saturday podcast listener. Oss squad.
Speaker 1: Are we watching the making of a sociopath in this
Speaker 1: hog kid? Um? No, No, I don't. I don't think so.
Speaker 1: I think we're just seeing somebody who's being elevated well
Speaker 1: beyond what his experience in life and his knowledge would
Speaker 1: recommend at this point. And it's it's a shame because
Speaker 1: you know that there's a part of that that feels well.
Speaker 1: First of all, you feel sympathy for any of these
Speaker 1: kids are at the school because they suffered a trauma.
Speaker 1: But also you know, maybe he would be a really
Speaker 1: astute observer of politics and world events. But it does
Speaker 1: take a little bit of time. I've never met an
Speaker 1: eighteen year old kid in my life, and I'm like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I want to get some long lectures on a complex
Speaker 1: national policy, uh from this guy. It just hasn't happened
Speaker 1: for me. So I think you've You've got a little
Speaker 1: bit more, a little more work to do. But thank
Speaker 1: you Mike for being an OSS and Ted is up
Speaker 1: next year. Ted writes, listening to the podcast of yesterday's episode,
Speaker 1: great show, well Ted, great note, I can't believe in
Speaker 1: an action movie officionado such as yourself. Oh here it
Speaker 1: comes you now? John? What they do is they say
Speaker 1: great show, and then they slip in because I know
Speaker 1: that I'm gonna I'm gonna read it on air. Then
Speaker 1: they slip in the but I got I got a
Speaker 1: bone to pick with you on something anyway, Ted writes,
Speaker 1: I can't believe an action movie aficionados such as yourself
Speaker 1: has never watched Boondocks Saints. It's a great action flick,
Speaker 1: and I second the recommendation you received yesterday. Give it
Speaker 1: a watch. You won't be disappointed. Keep up the great work,
Speaker 1: Shields High. Ted. So, um, yeah, I'm I'm gonna watch
Speaker 1: and I'm just kidding about slipping slipping in a bone
Speaker 1: to pick there. But thank you very much, Ted for
Speaker 1: your kind note. I do appreciate it. Wow. We got
Speaker 1: a lot of a lot of notes in this week.
Speaker 1: People are lightening up, which I very much appreciate. Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: Shields High. Question. Um, well, whoops, what I'm I'm missing
Speaker 1: this one here? Oh she's asking me to pass something
Speaker 1: to Glenn. Okay, I'll take a look at this, Amy
Speaker 1: and I'll see if I can pass it to Glenn.
Speaker 1: Next up, we have Simcha from Israel. I love my
Speaker 1: team Buck Israel. Folks, we've we've got a robust presence
Speaker 1: of of Team Buck in Israel. Shield Side from Israel.
Speaker 1: Your podcasts have been a part of my daily routine
Speaker 1: since the first time you filled in for Glenn Beck.
Speaker 1: I've heard you lament many times the foods that you
Speaker 1: can eat or cook with due to gluten. I just
Speaker 1: wanted to make sure you are aware that next week
Speaker 1: is pass Over and as such, many stores, and especially
Speaker 1: those a cater to Jewish communities, will be carrying gluten
Speaker 1: free versions of many products that might normally have some
Speaker 1: wheat content. Keep an eye out and ask a Jewish
Speaker 1: person to explain if you've got one handy. Keep doing
Speaker 1: what you do so well? Uh, simcha or sam um? Well,
Speaker 1: thank you very much, Sam, it's I didn't I didn't
Speaker 1: know that. One problem that I have and and have
Speaker 1: not been able to figure out is uh, the Eucharist
Speaker 1: as a Catholic. You know, what do you do? I
Speaker 1: I cannot eat the you. I know, through transubstantiation it
Speaker 1: becomes the body and blood of Christ, but I can't
Speaker 1: eat it. So that's the thing, and I've actually my uh,
Speaker 1: there's been some back and forth over it and the
Speaker 1: Catholic Church in case some of you were unaware, kind
Speaker 1: of slow to change on things. And so what I'm
Speaker 1: told is we'll just drink the wine. And I'm not
Speaker 1: gonna lie to you. I don't really like the idea
Speaker 1: of drinking from a chalice that all those other folks
Speaker 1: have been drinking from. So I got a little bit
Speaker 1: a dromophobia and celiac. So what do I do? I
Speaker 1: don't know. I gotta figure this one out. I got
Speaker 1: I gotta get the Pope on the line. Well, actually
Speaker 1: got a lot of things, A lot of things I
Speaker 1: gotta talk to the Pope about. Next up is Steve,
Speaker 1: He writes, Buck. The more I listen to your program,
Speaker 1: the more respect I have for you. You bring a
Speaker 1: calm and rational conversation to the complex and dangerous times
Speaker 1: in which we live. Keep up the good work, Steve.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much for the kind note. I appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Um we have Uh, Well, my man Gentry is back.
Speaker 1: He was. He says that he's honored that his post
Speaker 1: got to end the show. He agrees that comedy is subjective.
Speaker 1: What is hilarious to one might be offensive to another.
Speaker 1: Enus the true e full about this entire situation. Also,
Speaker 1: no Boondocks Saints really Shields High. Keep up the fantastic work, Gentry.
Speaker 1: And you know where is it, Gentry? It could be
Speaker 1: a hard g there. I should ask my friend Gentry.
Speaker 1: He can tell me which one. In the next message
Speaker 1: he sends Boondoc Saints. All right. You know what, guys,
Speaker 1: I've got enough messages about it at this point that
Speaker 1: I it's it's gonna happen. I gotta find a time
Speaker 1: when Miss Molly is going to be gone from the house.
Speaker 1: She's not gonna like it, so I gotta find a
Speaker 1: time when uh, she's out and then I can watch it.
Speaker 1: So I'm gonna work on it. But yes, it is
Speaker 1: on the list. It will get watched. Amanda Rights Falling Buck.
Speaker 1: I love your show. Well, thank you, Amanda. I love
Speaker 1: your message. It's great to hear your perspective on politics
Speaker 1: and movies. I love your impression of Hillary Clinton. It
Speaker 1: always makes me laugh. I wanted to write you because
Speaker 1: I listen to your episode mentioning the Maryland shooting and
Speaker 1: the Florida shooting. I'm currently teaching in a middle school.
Speaker 1: It's an adventure every day. I'm extremely put off by
Speaker 1: the fact no one is mentioning that the kid on
Speaker 1: kid and teacher a kid on teacher violence in school.
Speaker 1: I don't believe guns of the problem. I think parents
Speaker 1: and children are the problem. Parents are investing values and
Speaker 1: morals in their children, they are leaving it to teachers
Speaker 1: and schools. I love my students, but it's not fair
Speaker 1: for me to be cussed out, punched, kicked, bit slapped
Speaker 1: or yelled at in class because I tell a kid
Speaker 1: to sit down or turn in their homework. People complain
Speaker 1: about school safety, but I asked my students how they're
Speaker 1: contributing to making a school safe with their behavior. Um
Speaker 1: Family values need to make a comeback in a big way.
Speaker 1: Disrespecting teachers and faculty is not okay for students or parents.
Speaker 1: Thanks for keeping us informed and allowing us to share
Speaker 1: with you. Well man, thank you for your perspective. It's
Speaker 1: a very important issue. I had a number of friends
Speaker 1: who of including a a former uh well, an ex girlfriend.
Speaker 1: Sounds like you know something bad, but she was somebody
Speaker 1: that I dated in college and she's now married with
Speaker 1: several children, very very happy, and I wish her all
Speaker 1: the best. But she went into a Teach for America
Speaker 1: program right out of school, and I remember talking to
Speaker 1: her later on about some of the stuff that she
Speaker 1: was subjected to and saw, and yeah, some of the
Speaker 1: kids get violent with the teachers, which you rarely hear about,
Speaker 1: and puts the teacher in a very difficult situation. A
Speaker 1: whole bunch of ways. Right for the female teacher, it
Speaker 1: maybe that a sixteen or seventeen year old male or
Speaker 1: even a twelve or thirteen year old male student might
Speaker 1: be a physical, real physical threats who or even without
Speaker 1: a weapon. And for a male teacher, you know, you think, okay,
Speaker 1: well I'll just handle it. But you know, the kid
Speaker 1: punches you, or you know, throws a punch at you,
Speaker 1: and you defend yourself. You your teaching career is going
Speaker 1: to be pretty pretty sure. Probably. I wouldn't count on
Speaker 1: the the school board to have your back on that necessarily.
Speaker 1: So yeah, we'll have to see. But thank you man
Speaker 1: If for that perspective. Um let's see who else we've
Speaker 1: got over here to him? Rites? Why is Trump not reinstated?
Speaker 1: The Ronald Fireside chats Adam, You're just gonna have to
Speaker 1: ask the Trumpster himself about this one. I do not know. Um,
Speaker 1: I think Fireside, I mean, first of all, fireside chats
Speaker 1: with Trump would be a viral sensation. It would be incredible,
Speaker 1: Like can you imagine him sitting there with a glass
Speaker 1: of Scotch just talking about whatever to America? It would
Speaker 1: be destination viewing. Hey, it would be incredible. I mean,
Speaker 1: the whole idea would be no script, no nothing. He's like,
Speaker 1: let's just talk about what happened this week. He could
Speaker 1: sit there in a robe, like a Hugh Hefner esque robe.
Speaker 1: That's right. John points out he doesn't drink, so he
Speaker 1: would have a glass of martin Elli's. That's what we
Speaker 1: always us to drink it Thanksgiving for the kids, you know,
Speaker 1: the adults got to have booze and we always got
Speaker 1: to crack open the Martin Ellis. I will say that
Speaker 1: stuff was delicious. The sparkling cider. Sparkling cider is incredible.
Speaker 1: It's got a lot of sugar, though, folks, a lot
Speaker 1: of sugar. Yeah. I know, I'm not wet blanket over here.
Speaker 1: It's got all this is like when I discover I'm like, oh,
Speaker 1: you know what's right. I can drink hard cider instead
Speaker 1: of beer. Yeah, except hard cider, Like a big thing
Speaker 1: of hard cider. It's like two hundred and fifty calories,
Speaker 1: Like you might as well just have a you know,
Speaker 1: a chocolate doughnut or something. So yeah, um, hard cider
Speaker 1: has not been a big part of my of my
Speaker 1: social diet. Uh Pecesni alright, Pachesny cool name, Hey, love
Speaker 1: the show I listened to everyday work Shields High. Alright, Patchesney.
Speaker 1: I love that you love the show and listen to work,
Speaker 1: So thank you and shields high to you. She the
Speaker 1: short the short notes are easy. Uh, what else do
Speaker 1: we have here? Up? Up, I'm gonna have to I'm
Speaker 1: realizing now I've got a kind of shut this thing
Speaker 1: down unfortunately for for the day, for the weekend. Everybody's
Speaker 1: working for in a weekend from the freedom Hut. See,
Speaker 1: that's what we should do, John, Instead of having actual
Speaker 1: library music we can play here over the airwaves because
Speaker 1: of rights and everything else. We should just have me
Speaker 1: record everything one man band. You know, I'll bust out
Speaker 1: a recorder. I don't mean a recorder for my voice
Speaker 1: so we can tape it. I mean when I was
Speaker 1: like too too, too too, you know those little things
Speaker 1: that kids play. I'm amazing at the recorder I'm not
Speaker 1: even I'm not even kid. Right now, you think I'm crazy,
Speaker 1: I'm telling you the truth. I am not quite a
Speaker 1: recorder prodigy, but not far away from it. And if
Speaker 1: you give me a uh any, any sort of recorder
Speaker 1: like instrument, you know, from the Middle East or elsewhere,
Speaker 1: I can make all kinds of noises with it. So
Speaker 1: there's that, all right, With that little tidbit, have a
Speaker 1: fantastic weekend, everybody. Thank you so much for joining me
Speaker 1: here in the Freedom Hunt every day. It is an
Speaker 1: honor and a privilege. I really do mean it. Tell
Speaker 1: a friend about the show, make sure you subscribe to
Speaker 1: the podcast even if you're alive listener, and until next time,
Speaker 1: have a great weekend. Shields High,