Speaker 1: If you're going to run a great business, you've got
Speaker 1: to have great people, and finding them is a huge
Speaker 1: part of that puzzle. Zip Recruiter is the smartest way
Speaker 1: to hire. Zippercooter dot com has a platform that finds
Speaker 1: the right job candidates for you. It identifies people with
Speaker 1: the right experience and invites them to apply to your job.
Speaker 1: Eighty percent of employers who post a job on zip
Speaker 1: recruiter get a quality candidate through the site in just
Speaker 1: one day. The right candidates are out there, you can
Speaker 1: find them. But zipp recruiter is how right. Now my
Speaker 1: listeners can try zip recruiter for free. That's right free.
Speaker 1: Just go to zip recruiter dot com, slash buck. That's
Speaker 1: zipp recruiter dot com, slash buck. One more time. Try
Speaker 1: it for free zipp recruiter dot com, slash buck, zipp recruiter.
Speaker 1: It's the smartest way to hire. Once you check out
Speaker 1: their interface and you see those candidates come right into
Speaker 1: your inbox, you're going to realize there's a great choice.
Speaker 1: Zipp recruiter dot com, slash buck. You are entering the
Speaker 1: freedom hunt. Big day in US Israel relations, as the
Speaker 1: embassy has been moved from tel Aviv to Jerusalem. You've
Speaker 1: also got violence at the border of Gaza and the
Speaker 1: Israeli state. We'll talk about what all of that means.
Speaker 1: Plus eighteen magazine that's celebrating Karl Marx seems pretty crazy
Speaker 1: to me. We'll get into that in a whole lot
Speaker 1: more coming up. This is the buck Sexton Show, where
Speaker 1: the mission or mission is to decode what really matters
Speaker 1: with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a great American.
Speaker 1: Again the buck Sexton Show begins. What a day, my friends.
Speaker 1: Welcome to the buck Sexton Show. Honor and a privilege
Speaker 1: to have you here with me. As always, I am
Speaker 1: really enjoying watching this Trump administration flummocks the critics just
Speaker 1: to drive them up the wall. I'm not going to
Speaker 1: say that that's the one and only thing that I
Speaker 1: need to keep me happy with this administration. That's not true.
Speaker 1: We need policy success, we need victories beyond just the rhetorical.
Speaker 1: But man, it is fun to watch them squirm while
Speaker 1: Trump does things on the world stage, the place where
Speaker 1: he's supposed to be the least a death right. We
Speaker 1: were told, Okay, maybe he'll be good at infrastructure. Maybe
Speaker 1: maybe he'll be good, a little bit of dealing here
Speaker 1: and there. But foreign policy, that's the preserve of the fanciest,
Speaker 1: smartest people, kind of people who work for Democrat administrations,
Speaker 1: not Trump, the ruffian, the billion they're barbarian. Not possible
Speaker 1: for him to get further with some of these US
Speaker 1: interests and some of these global policy matters than previous administrations.
Speaker 1: Certainly not in eighteen months as opposed to the eight
Speaker 1: years of his predecessor. And yet here we are President
Speaker 1: President Trump getting a lot of gratitude, a very warm
Speaker 1: his administration, the folks that are over there, Ivanka, Jared
Speaker 1: Manuchin and others, warm reception in Israel today. Here is
Speaker 1: what the Prime Minister had to say about this embassy
Speaker 1: opening Playcliff nine. Dear friends, what a glorious day. Remember
Speaker 1: this moment. This is history. President Trump. By recognizing history,
Speaker 1: you have made history. There you go making history. Let's
Speaker 1: be honest. Not in year one, tech, it's year two. Now.
Speaker 1: That's still really early, isn't it. It's still rather impressive,
Speaker 1: and it's just the beginning, isn't it. Now. I will
Speaker 1: get into some of the violence going on in cause
Speaker 1: I will talk about that as well. Because it's not
Speaker 1: like this is going on without there being a a
Speaker 1: I shouldn't say a downside to it necessarily, it's just
Speaker 1: a an opposite reaction, right, it doesn't have to be
Speaker 1: this way. So I mean by it that the downside
Speaker 1: doesn't come along with this decision. There is no reasonable
Speaker 1: expectation that anyone should have that because the United States
Speaker 1: moves its embassy. By the way, who is that really
Speaker 1: a decision for for us and for the are Israeli hosts?
Speaker 1: That's it. It really isn't, in fact something that we
Speaker 1: have to take a worldwide proxy vote. We don't have
Speaker 1: to ask everyone's opinion on this. And yet you get
Speaker 1: the sense there's this consideration of this as though this
Speaker 1: is a vote by committee instead of a bilateral issue,
Speaker 1: which is really what it turns out to be, or
Speaker 1: turns out that it is. A few things. I want
Speaker 1: to get into the Gaza situation. What's going on with
Speaker 1: these so called protests. I mean, yeah, there's some protests,
Speaker 1: but there's some violence and yes, dare I say, some
Speaker 1: terrorist activity going on as well, and that has led
Speaker 1: to a response from the idea from Israeli forces that
Speaker 1: has resulted in the depths of over fifty people. But
Speaker 1: I first want to look at the policy side of this,
Speaker 1: and just note that this is an issue among the
Speaker 1: very first issues that I ever looked at as a
Speaker 1: policy matter. In fact, I am in the swamp right now,
Speaker 1: not far away from my first DC job, where I
Speaker 1: spent my first time in DC working at a Midi
Speaker 1: stink tank as a research intern for the Clinton era
Speaker 1: negotiator for the Arab Israeli peace process. So that takes
Speaker 1: me back gosh, seventeen years, eighteen years something like that,
Speaker 1: so I'm almost twenty years ago now, which, as I
Speaker 1: say that out loud, it feels pretty crazy, but that
Speaker 1: is the case. So this was an issue that I
Speaker 1: went to very early on in my academic career, studied
Speaker 1: in school, and I learned a few things, and this
Speaker 1: will hopefully provide some context for discussion we're about to have.
Speaker 1: I learned some things. One is that generally speaking in
Speaker 1: this country on the issue of Israel and Palestine, it
Speaker 1: quickly devolves into not, hey, how could we solve this?
Speaker 1: Everyone pretends that they want to solve it, but very
Speaker 1: quickly you see that there is a polarization that occurs
Speaker 1: because people feel the need to just to take a side.
Speaker 1: They take a side and the pro Palestinian left. I
Speaker 1: am I kid you not. I almost physically bumped into
Speaker 1: and I don't mean that it would have been an accident.
Speaker 1: We were both in the coming out of the train.
Speaker 1: I saw Linda Sarsore today at the train station here
Speaker 1: in DC. I just walked right past her and we
Speaker 1: were we were a foot away from each other. Said, oh, interesting,
Speaker 1: speaking of the anti Israeli pro Palestinian left, you have
Speaker 1: Linda star Sore in the house. Part of me was like,
Speaker 1: it would be fun to try to engage, But you
Speaker 1: know what, I give people their private space, even public people.
Speaker 1: I don't I see someone in public. I'm never gonna heckle.
Speaker 1: I'm not one of those. I'm just it's just not
Speaker 1: who I am. Linda sars it was at least thought about.
Speaker 1: I thought about it, right, it would have been Hey,
Speaker 1: so why do you say all those terrible things? Just
Speaker 1: curious you want to try to have a discussion about that.
Speaker 1: But I'm sure profanity would have come my way and
Speaker 1: why ruined her day? Ruined my morning? But you often
Speaker 1: see that this gets turned into a highly politicized discussion
Speaker 1: and so I tell you from the outset that I
Speaker 1: want to solve the issue, but I also am allied
Speaker 1: ideologically and otherwise with the Israeli state. So just to
Speaker 1: be upfront about it doesn't mean I think everything Israel
Speaker 1: does it's great. Doesn't mean that I don't think that
Speaker 1: there's some difficulties on both sides that we could alleviate,
Speaker 1: that we could do things to make less problematic. But
Speaker 1: I just view right now, you have an Israeli state
Speaker 1: that's trying to do the right thing, and that's trying
Speaker 1: to live in peace and has achieved a tremendous amount
Speaker 1: of prosperity. You have Palestinian people who are suffering, granted,
Speaker 1: but you have a Palestinian leadership that's a disgrace. And
Speaker 1: Hamas is a disgraceful organization. It's a terrorist organization. So
Speaker 1: I side with civilization against the terrorists. That's just a
Speaker 1: shorthand way of saying I'm I'm with the Israeli people
Speaker 1: in the Israeli state against Hamas. I don't view Palestinians
Speaker 1: and Hamas is one and the same. Though would also
Speaker 1: like to help, I would like the situation to be improved,
Speaker 1: and America to play a role in that for Israelis
Speaker 1: and Palestinians, and so with that or for Palestinians specifically,
Speaker 1: with that in mind, a few things here that I
Speaker 1: think have not gotten nearly enough attention with today, and
Speaker 1: I'll also come back to the Trump component of all this.
Speaker 1: But this is not the end of the US as
Speaker 1: an arbor in this. In Middy's piece, this is not,
Speaker 1: in any way, I think, something that we can look
Speaker 1: at as even a huge it's interesting, it's tremendously significant
Speaker 1: as is symbol. But in terms of where this takes
Speaker 1: us with the actual peace process, right, the very elusive
Speaker 1: now Palestinian Israeli peace process we've been trying to achieve,
Speaker 1: I usually think this will be better. And here's why.
Speaker 1: There was never going to be an Israeli state. It
Speaker 1: just wasn't going to happen that did not have as
Speaker 1: its end state Jerusalem as its capital. So then you
Speaker 1: start to wonder, what's with the not having embassies in
Speaker 1: the capital if there is there is absolutely positively no
Speaker 1: way that there would be an Israel that would allow
Speaker 1: Jerusalem to not be its capital. Right, it was never
Speaker 1: going to be traded away, It was never going to
Speaker 1: be placed under just a generalized international mandate or all that. No,
Speaker 1: that was never going to happen. So why go through
Speaker 1: these games, Why why go through these motions of well,
Speaker 1: we're gonna wait on the embassy because we don't want
Speaker 1: to make it seem like we've already decided. Well, they
Speaker 1: have decided as they should, so it doesn't really change
Speaker 1: very much in that regard. And people will talk about
Speaker 1: a two state solution and that's been There are a
Speaker 1: lot of their buzzwords. You'll hear about this and what
Speaker 1: is it like? Un resolution? They'll talk about two four
Speaker 1: two and three three eight and land for peace and
Speaker 1: there's all. This has just been ongoing for decades and
Speaker 1: decades now. No one's really gotten very far, although the
Speaker 1: biggest improvement has just been the Israelis, that's right, building
Speaker 1: a wall, building an actual physical border and creating security
Speaker 1: for themselves and then saying okay, well now what And
Speaker 1: the Palestinians, as they have done so many times, never
Speaker 1: miss an opportunity, to miss an opportunity, and Mahmoudabas the
Speaker 1: leader of the Palestinian authority, is a disgrace. And now
Speaker 1: we get to finally see an administration coming along the
Speaker 1: Trump administration that says this is just this is nonsense.
Speaker 1: This holding off on the embassy. Why it's already US law.
Speaker 1: What's the what's the point of pretending that there will
Speaker 1: be any future where we don't put our embassy with
Speaker 1: this Israeli state in Jerusalem. This isn't a carrot that
Speaker 1: should be offered up right, This isn't an inducement to talks.
Speaker 1: This is just reality. So I think that that's that's
Speaker 1: very important, and it also undermines a narrative here. You see,
Speaker 1: the narrative from Hamas is that the Israelis don't actually
Speaker 1: even that the Jews do not actually have ties to Jerusalem.
Speaker 1: They have they have no authentic relationship with Jerusalem. Their usurpers,
Speaker 1: you know, all kinds of vitriol from Hamas specifically around
Speaker 1: your Jerusalem. And this clearly undermines that narrative, right because
Speaker 1: one of the problems that you have with the hardliners,
Speaker 1: the radicals predominantly in Gaza, but there's some of the
Speaker 1: West Bank too, is that they are told by their
Speaker 1: leadership this is just temporary. This is just temporary, and
Speaker 1: they don't mean it's temporary as in there'll be a
Speaker 1: peace settlement. They mean the existence of the Jewish state
Speaker 1: is temporary. So when the world's loan superpower says, actually,
Speaker 1: our embassy with the Jewish State is going to go
Speaker 1: in their capital of Jerusalem, it doesn't obliterate the notion
Speaker 1: of a two state solution. Quite the contrary. And I'll
Speaker 1: get into some of that in a moment, But what
Speaker 1: it says is you've got to stop believing and telling.
Speaker 1: In the case of the Hamas leadership, you gotta stop
Speaker 1: believing these lies that this is going to change, that
Speaker 1: there is a world in which a world that you
Speaker 1: should be waiting for, in which there is no Jews state,
Speaker 1: there is no Jewish presence in Jerusalem. It's just not
Speaker 1: going to happen. Because as long as people believe and
Speaker 1: they've been fed a diet of anti Semitism and anti
Speaker 1: Israeli rhetoric for a very long time. As I tell you,
Speaker 1: I had a it's kind of a personal asside. I
Speaker 1: had a girlfriend many years ago who instead of meeting
Speaker 1: it was her choice. She was in grad school and
Speaker 1: instead of meeting me in I forget where I was
Speaker 1: going to meet her in Italy somewhere for you know,
Speaker 1: a romantic week away with vacation, and instead of going
Speaker 1: with me, she decided to go interview the families of
Speaker 1: suicide bombers in the West Bank for a school project.
Speaker 1: It wasn't mandated, but she did it, and putting aside
Speaker 1: for a moment the fact that I was disappointed that
Speaker 1: that was not a good move for our relationship. When
Speaker 1: she came back, she had a completely different view of
Speaker 1: what the problem was over there, because you had women
Speaker 1: who were celebrating the martyrdom of their children as suicide bombers.
Speaker 1: It was as though they had you know, gotten into
Speaker 1: Harvard or something but obviously dead now and killed a
Speaker 1: bunch of people in the process. This was a good thing,
Speaker 1: and that was and this was now stretching back, gosh,
Speaker 1: a decade ago, but that was a that was a
Speaker 1: moment that I always remember because Palestinian society had been
Speaker 1: so poisoned by this rhetoric from Hamas and these extremists
Speaker 1: and Palestinian Islamic Jihad and you know, the alax On
Speaker 1: Marter brigades, all these these different groups and factions within
Speaker 1: the groups and militants, and that this had now taken
Speaker 1: over even in some of the homes of people as
Speaker 1: normal in their minds. That's how poisoned they had become
Speaker 1: against honestly any basic decency or humanity. So you have
Speaker 1: to eradicate that. You have to take that narrative and
Speaker 1: shatter it and get rid of it. It's bad for
Speaker 1: the Palestinians, it's bad for it's bad for everyone. And
Speaker 1: I think that moving the embassy works to that effect.
Speaker 1: I do have to talk to you about Gaza. We've
Speaker 1: got a lot here on this and also the Trump
Speaker 1: administration getting credit for this. So we'll spend most of
Speaker 1: this hour on this issue, and then next hour we'll
Speaker 1: talk maybe a bit about where the latest is with Muller.
Speaker 1: The White House still under siege, no surprise there, that's
Speaker 1: like every day. And then I've got some interesting, an
Speaker 1: interesting assortment of stories, including legalizing sports betting. Talk about that.
Speaker 1: Karl Marx gets a shout out from teen Vogue, who
Speaker 1: knew the crazy world. And if you stay through the
Speaker 1: whole show, I've got a really heartwarming story about a
Speaker 1: wedding that you wouldn't expect at the very end, So
Speaker 1: I got a lot more comming teams, stay with me.
Speaker 1: Jerusalem is still the capital of Israel and must remain
Speaker 1: an undivided city accessible to all. Soon as I take office,
Speaker 1: I will begin the process of moving the United States
Speaker 1: ambassador to the city Israel as children as its capital.
Speaker 1: I continue to say that Jerusalem will be the capital
Speaker 1: of Israel, and I have said that before and I
Speaker 1: will say it again. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel,
Speaker 1: and it must remain undivided. It is time to officially
Speaker 1: recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Oh, previous presidents
Speaker 1: have made this a major campaign promise they failed to deliver.
Speaker 1: Today I am delivering, right. So the president there is
Speaker 1: just doing what you would think any previous president that
Speaker 1: we played the audio from right, we went through you know, Clinton, Bush, Obama,
Speaker 1: all of them. They're all saying that Jerusalem capital of Israel. Okay,
Speaker 1: So why wouldn't we put our embassy where the capitalists?
Speaker 1: What are we caving to? What sensibility are we trying
Speaker 1: to plague Kate with this? And with Trump? The genius
Speaker 1: and yeah, that's right, I said it. The genius of
Speaker 1: some of his foreign policy moves thus far has been
Speaker 1: to forget about the so called consensus, forget about what
Speaker 1: the people that think they are also smart on these
Speaker 1: issues have been telling each other about them for a
Speaker 1: very long time without fixing anything, without even moving the
Speaker 1: ball down field and say, what is the problem, Let's
Speaker 1: do something about it. What are we saying about it? Well,
Speaker 1: let's do something based on what we say. In this case,
Speaker 1: that means if Jerusalem is the capital, that's where the
Speaker 1: embassy will be. It's so simple. It's so simple, isn't it.
Speaker 1: It's so straightforward. Trump takes kind of an comes raise
Speaker 1: or approach to foreign policy. All Right, we got a
Speaker 1: big problem with North Korea. Let's maximize our leverage. We'll
Speaker 1: sit down and talk to North Korea, see if they'll
Speaker 1: stop this crap. We've got an agreement with the State
Speaker 1: of Israel that Jerusalem is their capital. We've said we
Speaker 1: want to move our embassy there. Let's just move our
Speaker 1: embassy there. There's no future in which we're not going
Speaker 1: to put our embassy there, so why not just do
Speaker 1: it now? And I think the messaging is very powerful
Speaker 1: for why moving it is in fact the right, the
Speaker 1: right thing to do now. David, if Fune will be
Speaker 1: join us here in just a moment, he's a if
Speaker 1: you listen to show you know, he's brilliant guy, editor
Speaker 1: in chief of the Alga Miner knows the Israeli issue
Speaker 1: backwards and forwards. So we'll talk to him about this
Speaker 1: and then I've got a whole lot more stay tuned team.
Speaker 1: Over a century ago, the Balford Declaration recognized the right
Speaker 1: of the Jewish people to a national home in this land.
Speaker 1: And exactly seventy years ago today, President Truman became the
Speaker 1: first world leader to recognize the newborn Jewish States. Last December,
Speaker 1: President Trump became the first world leader to recognize Jerusalem
Speaker 1: as our capital. And today the United States of America
Speaker 1: is opening its embassy right here in Jerusalem. Thank you,
Speaker 1: Thank you President Trump for having the courage to keep
Speaker 1: your promises. Thank you President Trump, and thank you all
Speaker 1: for making the alliance between America and Israel stronger than ever.
Speaker 1: Prime Minister net and Yahoo giving a heartfelt thanks to
Speaker 1: the Trump administration in the United States of America today
Speaker 1: because of what's going on with the embassy move We've
Speaker 1: got somebody who can help us put all of this
Speaker 1: into a context as well as some of the violence
Speaker 1: going on in Gaza. We have David iffun on the line.
Speaker 1: He is the editor in chief of the Alga Minor,
Speaker 1: which is the fastest growing Jewish newspaper in the country. David,
Speaker 1: great to have you back, always a pleasure, but I
Speaker 1: just wanted to hear from you what the significance is
Speaker 1: in your mind in terms of US Israel relations of today.
Speaker 1: It's hugely significant. Not so much it's so far as
Speaker 1: you know what is being said in and of itself.
Speaker 1: I think it's along been the case to Jerusalem has
Speaker 1: been the capital of Israel, of course historically, and of
Speaker 1: course that the Israel has always viewed it and as
Speaker 1: an act of congress back in nineteen ninety five, the
Speaker 1: American people have recognizing that as well. What's important today
Speaker 1: is really the symbolism of it. It's the celebration of it.
Speaker 1: It's the fact that the world newspapers and media outlets
Speaker 1: and headlines across the world are featuring the unveiling of
Speaker 1: this embassy, the public celebration and announcement, the comments from
Speaker 1: Benjamin Niahoo, and it's hard to to to really get
Speaker 1: a cent of what this means to the Israeli people.
Speaker 1: There's been some some imagery and of the streets of Jerusalem,
Speaker 1: which are be deathed with flags thanking President Trump. Obviously
Speaker 1: he played that clip. President Truman has a very special
Speaker 1: place in the Israelian hearts as the first person to
Speaker 1: recognize the Nason state of Israel while it was under siege,
Speaker 1: and the Israeli certainly feels very strongly about President Trump.
Speaker 1: I think, I mean a while ago he was he
Speaker 1: was more popular there than in the United States, which
Speaker 1: is one of only a couple of countries where he's
Speaker 1: perceived in that way. Now, I'm sure if a Poe
Speaker 1: were to be taking it would be even higher. They
Speaker 1: feel recognized, they feel that justice has been said up
Speaker 1: and there's a great deal of credit for Presidents Trump
Speaker 1: for really taking historic stand on the bucking the the
Speaker 1: political correctness and this uh sense of fear and and
Speaker 1: uh and insensitivity to the ready perspective and things, and
Speaker 1: coming out and saying that we're going to accept this publicly.
Speaker 1: We're going to move our industry and make a statement,
Speaker 1: and nobody's going to stop us. One thing that I
Speaker 1: read today, David, and I don't think this is getting
Speaker 1: nearly enough attention to press. You and I could both
Speaker 1: surmise as to why that is. But there are some
Speaker 1: knowledgeable onlookers analysts of this situation who are saying that
Speaker 1: this is actually better for a perspective peace process. Could
Speaker 1: you give me your sense of that. Look, that's certainly
Speaker 1: the the the perspective. Uh, And that's the narrative that
Speaker 1: we've been hearing from the White House, and I think
Speaker 1: there is there are certainly elements of truth to that.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is this is I mean the age
Speaker 1: old discussions of peacemaking, especially when you're when you're dealing
Speaker 1: with an adversary that that doesn't really have any intention
Speaker 1: to split hairs with you, to to reason and to divide.
Speaker 1: I mean, look, it's very very clear that the Palestine
Speaker 1: in preference is the complete annig nation, eradication, and replacement
Speaker 1: of the Jewish State of Israel as it stands today.
Speaker 1: So when you're dealing with an adversary who has that
Speaker 1: in goal, and the negotiating from a position of strength
Speaker 1: actually leads to a greater opportunity for some form of concession,
Speaker 1: the first thing that's necessary is for them to understand
Speaker 1: that the enterprise known as Israel is not up for
Speaker 1: negotiation and it's eradication and removal it's not on the horizon,
Speaker 1: and when that becomes a fact point, you can have
Speaker 1: a real discussion as long as there is some hope
Speaker 1: that eventually, piece by piece, in the long term, the
Speaker 1: entity called era can be out maneuvered and bypassed and overrun.
Speaker 1: Then dependency and the willingness to make real confessions and
Speaker 1: to really come to terms with it are going to
Speaker 1: be a lot less and I think, by the way,
Speaker 1: that applies to lots of international discussions. There are echoes
Speaker 1: of that line of thinking in the North Korean discussions,
Speaker 1: of the Koinian discussions, and the end of the day,
Speaker 1: as with everything in life, you know, the adversaries are
Speaker 1: going to push as hard as as they can until
Speaker 1: they meet resistance. And when facts are established, and when
Speaker 1: resistance and when lines in the sand are drawn and
Speaker 1: they're maintained, that's when you can start to have a
Speaker 1: conversation which doesn't involve the demise of either party. Now
Speaker 1: I have to ask you, David, I'd have to ask
Speaker 1: you about this violence in Gaza at the at the
Speaker 1: border fence between Israel and Gaza. What do you make
Speaker 1: of it? I mean, clearly, there's a there's an effort
Speaker 1: you punch through the fence. You have these people referring
Speaker 1: to this as a protest today in response to the
Speaker 1: embassy move when we know that for six weeks now,
Speaker 1: these so called protests that include molotov cocktails being thrown,
Speaker 1: that include people carrying knives and chanting about how they
Speaker 1: want to break into Israel and kill as many people
Speaker 1: as possible. It's not really much of a protest, but
Speaker 1: that has been going on here. What is behind this?
Speaker 1: I mean, what do those showing up at the border
Speaker 1: fence between Israel and Gaza think they will accomplish by
Speaker 1: doing this. Look, at the end of the day, this
Speaker 1: is just a repurposed suicide bombing campaign. It has all
Speaker 1: of the same mechanics, mechanisms, motivations of your traditional terrorist
Speaker 1: suicide bomber. I mean, these guys are being handed weaponry,
Speaker 1: in some cases explosive to being sent down to the border.
Speaker 1: They know what the result is going to be. They know,
Speaker 1: and Hamas knows. And the recent studies the Mayor I
Speaker 1: mean Intelligence Center that studied many of the recent counties
Speaker 1: found that the vast majority of them were actually card
Speaker 1: carrying members of terrorist groups. Today we published details of
Speaker 1: a report that was put together by a group of
Speaker 1: very very senior military people out in Europe headed by
Speaker 1: Kindel Richard Camp, who is ahead of British forces in Afghanistan,
Speaker 1: and a number of other very very senior military officials
Speaker 1: who described this as an orchestrated military terrorist campaign by
Speaker 1: the Hamas in Ghaza. But you know, that's something that
Speaker 1: we've come to expect from Hamas. At the end of
Speaker 1: the day, they are cut from the same cloth as
Speaker 1: al Qaeda and as ISIS, and as other various sort
Speaker 1: of barbaric terrorist groups that are across the globe. What
Speaker 1: is most disturbing though, is the way that major media
Speaker 1: outlets that are supposed to have some kind of journalistic
Speaker 1: guidelines or or benchmarks theoretical objectivity. I like to call it, yeah,
Speaker 1: theoretical objectivity. So we're seeing the Huffington Post. I don't
Speaker 1: know if they have the headlines still up now right,
Speaker 1: but they had it a couple of hours ago that
Speaker 1: the headline with embassy massacre. Encourage your listeners to go
Speaker 1: and to check their website dictionary and see what the
Speaker 1: word massaca means. That is actually a blood libel to
Speaker 1: accuse Israel of a sovereign state of wantingly massacring unarmed
Speaker 1: and defenses civilians from And this is from a major
Speaker 1: Western media outlet. I don't know if it's still owned
Speaker 1: by AOL or Time One or wherever it is. These
Speaker 1: a major US company, You've got to have some sentlance
Speaker 1: of responsibility. It's it's outrageous how the media, how the
Speaker 1: major media outlets in the United States, certainly in Europe.
Speaker 1: I mean, look at the b you see today and
Speaker 1: I figured out and all of the nature the Afton
Speaker 1: Blad Swedish media ads. I mean, they're leading on this
Speaker 1: thing with the Hamus narrative that they have swallowed Tookla Center.
Speaker 1: David Iffun is the editor in chief of the Alga Minor,
Speaker 1: largest Jewish or fastest growing Jewish newspaper in the country.
Speaker 1: You should check it out Alga Minor dot com. David.
Speaker 1: Always great to have you, man, and a good day
Speaker 1: in a lot of ways. Today. Always a pleasure book. Absolutely, team,
Speaker 1: We're rolling it a quick one. I've got a lot
Speaker 1: more for you coming back in just a moment. One
Speaker 1: thing I have to know it is the similarity between
Speaker 1: the way the media reports on the so called protests
Speaker 1: at the Israel gaza order and the way that some
Speaker 1: protest movements in this country are described. Right, If you
Speaker 1: have a large gathering and some people have placards, some
Speaker 1: people have posters that they're walking around with slogans or chanting,
Speaker 1: and there is also a group within that group that
Speaker 1: is engaged in violence. Do you call it? Do you
Speaker 1: call it a mostly peaceful protests or do you focus
Speaker 1: on the violent actors? Right? You see this all the
Speaker 1: time with the left in this country, whether it's Antifa
Speaker 1: or Black Lives Matter or any number of political movements,
Speaker 1: where there are some people who are violent, but then
Speaker 1: there's this bigger group that's not engaged in violence. I'm
Speaker 1: talking about the specific event, and they'll call it a
Speaker 1: mostly peaceful protest. I mean Ferguson where buildings were burning down,
Speaker 1: it was a mostly peaceful protest. These thousands and thousands
Speaker 1: of Palestinians who have been gathered for six weeks at
Speaker 1: the border with Israel are Yeah, they're engaged in protests, right,
Speaker 1: that's part of it. But they're also engaged in a
Speaker 1: form of it's kind of a passive assault. I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't know what you really They're walking and walking
Speaker 1: and daring the authorities to actually, in this case, the
Speaker 1: Israeli is right the border patrol or the military to
Speaker 1: do something about them. They're trying to run through the
Speaker 1: fence or get get beyond the fence and get into
Speaker 1: israel properties. Ralis aren't going to allow that. At some point,
Speaker 1: the States mandates have to be enforced with force or
Speaker 1: else they cease to exist. And that's what they're testing here, right.
Speaker 1: They do this through a form of a kind of
Speaker 1: aggressive activism. But then on top of that, they're the
Speaker 1: people that are throwing molotov cocktails, which can kill people, right,
Speaker 1: that's lethal. Throwing rocks a favorite of so called Palestinian protesters.
Speaker 1: Someone throws a rock at me, and it's big enough,
Speaker 1: and there's enough of them, I gotta think long and
Speaker 1: hard of it whether I'm gonna draw my firearm and
Speaker 1: draw it down on them, because if I get hit
Speaker 1: in the head with that rock, I could die. I
Speaker 1: could get knocked out. Then they come over and take
Speaker 1: my gun and shoot me. I'm not gonna sit there
Speaker 1: and get pelted with rocks. I don't have a great arm.
Speaker 1: But if I threw a pretty good sized rock at
Speaker 1: somebody and it hit them in the head, that's gonna
Speaker 1: be lights out for them. So you know, there's no all.
Speaker 1: They're just throwing rocks. They're just throwing rocks. That's a
Speaker 1: big deal. Actually, would you say they're just punch Would
Speaker 1: you rather have somebody throw a big piece of concrete
Speaker 1: at you or take a swing at you, throw a
Speaker 1: punch at you. I might actually take the punch over
Speaker 1: the piece of concrete. But if a bunch of people
Speaker 1: try to punch me and I had a firearm on me,
Speaker 1: and I felt like my life was in danger, I
Speaker 1: would probably draw it down. Many you are familiar with
Speaker 1: the often taught rule about twenty feet. How quickly can
Speaker 1: you actually get to your firearm? If someone has an
Speaker 1: edged or even blunt weapon and they come at you,
Speaker 1: if they're within twenty feet, there's a very good chance
Speaker 1: they're now know a lot of you're like buck, I'm
Speaker 1: much asked with that, But even folks with some training,
Speaker 1: very unlikely they'd be able to get. If they're talking
Speaker 1: about a side arm, Now get to their side arm,
Speaker 1: draw their side arm, and fire it, or they could
Speaker 1: be either stabbed or hit. Even if you get the
Speaker 1: rounds off that person, the attackers for momentum and adrenaline
Speaker 1: may allow them to complete the attack even after you've
Speaker 1: gotten the shot off. I remember, especially if you've got
Speaker 1: like a nine millimeter, it's probably gonna take more than
Speaker 1: one round. You're going for center mass, might take a
Speaker 1: few rounds. So you know, it's not as easy as
Speaker 1: just well, you've got people with guns that are manning
Speaker 1: this border fence, and then you've got a bunch of
Speaker 1: innocent civilians who just want to protest. That's not what's
Speaker 1: happening here. I've never seen this before. This is new. Actually,
Speaker 1: fire kites are being deployed. So they have these kites
Speaker 1: that they set on fire obviously, and then they try
Speaker 1: to fly them over the fence, you know, catch a
Speaker 1: gust of wind, and then have them land in Israelis
Speaker 1: to basically start field fires or forest fires. As I said,
Speaker 1: incendiary devices. That's a Molotov cocktail. That's something else they've
Speaker 1: been throwing. People are showing up with knives saying they
Speaker 1: want to stab Israelis. That they're chanting about how they
Speaker 1: want to march all the way to Jerusalem. This isn't
Speaker 1: peaceful protest, you know, this is this is like a
Speaker 1: mob marching up to a police officer and all throwing
Speaker 1: rocks at him. What's that cops supposed to do? Just
Speaker 1: keep getting pelt with rocks. Oh, it's not it's non
Speaker 1: lethal force they're using. Actually it's not true. So you know,
Speaker 1: this is where you're seeing the media breakdown between how
Speaker 1: they view That's amazing. You think a CNN, for example,
Speaker 1: takes a very pro Palestinian point of view, and people
Speaker 1: would say, oh, why is that. Oh, that's right. CNN
Speaker 1: makes I believe most of it certainly makes a lot
Speaker 1: of its money in the international market. That's why they
Speaker 1: can have all these boring shows that nobody watches on
Speaker 1: during the day and the ratings are garbage, and nobody
Speaker 1: doesn't really matter all that much because CNN as an
Speaker 1: organization makes a ton of money because in a lot
Speaker 1: of countries it's considered, you know, this is the American
Speaker 1: cable news channel of record, and so they'll just beam
Speaker 1: it all over the world, so you know you've seen
Speaker 1: international and it's an airports everywhere. It's kind of a
Speaker 1: background channel, right for in a lot of countries, CNN
Speaker 1: is the the airport or the elevator music of the
Speaker 1: news industry. It's just kind of there and you can
Speaker 1: kind of watch it or kind of not watch it.
Speaker 1: But they I think that's why they take this particularly
Speaker 1: pro Palestinian viewpoint a lot of things, and certainly with
Speaker 1: the Trump administration, and I didn't get into that as
Speaker 1: much this hour, but they view this as because Trump
Speaker 1: did it, it has to be bad, breaking with tradition,
Speaker 1: I think was the headline I saw I saw earlier today.
Speaker 1: The Trump administration breaks with tradition. Oh no, don't break
Speaker 1: with tradition, the tradition that has not exactly it worked
Speaker 1: out so well considering that the peace process under the
Speaker 1: Obama administration, the Israeli Palestinian peace process, did not get
Speaker 1: to first base. I think you could argue that Obama
Speaker 1: didn't even get up to the plate, didn't even get
Speaker 1: a chance to bat because his administration was so inept
Speaker 1: in bringing together the Israeli side with the Palestinian side
Speaker 1: of that negotiation. So they have no wisdom to share here.
Speaker 1: They have no perch from which they can cast aspersions
Speaker 1: on what Trump is doing. And I think we will
Speaker 1: see that this was a spark for discussions or if not,
Speaker 1: guess what, at least they tried at least they did something.
Speaker 1: They took action instead of sitting around thinking that the
Speaker 1: status quo was what we want, because it is clearly not.
Speaker 1: I want to switch gears because I know there's been
Speaker 1: a lot of talk about what's going on with the
Speaker 1: embassy today, and let's focus on some things here at home,
Speaker 1: Immigration coming up in the next hour and all so
Speaker 1: SNL and political community today, we'll get into that and
Speaker 1: much more. Stay with me. So, my family has a
Speaker 1: French bulldog. Miss Molly has a pitbullboxer mix. But whether
Speaker 1: you've got a little pup or a big one, you
Speaker 1: know that they can dig. And if they've got a
Speaker 1: lot of energy, if you've kept them cooped up for
Speaker 1: part of the day and then they get outside, guess what,
Speaker 1: some of them start digging and digging, and then they
Speaker 1: can get out, and that can be dangerous, right get
Speaker 1: out of the roadway, get out in the neighborhood. And
Speaker 1: now all of a sudden you're looking for your dog
Speaker 1: or predators can get inside your fence. Well, I've got
Speaker 1: the answer for you. Dig defense. It's genius and it
Speaker 1: solves the problem of having a dog that digs under
Speaker 1: the fence. No amount of digging is gonna let your
Speaker 1: pets out of the yard or predators in. It is
Speaker 1: easy to install, comes in a bunch of different models.
Speaker 1: All you need is a hammer and a pair of gloves.
Speaker 1: If you have pets that dig under the fence, try
Speaker 1: it out. It's available online at lows men Ards Wayfair
Speaker 1: and stop the dig dot Com. Dig Defense is a
Speaker 1: solution of pets digging onto that fence. Check it out.
Speaker 1: Stop the dig dot Com. Now. Buck Sexton Mission Decoding
Speaker 1: the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence magnor mistake American,
Speaker 1: You're a great American again. This is the Buck Sexton Show. Analysts,
Speaker 1: Remember Sexton, No, just tell me what do you need
Speaker 1: for this to all go away? A resignation here, right?
Speaker 1: Being president is like doing porn. Once you do it,
Speaker 1: it's hard to do anything else. He said, My poll
Speaker 1: numbers are finally up. And speaking of polls being up, okay, mommy,
Speaker 1: we'll always have shock week. I solve North and South Korea.
Speaker 1: Why can I save us? Sorry, Donald, it's too late
Speaker 1: for that. I know you don't believe in climate change,
Speaker 1: but a storm's a common baby. I've never been so
Speaker 1: scared and so Horny at the same time. So that
Speaker 1: was from one of the cold opens and welcome back
Speaker 1: to the Buck Saxons show. One are the cold opens
Speaker 1: from Saturday Night Live recently. Now maybe saying Buck, there's
Speaker 1: big policy matters to talk about. There's all kinds of well,
Speaker 1: he spent the last hour in Israel in the embassy
Speaker 1: move I want to look at the culture for a
Speaker 1: few minutes here and what's going on. It has been
Speaker 1: my contention on this show for quite some time, and
Speaker 1: I believe it to be increasingly true and obvious that
Speaker 1: culture is now a casualty of I'm sorry, comedy is
Speaker 1: now well. Actually both of those things are true, but
Speaker 1: comedy is a casualty of the left that progressive ideology
Speaker 1: and intersectional politics are making it increasingly impossible to actually
Speaker 1: be funny without risk to your career, ear to your reputation.
Speaker 1: But also it has replaced comedy with propaganda. Right, Propaganda
Speaker 1: can be funny, Propaganda can sometimes be you know, clever, humorous,
Speaker 1: but it's for a purpose that you're having this stuff
Speaker 1: told to you. It is meant to bring about a
Speaker 1: certain mindset, to change people's positions on things. And what
Speaker 1: you see from all the mainstream comedy shows these days,
Speaker 1: with a few exceptions, but all the big platforms that
Speaker 1: the late shows, SNL is just atrocious. It's not funny.
Speaker 1: It's the same trumpet arrangement syndrome, snide commentary that dresses
Speaker 1: dresses itself up as comedy somewhat, but is certainly not
Speaker 1: actually first and foremost concerned with making people laugh. And
Speaker 1: it's gotten so bad that I see even Vice, which
Speaker 1: is a left wing hipster media organization, published a piece
Speaker 1: on how these cold opens from SNL are just virtue
Speaker 1: signaling political screeds from the left. They're not funny, they're elitists,
Speaker 1: they're snide, they're nasty, and it just goes to show
Speaker 1: you how much Trump has rattled the other side, that
Speaker 1: this is what they have to do week in, week out.
Speaker 1: They all they have all these different staff writers. They're
Speaker 1: supposed to come up with with jokes that will make
Speaker 1: the American people laugh. And I think there's a real
Speaker 1: loss here because maybe it's just cowardice, right, they have
Speaker 1: to make fun of Trump or else they're they worried
Speaker 1: that they'll lose their privileged positions. They have to make
Speaker 1: fun of conservatives, of white Christian males of the right
Speaker 1: in general, because if they don't, then they're not woke enough,
Speaker 1: you know. So there's a social pressure that comes into it.
Speaker 1: But my big thing is they're just not funny. And
Speaker 1: I find it so rare to actually have comedy that
Speaker 1: is in, you know, wide circulation, that has a big platform.
Speaker 1: I'm sure, Look, I'm sure they're a great stand up
Speaker 1: people here that I saw stand up myself in New
Speaker 1: York a couple of months ago. And you know, it
Speaker 1: was it was good. It wasn't overly political. It's a
Speaker 1: little political. Look, I'm gonna get a little political commentary.
Speaker 1: I just think that there's a laziness that's at the
Speaker 1: heart of so much of the commentary we're seeing these days.
Speaker 1: And look, I used to like to trune into SNL
Speaker 1: sometimes in the Dana Carvey Mike Myers age. You know,
Speaker 1: you'd throw it on and there was some really good
Speaker 1: to Chris Farley, I mean, and it was funny. And
Speaker 1: you think back to the sketches that they would do,
Speaker 1: and they weren't meant to make one side of the
Speaker 1: political spectrum feel good about themselves and make the other
Speaker 1: side feel bad about themselves. It was just meant to
Speaker 1: make people laugh. You know, Wayne's World Celebrity Jeopardy another example,
Speaker 1: just meant to make me That's one of my favorites.
Speaker 1: Meant to make people laugh. Where's the equivalent today? You
Speaker 1: just don't see it, and it's it's a function in
Speaker 1: large part of the way the left does business now.
Speaker 1: I do blame the Democrat Party. I blame progressive ideology.
Speaker 1: I blame the Twitter outrage mobs, these newfound theories of
Speaker 1: intersectionality and the victimology that is so pervasive and progressive thought. Right,
Speaker 1: who's the biggest victim? That's the first thing you have
Speaker 1: to determine before you can have any discussion about anything,
Speaker 1: never mind make jokes. And I was actually happy to
Speaker 1: see that Jerry Seinfeld when he was talking to David Letterman.
Speaker 1: By the way, I've never thought Letterman was funny. And
Speaker 1: everyone I ever know who's been around the guy says
Speaker 1: he's mean. So why you know, he's just a construct
Speaker 1: of the legacy media. There's just so much there are constructs, right,
Speaker 1: They're the equivalent in comedy or in news of pop
Speaker 1: stars right in sync. I was gonna say, justin Bieber, Gosh,
Speaker 1: I'm losing him getting old? What's the guys, who's the
Speaker 1: one who's married, dear Jessica whatever her name is, instead
Speaker 1: of me? Damn it, Timberlake, thank you justin Timberlake. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he's talented. But the rest of those guys, Yeah, they
Speaker 1: were just kind of part of a machine, right Were
Speaker 1: they so great? Were they so so talented? They kind
Speaker 1: of got lucky. They're part of a machine. You have
Speaker 1: that in comedy too. Some of the right guys or
Speaker 1: some guys are just in the right place at the
Speaker 1: right time. You're having a news for sure. What's the
Speaker 1: difference see in like one anchor and another over at CNN.
Speaker 1: I don't know how much Zucker and the executives like them.
Speaker 1: That's really it not much of a difference in skill set,
Speaker 1: and certainly not much of a difference in skill set
Speaker 1: with people that are doing like, you know, local news
Speaker 1: in Peoria. I mean, it's all the same thing, right,
Speaker 1: So but I look at this and I think Letterman, Okay,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I just go on my little rants. I
Speaker 1: just don't like I've tried people like you're from New York, Buck,
Speaker 1: I remember was based or should no, Letterman, It's just
Speaker 1: not funny. Top ten lists are usually cheesy. You didn't
Speaker 1: but I'm done. I mean the whole thing. It's just
Speaker 1: not good at least in the last the last ten
Speaker 1: years on air. I can't speak to what it was like,
Speaker 1: you know, earlier on but Seinfeld was speaking to Letterman
Speaker 1: and this issue came up. Play clip too. Do you
Speaker 1: do Trump stuff when you go out? No, No, it
Speaker 1: doesn't interest me. I do a lot of raisin stuff.
Speaker 1: What raisins. I have a lot of raisin material because
Speaker 1: you know, you have the sun Made company, and then
Speaker 1: you have the raisin at people. That's right, and you're
Speaker 1: gonna go with the Sun Made people. Well, I just
Speaker 1: think it's interesting that after eighty years, sun Made finally went, hey,
Speaker 1: why don't we put some chocolate on it? Like, imagine
Speaker 1: not thinking of that for eighty years. Now. I like
Speaker 1: this and for a number of reasons. One is it
Speaker 1: you notice how Seinfeld he doesn't just deflect on that.
Speaker 1: You can tell why antagonize half of your perspective audience.
Speaker 1: It's one thing for me. And by the way, I
Speaker 1: want Democrats to listen to this show. I think I'll
Speaker 1: make converts out of them over time, and I want
Speaker 1: smart democrats to write to me in good faith and
Speaker 1: say you're wrong on this because of this, or I
Speaker 1: disagree with you. I'm always trying to learn more too.
Speaker 1: One of my favorite things about what I do is
Speaker 1: that it is my mandate to learn more, to get
Speaker 1: smarter on everything that I talk to you about each
Speaker 1: and every time I come to this microphone, so that
Speaker 1: I'm a better host. So this is what it pushes
Speaker 1: me to keep reading and writing and diving into more
Speaker 1: books and making the time to do more research. And
Speaker 1: I love that part of what I do. But you know,
Speaker 1: I also understand that you're generally going to have a
Speaker 1: right of center audience. Listen to a conservative talk radio host.
Speaker 1: If I were in comedy, I would want everybody to listen.
Speaker 1: I'd want to make everyone laugh as much as humanly possible.
Speaker 1: But they abandoned that as a mission. Even they're really
Speaker 1: just trying to make the left laugh. And you see
Speaker 1: this with the shows that are getting greenlit on Netflix
Speaker 1: and these other platforms. I've been telling you we are
Speaker 1: behind on the digital platforms we are getting. We're gonna
Speaker 1: wake up and the younger generation is going to be
Speaker 1: so much more interested in the news programming on YouTube
Speaker 1: and Facebook Live and Netflix and Amazon everything than they
Speaker 1: are in Like the old stagyrmal news anchor on CBS,
Speaker 1: and I could pay ten million dollars a year, even
Speaker 1: though you could pay somebody about a tenth of that,
Speaker 1: and they'd be just as good and super excited for
Speaker 1: the job. I mean, that's all going away, right. This
Speaker 1: is why you have a lot of the big names
Speaker 1: in media, in news media at the legacy networks, they're
Speaker 1: really so insecure because I think they know that one
Speaker 1: they're just lucky, but they're so lucky that to just
Speaker 1: get through the day they have to think that there's
Speaker 1: actually something special about them. But two, their whole business
Speaker 1: model is disappearing. The notion of fight it out internally
Speaker 1: to get some very rarefied news anchor job one of
Speaker 1: these places. It's just not it's just not people say, oh,
Speaker 1: bucking oh, it's just because you're not gonna do that.
Speaker 1: It's not going to exist anymore it, trust me, in
Speaker 1: twenty years, none of my peers, and you know who
Speaker 1: all the good conservatives are right now, I have a
Speaker 1: lot of them on the show. None of my peers
Speaker 1: who are going to be big in the commentary and
Speaker 1: news business are going to be vying for like an
Speaker 1: ABC news position. It's just not reality. Maybe there'll be
Speaker 1: some digital version of it, but there's not going to
Speaker 1: be some channel that has this huge built in advantage
Speaker 1: of advertising changing. It's all changing. Comedy, I think is
Speaker 1: right for disruption. I mean, I'm not just here to
Speaker 1: bemoan this. We need better platforms for comedy in general,
Speaker 1: and yes conservative comedy too, but but as a more
Speaker 1: broad spectrum thing, I just want to see people that
Speaker 1: try to make people laugh. It's so, you know, there's
Speaker 1: all these studies, but how it's good for you. And
Speaker 1: it's one of the reason I try to joke around
Speaker 1: here as much as I can on this show. Like
Speaker 1: I'm not a comedian, I know that, but I do
Speaker 1: try to. If I can't make you laugh, at least
Speaker 1: I'll make myself laugh over the course of the show.
Speaker 1: But this is something that it's just being stripped from
Speaker 1: our from our culture. It really is. We are watching
Speaker 1: the death of comedy and slow motion because of progressives.
Speaker 1: Because and they're even starting to pick up on this.
Speaker 1: No jokes are funny. Everything is offensive except you know,
Speaker 1: you have the the the additive effect of or the
Speaker 1: double whammy. That's what I was trying to think of of.
Speaker 1: You know, you can't make any jokes unless they're about conservatives,
Speaker 1: and then you can make all of your jokes as
Speaker 1: mean as you want. That's the way that we're supposed
Speaker 1: to go forward. Now it's just crazy. You know, I'm
Speaker 1: really tired of it. I feel like a lot of
Speaker 1: you are too, by the way, because I do take
Speaker 1: your suggestions, folks, those who call in, those are who
Speaker 1: write me. I did over the course the week and
Speaker 1: watch a few episodes of Last Man Standing, and it
Speaker 1: was a revelation. I'm like, oh, look at this, a
Speaker 1: show about a family in America with a guy who's
Speaker 1: being in a you know, kind of a red blooded
Speaker 1: as salt of the earth guy. He's got a wife
Speaker 1: and three daughters and they're just going through life. And
Speaker 1: it's supposed to be funny. That's it doesn't have some
Speaker 1: huge clawber you over the head. Agenda. Isn't supposed to
Speaker 1: be making you change the way you view this or
Speaker 1: that contentious social issue. It's just, hey, here's a show.
Speaker 1: Let's like stuff that everyone deals with whatever race, whatever creed,
Speaker 1: whatever color, whatever, you know, all of us deal with
Speaker 1: these things. And I think that there's there's so much
Speaker 1: more room for this now because we see the way
Speaker 1: all of this is going. But last man's standing was good.
Speaker 1: I think it's coming back too, which is I'm happy
Speaker 1: about that. But my only thing, and this is just
Speaker 1: a stylistic issue, and some of you are probably gonna
Speaker 1: be mad at me for that, but that's all right.
Speaker 1: I don't like laugh tracks. They have them the Big
Speaker 1: Bang Theory. They have a lot of these big shows.
Speaker 1: Still I prefer the just the comedy and you kind
Speaker 1: of cut back and forth different scenes. I don't like
Speaker 1: laugh tracks. It's just the thing for me. I know,
Speaker 1: I'm you know. I also don't like when people talk
Speaker 1: in the quiet car on amtrack, which happened recently and
Speaker 1: I almost lost my coal. Because we're not barbarians. The
Speaker 1: quiet car is sacred. Eight four four nine eight two
Speaker 1: five team, if you want to chat eight four four
Speaker 1: nine hundred buck, maybe we'll talk about, Well, there's some
Speaker 1: fun stuff from the campus reform and Obama's Nobel Prize. Also,
Speaker 1: what the latest on immigration? We've got the gosh, the
Speaker 1: media is still dug in trying to get as much
Speaker 1: mileage as possible out of this story about the bad
Speaker 1: comment made about John McCain. Maybe we'll get into some
Speaker 1: of that. And like I said, Carl marks two hundred
Speaker 1: year anniversary, Like there's a teen magazine that read dot
Speaker 1: com marks. I want to tell you about that. That's
Speaker 1: coming up in a little bet we'll talk about at
Speaker 1: h And I got a bunch of other oh in
Speaker 1: this at the the at the end of the show,
Speaker 1: I've got a really sweet story to share with you.
Speaker 1: It's not mine. It's from a priest who posted online,
Speaker 1: but it's just really nice. And I think, if nothing else,
Speaker 1: stay with me through the rest of the show for that,
Speaker 1: because you might cheer up a little bit. You're right back.
Speaker 1: Black rifle coffee, my friends, it is what I drink.
Speaker 1: It is my favorite coffee and I drink it every
Speaker 1: day and I hope you do two. It is founded
Speaker 1: by it was founded by veterans. They're really into it
Speaker 1: at small Batch Roast Order Coffee, so they love making
Speaker 1: delicious coffee. Don't think this is just oh, we're supporting veterans,
Speaker 1: because in and of itself, that's an reason to buy
Speaker 1: a black rifle. But on top of that, you can
Speaker 1: add that this coffee is delicious. Silence are smooth caffeinated
Speaker 1: as blank just Black Rifle Blend, Victory Blend, Freedom brend
Speaker 1: Our Freedom Blend. They've got delicious stuff. You should really
Speaker 1: check it out. Go to Black Riflecoffee dot com slash
Speaker 1: buck type in the coupon code buck one five that
Speaker 1: will get you fifteen percent off at checkout. Make sure
Speaker 1: you type in code buck one five or fifteen percent
Speaker 1: off at checkout. Black Riflecoffee dot Com slash buck is
Speaker 1: the website you should go do. They also have great gear.
Speaker 1: I've got some of their t shirts or really like
Speaker 1: that I drink their cake cups. You can have it delivered.
Speaker 1: Set up a subscription so it comes to you each month.
Speaker 1: Black Rifle Coffee dot Com, slash buck Man. They are
Speaker 1: really continuing to push on this issue of Kelly Sadler,
Speaker 1: the White House official who look made a very very
Speaker 1: bad comment about John McCain. Right, just a stupid, insensitive,
Speaker 1: disrespectful thing to say. But my understanding was that, and
Speaker 1: I could be wrong, but that she had called the
Speaker 1: McCain family apologized to them, and yet this is still
Speaker 1: a story. I was in the gym today here, I know, right,
Speaker 1: fighting the dad bod. It's a losing battle. I was
Speaker 1: in the gym today here in DC and they had
Speaker 1: MSNBC on a locker room. First of all, there should
Speaker 1: be no TV's in locker room. Second of all, why
Speaker 1: is it MSNBC. Are they just trying to get me
Speaker 1: angry before I work out? I mean, maybe that's some
Speaker 1: form of motivation, but this is all a total aside.
Speaker 1: But they're still trying to make this a a story,
Speaker 1: a continuing story. I mean, we we covered this a
Speaker 1: bit last week. Today, raw Shaw, who we've had here
Speaker 1: on the show, took over the White House Press docker
Speaker 1: Harry podium from Sarah Sanders. She was out for today.
Speaker 1: I don't know why, and Roj had to just deal
Speaker 1: with just one question after another. Remember we got the
Speaker 1: embassy move today, still the whole Mueller probe, all that
Speaker 1: situation going on, big immigration issues to deal with, reports
Speaker 1: out that Trump wants a budget deal before the August
Speaker 1: reassessed me, all kinds of stuff to really have the
Speaker 1: media synk their teeth into and what do they really
Speaker 1: want to talk about? How mean somebody in the White
Speaker 1: House was, and that's what they want to talk about
Speaker 1: play eleven. Senator Lindsey Graham said, I wish somebody from
Speaker 1: the White House would tell the country that what Kelly
Speaker 1: Sadler said was inappropriate, that that's not how we are
Speaker 1: as a Trump administration. Why not just apologize? Kelly Sadler
Speaker 1: told Megan McCain that she would apologize publicly, and that
Speaker 1: has not yet happened. Why has that not happened, she explains,
Speaker 1: You're always being addressed internally. She is still an employee
Speaker 1: here at the White House. She came to work today.
Speaker 1: Why had she publicly apologized, as she told Medima came
Speaker 1: that she traded. Kelly Sadler is a little bit of
Speaker 1: a victim here. Do you agree that she's a little
Speaker 1: bit of a victim here? And why is there any
Speaker 1: environment where that conveying that thought would be viewed as appropriate?
Speaker 1: He said? It is dealt with internally. Has it anything
Speaker 1: been dealt with since last week when she called the family?
Speaker 1: We're leading the meeting where Kelly Sadler said what she said,
Speaker 1: How did it strike you? Did you find to being inappropriate?
Speaker 1: And how did what was the reaction in the room?
Speaker 1: And that's that's just a smattering, that's just a selection
Speaker 1: of the questions asked on this issue. A few things
Speaker 1: on this They want her fire. The media will not
Speaker 1: be satisfied until she's fired. Oh but keep this in
Speaker 1: mind too, not only do they want her fired once
Speaker 1: they get their way, if they get which they won't,
Speaker 1: I think with this White House. And remember I don't,
Speaker 1: in any way, shape or form think anything other than
Speaker 1: that comment was completely unacceptable. But she apologized. She hasn't
Speaker 1: publicly apologized, but maybe that's because the media keeps pushing
Speaker 1: the issue with a very clear agenda. I think of
Speaker 1: she needs to be fired for the comment to be fired.
Speaker 1: You know this is this is also a moment where
Speaker 1: I have to wonder, and they they will not be
Speaker 1: satisfied even if she has fired, right then then it
Speaker 1: will be yet another person fired for there for being
Speaker 1: you know, grotesque and terrible in this White House, and
Speaker 1: so it won't stop the stories. But another thing, and
Speaker 1: this just comes from yeah, I was a CIA guy,
Speaker 1: So discretion something that I kind of have a little
Speaker 1: bit of a better understanding of than a lot of
Speaker 1: other folks, but especially in the media. Um, who would
Speaker 1: I mean, it's it's hurtful for this for the family,
Speaker 1: for the McCain family to hear this. It's just hurtful
Speaker 1: all around to spread this out there in the media.
Speaker 1: Who is the turn Coode in that meeting that told
Speaker 1: everybody about this terrible comment. He's back with you now
Speaker 1: because when it comes to the fight for truth, the
Speaker 1: fuck never stops. Big decision came down from the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court earlier today. It's gonna change what is legal and
Speaker 1: what is not what it comes to betting on sports.
Speaker 1: I'm not somebody who watches a whole lot of professional sports,
Speaker 1: but I do have interest in the government. It's regulation
Speaker 1: and it's mandates when it comes to what is acceptable
Speaker 1: and unacceptable commerce. We have somebody, though, who can answer
Speaker 1: all these things for us and bring it all together
Speaker 1: and make some sense of whether you can actually now
Speaker 1: go and bet on the I was gonna say the
Speaker 1: Crimson Tide or roll Tide or I don't know. I
Speaker 1: don't know any of college sports at all. Emily Campanio
Speaker 1: is with us. Yeah, she knows. Emily Campanio is with it.
Speaker 1: She's a former federal attorney, also a legal analyst and
Speaker 1: sports business analyst. Emily, great to have you back, Thanks
Speaker 1: so much. But how are you all right to tell
Speaker 1: me about this decision today? First of all, what led
Speaker 1: to this, right, What led to this is the fact
Speaker 1: that in nineteen ninety two a law was passed that
Speaker 1: effectively prohibited states from enacting their own legislation to create
Speaker 1: sports betting. Right A, New Jersey kept trying to get
Speaker 1: around it, and so eventually the NCAA sued New Jersey
Speaker 1: for trying to get around it. So in turn, New
Speaker 1: Jersey sued back and said, this nineteen ninety two law
Speaker 1: is unconstitutional, and finally the Supreme Court agreed to hear it.
Speaker 1: And so what it boils down to is the fact
Speaker 1: that if the if Congress had passed a law that
Speaker 1: said we federally prohibit sports betting, then that would have
Speaker 1: been constitutional. But instead the law said we prohibit states
Speaker 1: from passing laws to that effect, and as we know,
Speaker 1: that is prohibited via the commandeering exception in the Tenth Amendment.
Speaker 1: And so that is why the Supreme Court struck it
Speaker 1: down today. So essentially it opens the doors for states
Speaker 1: to set their own laws to regulate and execute sports
Speaker 1: betting within their own borders. Now, under this law, before today, right,
Speaker 1: the situation was that you could I'm not somebody who
Speaker 1: does any sports gambling because I don't watch much of
Speaker 1: the way of sports, as you know, Emily. But you
Speaker 1: could place a bet right, but you would have to
Speaker 1: call Las Vegas or something wasn't there. So you could
Speaker 1: be in a state, but you'd have to call a
Speaker 1: place and they put the bet for you there. How
Speaker 1: did that work? Right? Essentially, that original law carved out exceptions,
Speaker 1: And here's the irony is that it actually carved out
Speaker 1: an exception for New Jersey at the time also, and
Speaker 1: New Jersey was sluggish and slow and fail to take
Speaker 1: advantage of that. They failed to be timely. And so
Speaker 1: Las Vegas and states that already have sports lottery, which
Speaker 1: include states like organ they got in under that exception
Speaker 1: of the Father clause. But New Jersey just failed at it.
Speaker 1: So in a way, it's good for we didn't because
Speaker 1: now the law has been one hundred percent overturn ruled unconstitutional.
Speaker 1: But until then, in this past interim, you could only
Speaker 1: again place bets under lottery systems if it was already
Speaker 1: existing or in Vegas because of the Grandfather clause. Now
Speaker 1: note as well, for listeners, this doesn't change online gambling.
Speaker 1: This only has to do with state borders. And so
Speaker 1: until it's you know, until something happens differently on the
Speaker 1: federal level, when you see and hear people already talking
Speaker 1: about oh, mobile apps and this and that, it has
Speaker 1: to be tied to a house. It has to be
Speaker 1: tied to a racetrack or a brick and mortar within
Speaker 1: a state, so that you're not operating across state line. Okay,
Speaker 1: see that's really important. So before you would have to
Speaker 1: call a state that had the exception and they could
Speaker 1: place the bet for you in that state. And now
Speaker 1: states were any state based on the Supreme Court decision
Speaker 1: that came. Now today any state could say, you know,
Speaker 1: New York, they could say, okay, we're gonna set up
Speaker 1: the New York Betting Authority or something, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: just I know this is what they call these things.
Speaker 1: But and anyone can show up and they can bet
Speaker 1: on whether the Hoosiers are gonna beat the Hoyas. Right
Speaker 1: there we go. I got a couple. I don't know
Speaker 1: if they're even in the same conference or whatever, but
Speaker 1: you know, there's something, there's something there. I'm close. But
Speaker 1: so you could do that as long as you were
Speaker 1: doing it at that authority in the state where you
Speaker 1: reside or in the state where you're placing the bet.
Speaker 1: But I couldn't say, as a New York resident, call
Speaker 1: Ohio and say, hey, I want to bet on your
Speaker 1: I want to bet on your game there right? I mean,
Speaker 1: is that am I close? Um? Yeah, you're You're on
Speaker 1: the right truck, absolutely, And again you you can't. You
Speaker 1: can't cross state lines at this moment um until unless
Speaker 1: you are tied directly to that house. So you're right
Speaker 1: on that account. And I do want to point out
Speaker 1: to you for listeners how complex this is in that
Speaker 1: you mentioned, you know, the gaming commission or who would
Speaker 1: oversee so certain states have been eyeing the fact that
Speaker 1: this was in the works, and there are many states
Speaker 1: that already have legislation approved and ready to go that
Speaker 1: was contingent upon this being struck down, and they've proposed
Speaker 1: that there existing gaming commissions or things of the like
Speaker 1: will now be amended to oversee sports betting operations as well.
Speaker 1: There's obviously a lot of profit that is to be
Speaker 1: made that goes to the state and those individual houses
Speaker 1: and including sovereign tribes right and casinos in certain states
Speaker 1: where that applies. I want to say around thirty of them.
Speaker 1: And the biggest issue here, the biggest con was the
Speaker 1: preservation or the potential for piercing of the integrity of
Speaker 1: the game. And so when you hear a lot of
Speaker 1: kind of vernacular about this, people have been talking about
Speaker 1: the propensity for addiction, and obviously there is that, but
Speaker 1: really it had to do with preserving the game, because
Speaker 1: that is why that nineteen ninety two while was passed
Speaker 1: in the first place. And so that's why now everyone
Speaker 1: is clamoring to ensure a portion a portion of the
Speaker 1: profit goes toward what they're calling it's an integrity free
Speaker 1: And so the irony is that all of these big
Speaker 1: league and professional sports organizations that have been protesting this
Speaker 1: the whole time, they've actually been lobbying now for the
Speaker 1: last six years undercover or I mean, you know, openly,
Speaker 1: but on the side with the estates can make sure
Speaker 1: that they get a cut, because they're saying, we are
Speaker 1: now the ones that have to put the bill for
Speaker 1: that integrity. Huh. So what's the interity thing? By the way,
Speaker 1: they think that if people are allowed to if people
Speaker 1: are allowed to place bets on games, then people are
Speaker 1: going to cheat in the games, Like, is that that's
Speaker 1: what they say? Because can't you place it Ben right
Speaker 1: now in Vegas? Exactly? Yes you can, and yes that
Speaker 1: is that is the fear that you know that coaches
Speaker 1: and players and officials and all of a sudden it
Speaker 1: will be one mass of corruption. And how much of this, Emily,
Speaker 1: I gotta jump in this is important? How much of
Speaker 1: this is really about Vegas, Atlantic City, a few other
Speaker 1: places spending a lot of money on lobbying and trying
Speaker 1: to protect their protect their own prerogatives here by being
Speaker 1: places where you can actually gamble, you know what I mean?
Speaker 1: How much of this is actually gambling special interest driven
Speaker 1: up until this point instead of actually about protecting the game.
Speaker 1: Or do you think it really is primarily about just
Speaker 1: people wanting to protect the game? I don't know, I'm asking.
Speaker 1: I think that is the pure intent at the heart
Speaker 1: of what obviously translates into money, So it all goes
Speaker 1: to everyone wants to make sure that their best are
Speaker 1: based on pure principles and that their money will not
Speaker 1: be rendered vulnerable by other people feeding and by corrupting
Speaker 1: the game and correcting their gambling, you know, the enjoyment
Speaker 1: of course, that's like a pure thing, that's the fan thing.
Speaker 1: But how it relates becomes a lot more complicated. And
Speaker 1: I want to point out, because we are all interested
Speaker 1: in our tax dollars and how money has spent in
Speaker 1: what things we are obligated for, the states are already
Speaker 1: taking firm positions over who splits that. See so West Virginia,
Speaker 1: for example, they're like, absolutely not. Will There's no way
Speaker 1: our states will folder one red sense of this integrity.
Speaker 1: See like, absolutely not, that's going to be fully casinos.
Speaker 1: A New Jersey says absolutely not. You spent the last
Speaker 1: six years, you know, bleeding us dry and screwing us
Speaker 1: in courts, So absolutely not will you even see a
Speaker 1: red scent at all from us? So it plays into
Speaker 1: into account as well, like who foots the bill for
Speaker 1: the preservation that then protects people's gambling dollars? As you
Speaker 1: pointed out, how much money do we think is at
Speaker 1: stake here if this were to go state by state
Speaker 1: and people and states rather are passing legislation to allow
Speaker 1: sports betting, I've got a guess it's billions, right, And
Speaker 1: there's billions of dollars that must be conceivably at play
Speaker 1: here because of this ruling. Right, Okay, So the American
Speaker 1: Gambling Association they have estimated one hundred and fifty billion
Speaker 1: dollars was spent that spent annually illegally over you know,
Speaker 1: legally um outsourced because sports betting was illegal here. And
Speaker 1: in twenty seventeen alone in Nevada, where it's legal, so
Speaker 1: heart numbers of legal sports betting, we had four point
Speaker 1: eight billion wagered and then the sports books themselves made
Speaker 1: two hundred and forty nine a million. So that's one year,
Speaker 1: one legal place, and that's you know, that's what we're
Speaker 1: looking at. You're absolutely right. The point is in the
Speaker 1: billions and no two for people who aren't as versed
Speaker 1: in gambling. But sports betting isn't really lucrative for the house.
Speaker 1: It is more lucrative actually for the fans. So that's
Speaker 1: an interesting thing too that um it, it pulls into
Speaker 1: play more than just you know the kind of thing. Right.
Speaker 1: I've got to assume though, that the same way that
Speaker 1: states justify the lottery, which is really actually attacks on
Speaker 1: many people in the working class. Uh, but they justify
Speaker 1: by taking the proceeds of lottery. So wherever you are
Speaker 1: across the country, folks listening. I mean, unless I'm missing it.
Speaker 1: Maybe it's different in some states, but usually the proceeds
Speaker 1: the state gets from loattering, at least in theory, goes
Speaker 1: toward education, and I know they've done that. I think
Speaker 1: also with taxes on marijuana in states that have de
Speaker 1: facto legalized marijuana, it's supposed to go towards schools. I
Speaker 1: got to assume that now that states have the green light,
Speaker 1: based on this Supreme Court ruling today Emily, that they're
Speaker 1: just going to tax the tax that you know what
Speaker 1: out of sports bets in their states. Right, it's a
Speaker 1: big source of revenue for the government. And you know
Speaker 1: that any opportunity for income for the FED or income
Speaker 1: for the states. First of all, anything they don't get
Speaker 1: they call quote lost income, which shows you that any money,
Speaker 1: any money you bring home, they really consider it that's lost.
Speaker 1: That's really their income that's lost. That's number one and
Speaker 1: number two. Yes, and the states have already come out
Speaker 1: many of them and said specifically, look, this is where
Speaker 1: all of that faufit dollars, this is where they're going.
Speaker 1: And you're right, it includes education and it includes global benefits,
Speaker 1: benefits for their citizens. So it's certainly not tied only
Speaker 1: to uh sports or gambling. Um and I agree with you,
Speaker 1: by the way, that the lottery is a tax on workers. Um. So, yes,
Speaker 1: you are one hundred percent right. And a lot of
Speaker 1: the legislation too, by the way, is not it's not
Speaker 1: set in stone. They say, look, you know this is
Speaker 1: this is tentative, and then as soon as this small
Speaker 1: was overturned, which it was today and the implementation, it'll
Speaker 1: be put in stone and the actual percentage of tax
Speaker 1: will be um uh conquertized at that time essentially. So
Speaker 1: do you think we're going to see just last one
Speaker 1: for your Emily or speaking to Emily Componu by the way,
Speaker 1: everyone go to Emily Komponyu dot com for more of
Speaker 1: her a legal analysis. Are we going to see an
Speaker 1: explosion of different states that are that are actually going
Speaker 1: to pass laws here that allow this to become kind
Speaker 1: of a new American tradition betting on sporting events. Yes,
Speaker 1: in the last couple of years, we have states that
Speaker 1: have already teed it up, ready and waiting to go.
Speaker 1: So we have New Jersey obviously right away they even
Speaker 1: fought kiosks already. I mean, everyone is poised and ready
Speaker 1: to embark. And we have UM six that are ready
Speaker 1: to go, an additional thirteen that are almost ready to go,
Speaker 1: and then a couple more that have study bills in place.
Speaker 1: So and there by the way, listeners can go online
Speaker 1: to interactive map where they can see which states are
Speaker 1: at what stages and yes, it's absolutely an explosion happening.
Speaker 1: Follow them, they compano on Twitter. Folks, Emily, great to
Speaker 1: have you, come back soon, Thanks so much, Bucks, See
Speaker 1: you again so eight four four nine two eight two five.
Speaker 1: If you want to chat, we are here in the hut.
Speaker 1: We are ready to rock. Take your calls whenever you like.
Speaker 1: UM talk to you about liberal hypocrisy and immigration. That'll
Speaker 1: be fun. It's always a good topic. We'll enjoy that one.
Speaker 1: Maybe we'll make fun of college kids who don't know
Speaker 1: about Obama's Nobel Peace Prize. But I don't know. Maybe
Speaker 1: we'll see what kind of mood we're in. Then, team
Speaker 1: and stay with me. Hey, team, We've got some calls
Speaker 1: coming in. Hey John in Bucks County based on the
Speaker 1: name clearly God's country, Pennsylvania. John, Great to have you,
Speaker 1: Yes it is thanks Bucks. Uh. I just want to
Speaker 1: say I've been listening to you for a long time
Speaker 1: since the Blaze, and I'm basically proud that there's somebody
Speaker 1: out there speaking truths of power like you're you're you're smart,
Speaker 1: you're funny and andy, and you got a good objective
Speaker 1: of pinion of stuff. You're very kind, sir, Thank you, well,
Speaker 1: You're You're welcome. You deserve it. Um. What I wanted
Speaker 1: to say was about voting. Um, We're a vote in
Speaker 1: Pennsylvania tomorrow and I've been watching what's going on with
Speaker 1: Trump and I hope people that you know, people listen.
Speaker 1: Is it the primary? John give Can you give us
Speaker 1: a little just a little primer. What's what's up for tomorrow?
Speaker 1: You said you're voting. Who's who's running? Who's voting? Well,
Speaker 1: there's all kinds of people running. But I'm I'm saying
Speaker 1: what I'm telling the people that listen to Buck Sex
Speaker 1: and there's they should get out and vote because I mean,
Speaker 1: Trump showed that you can, you can get out and
Speaker 1: you can put some of these people out that are
Speaker 1: some of these deep state people. I mean, you gotta
Speaker 1: you gotta start at the grass roots. You gotta earlier
Speaker 1: might get out there, and you gotta vote, because I mean,
Speaker 1: if you look at what's going on, if they can
Speaker 1: do that to Trump, they can do that to anybody.
Speaker 1: And well, what they're doing is is just dead ass wrong.
Speaker 1: Some of the stuff's coming out with that in bed
Speaker 1: in the in the in the campaign and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: I mean, yeah, I want I'm gonna I'm gonna drill
Speaker 1: down to that. People are probably like, Buck, why aren't
Speaker 1: you hitting the more today. I'm I'm doing some my
Speaker 1: deep dive research and you'll probably hit it more tomorrow
Speaker 1: and the next day. But I do think that they
Speaker 1: I think that there's a preponderance of the evidence now
Speaker 1: pointing toward a penetration of the Trump campaign by somebody
Speaker 1: working on behalf of the FBI and perhaps others in
Speaker 1: the in the intelligence community. We don't know yet, but
Speaker 1: we'll look into that. And uh and John, I appreciate
Speaker 1: you calling in for Pennsylvania. Thank you, sir. H Yeah,
Speaker 1: don't think that I've that's off my off my radar.
Speaker 1: I will certainly be spending more time looking at and
Speaker 1: thinking about the Muller probe. Be honest with you, folks,
Speaker 1: I need to stop, as a preface to a sentence,
Speaker 1: I need to not use that anymore because it makes
Speaker 1: it sound like, well, unlike the other times, we're being
Speaker 1: dishonest with you folks, right, let me let me be
Speaker 1: straight with you here, unlike the other times. No, but
Speaker 1: I get Muller fatigue here. And I know so many
Speaker 1: shows spend so much time on it. I really look,
Speaker 1: I feel like by the time you get to listen
Speaker 1: to me, many you know, those you listening live or
Speaker 1: many of you are listening on the podcast later on,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm giving you stuff that you haven't heard elsewhere,
Speaker 1: and hopefully stories you haven't even heard about elsewhere. It's
Speaker 1: one of the one of the value addeds that I
Speaker 1: like to have here on the show. So I try
Speaker 1: to also mix it up. I mean, today, look, you
Speaker 1: got to talk about Israel when it's the biggest story
Speaker 1: in the country. I think you're right what it means
Speaker 1: the Trump administration. So we certainly do a fair amount
Speaker 1: of the big news of the day here, but I
Speaker 1: try to bring other things into the mix as well.
Speaker 1: That all set I just also get tired of Muller
Speaker 1: the whole thing, right, all this and that, this and that,
Speaker 1: and you know, it's it's certainly a marathon, not a sprint,
Speaker 1: and it feels sometimes like it's a it's a marathon
Speaker 1: in slow motion. Right, it's just watching paint dry here
Speaker 1: with hoping this thing is gonna end sometime soon and
Speaker 1: I'll look into you know, we wanted to have Kim
Speaker 1: Strassel last week. She got super busy because her story
Speaker 1: on this possible penetration of the Trump campaign became one
Speaker 1: of the one of the main news narratives in the
Speaker 1: country unless you're a Democrat, and then it's just Stormy
Speaker 1: Daniels and you know Russia, or this guy Michael Avanati,
Speaker 1: who her lawyer, the porn lawyer. This guy is sending
Speaker 1: around some pretty crazy emails to people the media, threatening
Speaker 1: them like you can't talk about this or I'm gonna
Speaker 1: sue you and you better watch out or else. This
Speaker 1: guy's a clown. This guy's a real joke. But notice,
Speaker 1: you know, Cooper and Cuomo and Tapper and matt Ow,
Speaker 1: and they're all, oh, let's treat this guy like he's
Speaker 1: he's a real hero of the resistance. You know, they'll
Speaker 1: they'll treat him with a lot of respect. The guy
Speaker 1: who's you know, the poor lawyer guy of a Nati
Speaker 1: and I think he's angling for a show. I really do.
Speaker 1: I think he thinks he's got to get his own
Speaker 1: table news show. I want to talk to you about
Speaker 1: liberal hypocrisy when it comes to um homelessness, specifically in
Speaker 1: California and what's going on there. That'll that'll be a
Speaker 1: story coming up. And then also teen Vogue and Karl Marks,
Speaker 1: we'll talk about that just a few minutes. Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: remission to coding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake American, You're a great American. Again. This
Speaker 1: is the Buck Sexton Show. CIA analysts. Remember, No, it's
Speaker 1: about seventy five percent of geographical areas inhabited by twenty
Speaker 1: five percent of lower income people buy and large so
Speaker 1: people in this medieval society on the coast, they don't
Speaker 1: believe in water transfers for agriculture and for poor people,
Speaker 1: but they surely do for the artificial landscapes in the
Speaker 1: Bay Area, whether it's het Chechi or the California Water Project.
Speaker 1: So that attitude is it sort of reverberates throughout California,
Speaker 1: and it's a dysfunctional state because of that. There's the
Speaker 1: middle class about four or five million people have left.
Speaker 1: We had about four or five million people come illegally
Speaker 1: from southern Mexico, and we've had an enormous concentration of
Speaker 1: global wealth in a very small geographical area. And you
Speaker 1: put all that together and you get what you have now,
Speaker 1: a dysfunctional state. That was Victor Davis Hansen, one of
Speaker 1: my favorite contemporary writers, does a great job National View.
Speaker 1: I really like his books too, And I had the
Speaker 1: good fortune to be a wow who I was gonna say,
Speaker 1: I was out on the West coast. Got that? Who
Speaker 1: cares about that for now? But he's a really interesting guy,
Speaker 1: and I really appreciate his analysis a California native of
Speaker 1: what's going on out there because it is a window
Speaker 1: into our future. And when I say that it is
Speaker 1: turning into a stratified socioeconomic society like Latin America, I
Speaker 1: don't mean in terms of the Latin American population in California.
Speaker 1: I mean incredibly wealthy people, period and very very very
Speaker 1: dependent on the state. Not wealthy people. Right. You have
Speaker 1: that across much of Latin America. That's the status quo.
Speaker 1: In Brazil, that's the status quo. In Argentina, that's just
Speaker 1: the way that it is. And California doesn't have an
Speaker 1: answer to this problem, really, and I think it's just
Speaker 1: going to keep getting worse and worse. But apart from
Speaker 1: the issue of illegals, where you have a lot of
Speaker 1: hypocrisy because the liberals who have the money and have
Speaker 1: a lot of say in what the government is doing
Speaker 1: in California don't deal with illegals dept in ways that
Speaker 1: benefit them right there. Their kids aren't going to schools
Speaker 1: with a lot of illegal immigrants. Their kids aren't or
Speaker 1: their their neighborhoods tend not to be places where you have,
Speaker 1: you know, not a lot of illegals in Beverly Hills,
Speaker 1: for example, at least not living there. But the homelessness issue,
Speaker 1: which is separate from the issue of illegal immigrants, is
Speaker 1: also a place where you see this stratification. I didn't
Speaker 1: even know this, you know, I was in LA recently
Speaker 1: a few weeks back, and I told you I love
Speaker 1: San Diego. La has some great parts that some big drawbacks.
Speaker 1: But I would drive past these encampments of homeless people
Speaker 1: and and I mean I mean it looked like occupied
Speaker 1: Wall Street. I mean tents that are clearly not going
Speaker 1: anywhere set up for long term open air living. And
Speaker 1: I knew that that LA had this problem, but I
Speaker 1: didn't know until I read this article in the was
Speaker 1: the Post at the Times that California has a quarter
Speaker 1: of the entire country's homeless population. Okay, so twenty five
Speaker 1: percent of all homeless people in the three twenty million
Speaker 1: person United States are in California, which is pretty stunning.
Speaker 1: But it's only now becoming an issue because you see
Speaker 1: a lot of the liberals in the Bay Area, LA
Speaker 1: and around really the coasts. The rich people in California
Speaker 1: live in the coasts. The working class, poor people, legal immigrants,
Speaker 1: they live more in the interior of California. But the
Speaker 1: rich people along the coasts are starting to complain about
Speaker 1: the homeless population because they're actually having It's gotten so
Speaker 1: bad that they're actually having to deal with it. This
Speaker 1: is the peace in the Washington Post. As gentrification escalates
Speaker 1: in California, people wonder where can the homeless go. Well,
Speaker 1: let me answer this question. I can't go to you
Speaker 1: can't go to Malibu, can't go to Orange County, can't
Speaker 1: go to you know the nicest you know, Santa Monica. Well,
Speaker 1: actually there's a lot of Homelessessanta Monica. It's a problem
Speaker 1: because of the beaches, but you know, can't go to
Speaker 1: a lot of places where the wealthy or congregated. But
Speaker 1: they don't understand that having the policies they do of
Speaker 1: permissiveness for homelessness statewide cause problems for everybody else. Right,
Speaker 1: Just now you're starting to see some pushback on this
Speaker 1: because and this is by the way, you see this
Speaker 1: with schools, You see this with a number of things.
Speaker 1: These sanctimonious limousine liberals will be there's stands so tall,
Speaker 1: they're so into the virtue signal on this stuff. The
Speaker 1: moment that they actually have skin in the game, the
Speaker 1: moment that it's hold on a second, you're gonna have
Speaker 1: to deal with these policies you have advocate for everyone else.
Speaker 1: They didn't even try to hide the hypocrisy. It just
Speaker 1: jumps out at you. This is one in particular I'm
Speaker 1: trying to find. This was in this piece on you know,
Speaker 1: I think that Malibu is of the most beautiful places
Speaker 1: in the whole country. But obviously it's incredibly wealthy liberal enclave, right,
Speaker 1: But it's a very very beautiful place. If you haven't
Speaker 1: been Pacific Coast Highway. There's it's worth a drive, It's
Speaker 1: it's gorgeous. Obviously a very very expensive place to live
Speaker 1: as well. But here's what this piece says about Malibu.
Speaker 1: It's a city west of Los Angeles that includes a
Speaker 1: neighborhood nicknamed Billionaires Beach. But residents have urged a church
Speaker 1: to stop the weekly dinners at holds for the homeless.
Speaker 1: Residents argue that offering charity just attracts more homeless people,
Speaker 1: and the same thing has happened in other parts of
Speaker 1: Los Angeles. Oh, you mean that if you if you
Speaker 1: invite now, the church is different than the state. But
Speaker 1: if you have state policies that invite in homeless people
Speaker 1: and tell them that they can live on the streets
Speaker 1: and they yeah, by the way, this to outbreaks of disease.
Speaker 1: It's really unsanitary. I'm I'm all for helping the homeless.
Speaker 1: I'm not for municipal policies that encourage the homeless to
Speaker 1: just live out on the city streets, which is what
Speaker 1: you have in places like la You have these big
Speaker 1: encampments of tents everywhere, and that's been okay until they
Speaker 1: want to set up shop in Malibu. Then all of
Speaker 1: a sudden, liberals start complaining about it until they want
Speaker 1: to start, you know, taking over parks. That's, by the way,
Speaker 1: one of the things you see, park is supposed to
Speaker 1: be a common space, a shared space right for all
Speaker 1: people in a neighborhood, anyone even passing through the neighborhood
Speaker 1: to enjoy. If a park turns into a giant, open
Speaker 1: air latrine, it is much less enjoyable. I think, call
Speaker 1: me crazy, but that's what ends up happening in a
Speaker 1: lot of these. I've heard it's worse sin San Francisco
Speaker 1: than any other place in the country. I have friends
Speaker 1: and family members have been out of the West to
Speaker 1: specifically a Bay area recently, and they say it's just
Speaker 1: San Francisco is feeling more and more like a giant,
Speaker 1: open air homeless shelter. It's not good for the homeless
Speaker 1: people that are in these encampments, by the way, it's
Speaker 1: not helpful to them to be in a in a
Speaker 1: city that you know, gives them all kinds of free
Speaker 1: services and it really encourages them. I think San Francisco
Speaker 1: also gives a has a needle distribution programs. You've got
Speaker 1: hy hypodermic needles all over the city too now, and
Speaker 1: they're really ruining these places, folks. And by the way,
Speaker 1: what is one unifying characteristic of all of these cities,
Speaker 1: and of course the state of California, It is the
Speaker 1: Democrat stronghold, the bluest of the blue, as left wing,
Speaker 1: as progressive as it gets. At least New York City
Speaker 1: progressivism has a bit there's a bit more of a
Speaker 1: of an attachment to capitalism as a general concept, you know,
Speaker 1: because the Wall Street and all that stuff out in
Speaker 1: the progress out in the West Coast that progresses. Man,
Speaker 1: it's there. They're even in a whole other level. I think. Oh,
Speaker 1: here's another one. This is when all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: the problem of mass homelessness. Liberals start to pay attention
Speaker 1: when it is literally in their backyard. Right, when it's
Speaker 1: your backyard, How could you be so mean? Why don't
Speaker 1: you want to help the less fortunate? Oh? But when
Speaker 1: all of a sudden it means that they're celebrated cultural
Speaker 1: edifices are under assault, then there's a problem. Here's what
Speaker 1: this piece says. There's a fire last fall that threatened
Speaker 1: the Getty Museum because a fire started in a hillside
Speaker 1: homeless encampment, which drew calls from some of the richest
Speaker 1: Los Angeles neighborhoods for the government to do more to
Speaker 1: address the issue. Downtown business is also burned as a
Speaker 1: result of cooking fires that got out of control in
Speaker 1: homeless enclaves. This stuff is dangerous. Let's you get a
Speaker 1: homeless man walk into a steakhouse in Ventura in Los
Speaker 1: Angeles and stab a thirty five year old man as
Speaker 1: he ate dinner with his f five year old daughter
Speaker 1: sitting in his lap. Folks, okay. Allowing for widespread systematic
Speaker 1: homelessness on the streets without a city program to address
Speaker 1: it and deal with it right away is a big problem.
Speaker 1: I saw this in New York City. There was and
Speaker 1: in my neighborhood on the East side of New York
Speaker 1: growing up as a kid, there was an open air
Speaker 1: homeless shelter that was being operated right a block away
Speaker 1: from my church, and not by the church, by the way,
Speaker 1: by a bunch of Democrat politicians wanted to look like
Speaker 1: they were being so nice. You know what. It was loud,
Speaker 1: it was unsanitary, it was dangerous. Maybe now the liberals
Speaker 1: are starting to wake up because the loudness and the
Speaker 1: lack of sanitary conditions, and the danger is getting close
Speaker 1: enough to them. But you know, maybe they should also
Speaker 1: think there's some ideas we should revisit here about being
Speaker 1: a bleeding hard progressive just maybe, just maybe we'll be
Speaker 1: right back. So the left has some weird heroes. I
Speaker 1: don't mean today. I don't mean like Sarah Silverman, who's
Speaker 1: neither funny nor charming nor interesting. I mean historically too.
Speaker 1: I mean you will see people walking down the street
Speaker 1: progressives who think of themselves as very socially conscious, woke
Speaker 1: in the parlance of our times. They're so woke, and
Speaker 1: they will, whether they believe it or not, virtue signal
Speaker 1: by tying themselves to symbols of the wicket. You see
Speaker 1: this with Chekavara, for example, Ernesto Guivara. We all call
Speaker 1: him cha Chay just means dude. It's the nickname like Buck.
Speaker 1: Two points everybody, what's my real name? Some of your
Speaker 1: yelling James, and you're correct, But Ernesto che Guevara, Buck
Speaker 1: is my middle name, so that counts. Is somebody you'll
Speaker 1: see emblazoned on T shirts and they they won't know
Speaker 1: about his his authoritarianism, his brutality, his feelings towards what
Speaker 1: should be done to uh to gaze. He was a
Speaker 1: terrible fellow. I mean, Guivara was a really bad guy.
Speaker 1: But he's a revolutionary. And there's a picture of him
Speaker 1: where he looks like kind of a handsome Brooklyn hipster
Speaker 1: and so bam his face is on things. But you
Speaker 1: don't usually see a hipsterization of Karl Marx among the
Speaker 1: pop culture set, but sometimes it happens, And now we've
Speaker 1: got an example of that, courtesy of teen Vogue. So like,
Speaker 1: am I got ask like whatever? Because like if I
Speaker 1: just like listen to Aria Grande, like, I feel like
Speaker 1: I'll get like the bath sense of like hopital and
Speaker 1: like what's going on in the world because she like
Speaker 1: south Thumb and a sad as. The usage, the the
Speaker 1: overuse of like in speech is one of the things
Speaker 1: that we should all work to eradicate. And I will
Speaker 1: tell you I know some lots of very smart people
Speaker 1: who like just like just like they'll like talk like
Speaker 1: just like this like all like day. It needs to stop.
Speaker 1: It is bad. It's a habit, it is learned, and
Speaker 1: we need I know, this is a very get off
Speaker 1: my long thing. But you all have to agree with
Speaker 1: me as I said to you. Everyone should feel comfortable pausing.
Speaker 1: I do it all the time here on the show.
Speaker 1: I'm also speaking for three hours at a time. But
Speaker 1: everyone should feel comfortable pausing as they speak and not
Speaker 1: like feel like they have to like feel like every
Speaker 1: like pause like because like oh my anyway, so like commrqus.
Speaker 1: Back to teen Vogue, hairs an article and the title
Speaker 1: as who is all Marks made the anti capitalist scholar?
Speaker 1: That communist scholars ideas are more prevalent you might realize
Speaker 1: in teen Vogue And they go on to say this,
Speaker 1: this author in teen Vogue, which I didn't even really
Speaker 1: know was a thing, goes on to actually give some
Speaker 1: information about Marks. I'm like, you know, she has access
Speaker 1: to Wikipedia. That's good, so talking about the communist manifesto
Speaker 1: and socialism and labor and ye, there's a little bit
Speaker 1: of information in here. So I can't say that it's
Speaker 1: a total loss, because I'm sure there's some girls who
Speaker 1: are like, oh my gosh, like why is Santa Claus
Speaker 1: like writing about political things? It's like, it's not Santa Claus, honey,
Speaker 1: it's Krawl Marks close enough, though, Like what I've heard
Speaker 1: us he bring presents. Well, actually, in fact there's uh
Speaker 1: that's that's kind of part of the appeal of socialism
Speaker 1: is the promise that you're gonna get lots of free
Speaker 1: goodies in presidents. But it doesn't work out that way.
Speaker 1: So in a sense, all Marks is an evil Santa clause,
Speaker 1: he's Santa, but there aren't any actual presence. He's Santa
Speaker 1: who takes presence from you. But this piece goes on
Speaker 1: to then, after laying out some of the very basics
Speaker 1: about the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, goes in to say
Speaker 1: things like like this quote. Some examples of violence that
Speaker 1: aided in the establishment of capitalism in the United States
Speaker 1: include stealing the land of indigenous people and trafficking Africans
Speaker 1: through slavery end quote. So now we're gonna look at
Speaker 1: capitalism as anything bad that has happened during the period
Speaker 1: that capitalism has existed. Like, let's pick the worst stuff
Speaker 1: and blame that on capitalism, even if it has nothing
Speaker 1: to do per se with the economic system of capitalism.
Speaker 1: And see, this is polluting the minds of the youth.
Speaker 1: My friends. Socrates got in trouble for this. But teen
Speaker 1: Vogue is actually doing it. You mean Socrates as an aside.
Speaker 1: I saw over the weekend. I saw Bill and Ted's
Speaker 1: excellent ADVENTURER Bogus excellent, And you know, Keanu Reeves is
Speaker 1: one of my favorite actors. I'll say that. So I
Speaker 1: have a particular place place in my heart for Bill
Speaker 1: and Ted's excellent adventure Bogus. Journey was just like not
Speaker 1: not good enough. It was it was. It was bogus. Obviously,
Speaker 1: it's a well named movie in that the journey in
Speaker 1: the second one was was bogus. But there's more in
Speaker 1: this teen Vogue piece that I find troubling because I
Speaker 1: assume that only I can't imagine anyone who's not a
Speaker 1: teenage girl reads teen Vogue. I could be wrong, but
Speaker 1: there are things like this in this piece. While you
Speaker 1: may not necessarily identify as a Marxist, socialist or communist,
Speaker 1: you can still use Karl Marx's ideas to use history
Speaker 1: and class struggle to better understand how the current socio
Speaker 1: political climate came to be. Instead of looking at President
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's victory as a snapshot, we can turn to
Speaker 1: the bigger picture of what led up to the current moment.
Speaker 1: So Yeah, you can use Marx's ideas to better understand
Speaker 1: the current socio political climate in America. I guess that's
Speaker 1: somehow technically true, and that learning things means that you'll
Speaker 1: know more about other things as you learn them. But
Speaker 1: I don't think that Marx and his theories are particularly
Speaker 1: useful for understanding this moment in time in this country. Plus,
Speaker 1: like Marx, like if you give back and you look
Speaker 1: at like the history of like mark them, like there's
Speaker 1: not a lot of like really fancy designers in communist countries,
Speaker 1: like kind of thing that communist countries have really bad
Speaker 1: designers if you look at the photos. See, I want
Speaker 1: to scare the youth away from communism, so I want
Speaker 1: to tell them about things like that, like the cars
Speaker 1: were like really ugly and like slow and not like
Speaker 1: there were no beamers in like communist countries, like not
Speaker 1: like fancy ones at least stuff like that. Yeah, So
Speaker 1: if teen Vogue is going to get in on this game,
Speaker 1: I feel like we need to do our part and
Speaker 1: disabuse the youth of thinking that that Marx is cool.
Speaker 1: But what was it mark the two hundredth anniversary of
Speaker 1: Yeah it's too I'm sorry. Yeah, the two hundredth birthday
Speaker 1: of Karl Marx was May fifth. That was why this
Speaker 1: is getting getting some traction. Oh and maybe it will
Speaker 1: be good just asn't a side, Maybe it will be
Speaker 1: good to include in this piece about Marxism in teen
Speaker 1: Vogue some discussion of the hundreds of millions who were
Speaker 1: killed as a result of this guy's terrible ideas that
Speaker 1: negate basic human nature and their for dignity, and the
Speaker 1: billions of people throughout history who have been enslaved as
Speaker 1: a result of these terrible ideas. That also might be
Speaker 1: nice to throw into this Team Vogue article on Karl Mark.
Speaker 1: But like, happy birthday, Carl, you're like two hundred, that's
Speaker 1: like foe all like lmg, he's back with you now,
Speaker 1: because when it comes to the fight for truth, the
Speaker 1: fuck never stops. Team. Whenever I see something online and
Speaker 1: I think is really worthwhile, I try and share it
Speaker 1: with you, even if it's has nothing to do with
Speaker 1: the news. And I wanted to tell you about this one.
Speaker 1: This was off of a Twitter thread. Usually you don't
Speaker 1: find a lot of wisdom on Twitter, or a lot
Speaker 1: of things that inspire you pull at your heart strength.
Speaker 1: This one, though, I thought was worth sharing with you,
Speaker 1: in particulars from a father. Goyo was a Catholic priest,
Speaker 1: and here's what he shared. Meet Estella and Nicholas today
Speaker 1: they got married. For anyone else, this would just be
Speaker 1: a picture of a normal wedding day. But for these
Speaker 1: two there is much more than meets the eye. For them,
Speaker 1: this is a story of the triumph of love and hope.
Speaker 1: There's a nice photo of Nicholas and Estella looking very
Speaker 1: lovely on their wedding day. Father Goya writes, three weeks ago,
Speaker 1: I was approached by someone at my parish. Father, there's
Speaker 1: a couple who wants to get married. I'm glad to
Speaker 1: hear it. I said, tell them to call me and
Speaker 1: we will set up a meeting. Well, she said, this
Speaker 1: is the thing. They're in the hospital. Could you come
Speaker 1: see them please. I went to visit them, only to
Speaker 1: find out that Estella Abut, twenty six year old woman,
Speaker 1: had cancer that had spread all over her body. Doctors
Speaker 1: gave her a limited time of life. I saw her
Speaker 1: husband to be by her side with a sad smile
Speaker 1: in his eyes, asking me for hope and a miracle.
Speaker 1: I didn't know what to say. I can't perform miracles.
Speaker 1: But I listened and I did what I do best.
Speaker 1: I put a smile on Estella's face. Her smile brightened
Speaker 1: the room like I've never seen before. Yes, I told
Speaker 1: her when she asked me about her wedding, I will
Speaker 1: do the wedding. I went back home very sad. I
Speaker 1: never take the hard cases home with me in the hospitals,
Speaker 1: but this was different. I couldn't shake it off. Plus,
Speaker 1: I've never done an emergency wedding, so the nerves were
Speaker 1: pretty bad. Now I had to prepare for something I
Speaker 1: myself wasn't ready for. We agreed we would do a
Speaker 1: private wedding since she couldn't move much and had tons
Speaker 1: of needles. I would come to the room along with
Speaker 1: the witnesses and some family members. I'm not gonna lie.
Speaker 1: I felt really nervous. This is something they don't teach
Speaker 1: in seminary. The day came, I took my alb stole
Speaker 1: and ritual book, my holy water, of course, and I
Speaker 1: decided to stop at the store to buy her some flowers,
Speaker 1: since I didn't expect her to have many. I already
Speaker 1: told friends to make her feel like a bride and
Speaker 1: to put in a suit, I said for her groom.
Speaker 1: I drove to the hospital. When I got there, I
Speaker 1: couldn't believe what I saw. Sixty people were waiting, including
Speaker 1: doctors and her nurses. Estella felt so much better that
Speaker 1: the wedding would take place in the chapel, and she
Speaker 1: looked so beautiful and full of life. And there is
Speaker 1: a photo that he attaches of Estella looking absolutely splendid
Speaker 1: on her wedding day. Father writes, I gave her the
Speaker 1: biquet of white roses, and smiling timidly, she said, thank you, father,
Speaker 1: this is the dream of my life. I never thought
Speaker 1: I could do it before my life was over. I
Speaker 1: am telling you. I had to summon all my strength
Speaker 1: not to cry, so I just smiled back and helped
Speaker 1: her up. I accompanied both groom and bride to the chapel,
Speaker 1: which was packed before we started. I'd never paid so
Speaker 1: much attention to those vows. I take you for better
Speaker 1: and worse in sickness and health, till death do us part.
Speaker 1: At this point, the sniffles and the tears were louder
Speaker 1: than music. Staff of the hospital were amazing. They prepared
Speaker 1: a surprise reception in less than twenty four hours. Then
Speaker 1: the groom said to me, thank you Father. All I
Speaker 1: wanted was for God to bless my love for her,
Speaker 1: and it happened. I don't know what the future has
Speaker 1: for Estella Nicholas. I don't know what will happen tomorrow.
Speaker 1: But today they enjoyed the miracle of love that gives
Speaker 1: strength to the sick. Today, hope, faith, and love. One
Speaker 1: and one more day, we all gave thanks to God
Speaker 1: so they experience the love that conquers the hopeless heart,
Speaker 1: sadness and suffering, the love that brings tears of joy
Speaker 1: in health and illness, till death breaks the earthly bond.
Speaker 1: My dear friends, I love being part of your witness,
Speaker 1: Estella and Nicholas. God loves you. From Father Goya. Time
Speaker 1: to spread some freedom coast to coast. He's a lean,
Speaker 1: mean analysis machine. Team Buck, it's time for roll call.
Speaker 1: I don't even know how I would characterize that music
Speaker 1: we just played. It feels like it's it's multiple genres.
Speaker 1: It's kind of like aggressive elevator music. You know, it's
Speaker 1: it's the music where you're you're not supposed to hear it,
Speaker 1: but for a second you might catch yourself like ooh,
Speaker 1: I gotta sway those hips side to side with this
Speaker 1: elevator music. I hope you all had a great Mother's Day.
Speaker 1: I made my now world famous thanks to the Stephen
Speaker 1: Colbert Show and my world famous eggs, which I will say,
Speaker 1: we're delicious. The eggs I nailed because I make eggs
Speaker 1: almost every day, and I can tell you that I'm
Speaker 1: actually leaner and in better health now than I was
Speaker 1: when I used to eat like a big bowl of
Speaker 1: special K to start my day. That was also before
Speaker 1: I knew I had Celiac disease. But I'm not gonna
Speaker 1: lie to you because I did not manage to nail everything.
Speaker 1: We had a great Mother's Day brunch. I was with
Speaker 1: my siblings, my two awesome brothers, my amazing little sis,
Speaker 1: and my parents, Mom and Dad. And you know, we
Speaker 1: made mom because we have a great mom a a
Speaker 1: very nice Mother's Day brunch I nailed. I nailed the bacon.
Speaker 1: I got thick cut bacon from Italy in New York City,
Speaker 1: which is this Italian kind of a gourmet Italian mall
Speaker 1: if it's like a big super food store. But I
Speaker 1: got the thick cut bait. I mean, you can really
Speaker 1: taste the pork. It's really phenomenal. And that came out
Speaker 1: very well, and the eggs came out very well. And
Speaker 1: I got some roast potatoes too. I thought I would
Speaker 1: flash fry. This is where this is where I went wrong.
Speaker 1: I thought I would flash fry the roast potatoes. And
Speaker 1: sure enough they didn't get so much flash flash fried
Speaker 1: as flash soggy. And yeah, it wasn't really the all
Speaker 1: time best move that I've ever pulled off. What idiot?
Speaker 1: Oh what a loser? Good good more for me and you.
Speaker 1: But other than that, everything was great. We had a
Speaker 1: really good time, really enjoyed ourselves. And there you have it,
Speaker 1: and I hope you had a great time too. Let's
Speaker 1: get into a roll call Facebook dot com slash Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton if you want to send me your thoughts. Also
Speaker 1: official Team Buck at gmail dot com. One bit of business,
Speaker 1: I actually have to put off the announcement about why
Speaker 1: I'm in the swamp for one more week. It's not
Speaker 1: up to meet team. What can I tell you? One
Speaker 1: more week and then we can announce and we will
Speaker 1: be good to go. It's exciting stuff, that much, I
Speaker 1: can tell you. All Right. First, up here we have Sterling,
Speaker 1: who writes buck Love the show. Your analysis is the
Speaker 1: best out there. Something I noticed when considering the differences
Speaker 1: between the investigations of the Clintons her classified server and emails,
Speaker 1: and the Trump investigation. Didn't they offer immunity to almost
Speaker 1: everyone they talked to in the Hillary investigation, and their
Speaker 1: justification was that they just wanted to get to the truth.
Speaker 1: Has anyone in the Trump campaign or administration been offered immunity?
Speaker 1: You know, Sterling, this is a great point. It's one
Speaker 1: I've made before on the show in different ways, and
Speaker 1: I appreciate you raising it once again. And it's really
Speaker 1: the disparity that we see from the prosecutors on the
Speaker 1: investigators and prosecutors on the one side with the Clintons
Speaker 1: versus the way it's going on with Trump. They gave
Speaker 1: not just every benefit of the doubt, but really bent
Speaker 1: over backwards trying to make sure that there was no
Speaker 1: way that anyone could run a foul of a process charge,
Speaker 1: right of lying under oath, or obstruction or destruction of
Speaker 1: evidence or any of that with the Hillary probe, And
Speaker 1: on the Trump side of the equation, they are doing
Speaker 1: everything in their power to make sure that they can
Speaker 1: get people for those reasons. You know, the show Billions
Speaker 1: is pretty good in a lot of ways. Some stuff
Speaker 1: is a little over the top. It's a showtime show.
Speaker 1: I was watching it this past weekend, and you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's one of these shows where you finally see
Speaker 1: that prosecutors. Prosecutors are not, in fact these paragons of
Speaker 1: virtue who do not in any way have politics influencing
Speaker 1: or thinking. You know, you see in Billions a guy
Speaker 1: who is trying to become governor spoiler alert, sorry, but
Speaker 1: who's doing all sorts of political machinations behind the scenes,
Speaker 1: including those that benefit him specifically. Really interesting from a
Speaker 1: recent episode, by the way, was this is a total asside.
Speaker 1: But since I was talking about food and cooking before,
Speaker 1: they eat something called an ortolan on the show, and
Speaker 1: I will be honest with you, I had never heard
Speaker 1: of this before. So an ortolan is a delicacy. This
Speaker 1: became popular in well they say it was popular even
Speaker 1: an ancient Rome, but it certainly is still something that
Speaker 1: is liked by a certain contingent in France. It's an
Speaker 1: ordolon is a songbird and what they do and by
Speaker 1: the way, it's illegal to eat it, and it's considered
Speaker 1: a great mark of elitism if you ever get the
Speaker 1: chance to eat it. So an ordolon is this songbird.
Speaker 1: And when you eat it, you cover your head, and
Speaker 1: this was all on the show. You cover your head
Speaker 1: in a white napkin, a white cloth, the idea being
Speaker 1: to shield yourself from God. That's kind of the the
Speaker 1: lore behind it. Other people say it's actually just so
Speaker 1: you have the vapors, the sense of the food, the
Speaker 1: smells that come together, or it's you know, you enjoy
Speaker 1: it more if you have this nap over your head.
Speaker 1: But so, this is just a song bird that they
Speaker 1: keep in darkness and or they blind it. Actually it's
Speaker 1: a little bird and then it gorges on grains and grapes.
Speaker 1: It becomes incredibly fat, and then it is a thrown
Speaker 1: alive into a vat of armagnac brandy, so it you
Speaker 1: drown the bird in brandy, which then of course also
Speaker 1: marinates the bird after you've made it insanely fat, and
Speaker 1: then you eat the whole thing, kind of like a
Speaker 1: soft shell crab. And it's called an ortolan. And this
Speaker 1: is illegal everywhere. Now they're protected. In fact, the birds
Speaker 1: are protected. They eat it on the show Billions, though,
Speaker 1: because it's now considered a super secret elitist thing to
Speaker 1: do anyway, So I learned about ortolans from Billions. But
Speaker 1: more importantly, with prosecutors, you see that they are very political,
Speaker 1: and you get a sense of that from the show
Speaker 1: we have. Next up here, Vicky, who writes Shield's Hi,
Speaker 1: this is why God in Heaven chose Donald Trump to
Speaker 1: become president, to clean house with all the lies and
Speaker 1: corruption going on for decades. We all knew it, and
Speaker 1: even some on the other side knew it, but we're
Speaker 1: not able to speak, and probably because lives were in danger.
Speaker 1: This is a great and scary time to be alive
Speaker 1: and aware of the business in DC. Keep up the
Speaker 1: good work, Vicky. Well, Vicky, thank you so much. Appreciate
Speaker 1: the words of support, and thank you so much for
Speaker 1: writing it on Roll Call. Next up, Ryan who writes, Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: I love your show listening in via podcast. Could you
Speaker 1: post a list of your sponsors and associated codes somewhere
Speaker 1: on your show site? Thanks and Shield's high Ryan. Ryan.
Speaker 1: It's very kind of you, and it is really important. Folks.
Speaker 1: Whenever you hear me talking about our sponsors, remember those
Speaker 1: are companies that like my show, like what I'm doing,
Speaker 1: appreciate the work and effort that goes into this, and
Speaker 1: so it really is a partnership. And when you use
Speaker 1: that promo code, you get a discount, which is great,
Speaker 1: but it's also a way of casting a vote for
Speaker 1: the freedom hunt for this show. The Buck Sexton Show
Speaker 1: is what it's actually called. But that's it's really important.
Speaker 1: It really helps. It means a lot. And these are
Speaker 1: when I tell you about my sponsors. I mean, I
Speaker 1: drink black Rifle all the time. I'm actually gonna get
Speaker 1: black Rifle sent to my new office here in DC
Speaker 1: as well as at home. So I'm all about it.
Speaker 1: If you're somebody who runs a company and you want
Speaker 1: someone to do background investigation services for you, or just
Speaker 1: background or just background and vetting in general, global verification,
Speaker 1: I know the CEO, it's a company of great guys.
Speaker 1: But when you call them, we don't have a promo code.
Speaker 1: Just tell them you know, we learned about you in
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show. That stuff makes all the difference,
Speaker 1: it really does. And you know we do this show.
Speaker 1: It's obviously free for all of the listeners. But if
Speaker 1: you can see your way, see your way fit to
Speaker 1: do so. Please check out our sponsors, use our promo code,
Speaker 1: spread the word, tell people that you heard about it here.
Speaker 1: It means a lot. It means a lot to me.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. So oh, Buck fifty for a
Speaker 1: black rifle. By the way, Buck one five. So next
Speaker 1: up here. We have so many good callers, so much fun, Joshua.
Speaker 1: When I say callers, I mean writers. Pardon me. Hey there, Buck,
Speaker 1: big fan United States Marine Corps Active. I'm a fan
Speaker 1: of yours. And Joe Rogans would like to see you
Speaker 1: on his show or vice versa. He's got a really
Speaker 1: negative opinion on Trump, and I get that Trump is
Speaker 1: not perfect, but I'd like to see you set Rogan
Speaker 1: straight and maybe help him see the light a little. Anyways,
Speaker 1: take care and shields high ps. I love Rogan, but
Speaker 1: his Trump bashing is over the line and just drives
Speaker 1: me insane. Well, Joshua, first of all, thank you for
Speaker 1: your service. I'm always especially honored to have such a
Speaker 1: a fantastic contingent of active and former US military listening
Speaker 1: into this program. We really have. It's a core look,
Speaker 1: it's a core audience for US. I like to think
Speaker 1: it's just because of the content. Maybe it's also because
Speaker 1: I have a little bit of a richer understanding. I
Speaker 1: think of what a lot of the military goes through,
Speaker 1: having lived for long stretches of time on military basis
Speaker 1: here and abroad, having spent a lot of time in
Speaker 1: some of the diciers parts of the globe, a Rock
Speaker 1: and Afghanistan notably. So that's one other place that I
Speaker 1: think we or one other way that we can connect.
Speaker 1: As to Rogan, I'd love to do a show. And
Speaker 1: you know what's actually something that for those of you
Speaker 1: who are so interested. I take guest singestions from all
Speaker 1: of you. When you email me or you send me
Speaker 1: a note on Facebook, you say, hey, check this guy
Speaker 1: out or this gal out. I looked them up and
Speaker 1: if we have a way of working them into the show.
Speaker 1: I've brought on lots of guests because of audience request.
Speaker 1: So if you want me to do the Joe Rogan Show,
Speaker 1: and you're a constant listener or you know, a frequent
Speaker 1: listener to the show, reach out to Joe say hey,
Speaker 1: you should have bucks X, then on you'd be surprised.
Speaker 1: You might be like, yeah, you know what that x
Speaker 1: CIA analyst dude with the poofy hair. I'll give him
Speaker 1: a shot. You know, we'll talk about some stuff, so
Speaker 1: I'd be happy to do a show. I think Joe
Speaker 1: does some really interesting work. And Joshua, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for the suggestion. Let's see here. Bryce has been
Speaker 1: writing here. He writes, I've been trying to think of
Speaker 1: something worthwhile, but to no avail. I have a question
Speaker 1: though in your opening sequence there are two most Morse
Speaker 1: code letters. Is there some meaning to this? I would
Speaker 1: have expected BS, not BG, Shields High, Bryce, Bryce, I
Speaker 1: have no idea, man, I don't know Morse code. I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna lie to you. So you caught me, my friend.
Speaker 1: That's gonna be it for the Hut today. Thank you
Speaker 1: so much for hanging out with me. I will be
Speaker 1: back with you every day this week from the swamp
Speaker 1: where I am live and things are steamy and getting swampier.
Speaker 1: Some of your thoughts. Please tell somebody about the show,
Speaker 1: and until tomorrow you have your orders, my friends. Shields
Speaker 1: Hip nine Line Apparel is a veteran owned and operated
Speaker 1: patriotic lifestyle brand and as a giveback company, Nine Line
Speaker 1: is proud to announce a partnership with NASCAR driver Jeffrey
Speaker 1: Earnhardt to give back to children of our nation's fallen
Speaker 1: from now through the end of May fifteenth, so not
Speaker 1: a lot of time here, folks. Go to nine Line
Speaker 1: Apparel dot com to get there. Remember the Fallen Memorial
Speaker 1: Day T shirt. With each shirt purchase, you have the
Speaker 1: option of submitting the name of a fallen soldier and
Speaker 1: these heroes names will cover Jeffrey Earnhardt's car at the
Speaker 1: Coca Cola six hundred over Memorial Day weekend in Charlotte.
Speaker 1: The charity that nine Line and Jeffrey Earnhardt are partnering
Speaker 1: with is Angels of America's Fallen. They support the children
Speaker 1: of those loss due to military service, So please support
Speaker 1: our fallen heroes. Go to nine Line Apparel dot com
Speaker 1: to get it's exclusive Memorial Day T shirt. Do so
Speaker 1: if you can before the end of May fifteenth, so
Speaker 1: we've just got a short period here. Nine Line Apparel
Speaker 1: dot com. Support our fallen heroes.