Speaker 1: M you are entering the freedom hunt. Are the Kobe
Speaker 1: memos his interactions with Trump going to be shared publicly?
Speaker 1: And what could that mean for sank to Komey himself.
Speaker 1: Plus Muller has abused prosecutorial discretion so many times in
Speaker 1: the past. What should that mean about how we judge
Speaker 1: McKay the FBI's number two, and the charges that he
Speaker 1: may in fact face. Also, the Starbucks arrestes have spoken out.
Speaker 1: We've got more on that and update on the North
Speaker 1: Korea talks. Stay with me. This is the buck Sexton Show,
Speaker 1: where the mission or mission is to decode what really
Speaker 1: matters with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake American, You're a
Speaker 1: great American Again the buck Sexton Show be end. No,
Speaker 1: there has been no collusion. They won't find any collusion.
Speaker 1: It doesn't exist. As far as the two gentlemen you
Speaker 1: told me about, uh, they've been saying I'm going to
Speaker 1: get rid of them for the last three months, four months,
Speaker 1: five months, and uh, they're still here. So we want
Speaker 1: to get the investigation over with, done with, put it
Speaker 1: behind us. Welcome to the Bucks Actions Show, everybody. Great
Speaker 1: to have you. I'm coming to you live from San Diego. California,
Speaker 1: which I would say is sunny San Diego, but somehow
Speaker 1: I brought the cold in the rain with me. Womp.
Speaker 1: Trump is right. Trump is right. They are continuing this charade,
Speaker 1: or charade if you want to sound really fancy of
Speaker 1: caring about what the truth of the investigation into Russia
Speaker 1: collusion is. What, as we know, it is just to
Speaker 1: get Trump never Trump anti Trump operation in disguise. That's
Speaker 1: what this is all about. They keep talking about whether
Speaker 1: they should pass legislation to protect Rosenstein and Mueller, and
Speaker 1: as Trump has putted out himself, they run this story
Speaker 1: whenever it feels like there's a hole in their news cycle, right, CNN,
Speaker 1: MSNBC and others. Oh yeah, let's just let's pretend that
Speaker 1: the the firing of Rosenstein is imminent. That will get
Speaker 1: people to tune in. Let's get everyone all riled up
Speaker 1: that it's just, uh, any moment now, Mueller is gonna
Speaker 1: get tossed. As I've said to you, I'm much more
Speaker 1: open to the idea than a lot of other conservatives are.
Speaker 1: I figure, you know, rip the band aid off and
Speaker 1: don't think twice about it. But you know, there's some
Speaker 1: word that the Senate may go around Mitch McConnell and
Speaker 1: take action on this. And as I've said to you,
Speaker 1: I think this causes problems just from a constitutional separation
Speaker 1: of powers perspective. The Senate can't be passing laws that
Speaker 1: says what the executive branch can do within the executive
Speaker 1: branch about appointees and decisions. That that's that's a no
Speaker 1: go as far as I can see. Uh. But more
Speaker 1: to the point about the complaints around the imminent firing
Speaker 1: of Rosenstein and Mueller, you'll notice that the media are
Speaker 1: not very good at predicting things. They weren't good at
Speaker 1: predicting the the onset of fascism in this country. That's
Speaker 1: what they said was they said that was gonna happen.
Speaker 1: There's gonna be fascism in America because of Trump. Nope,
Speaker 1: that didn't happen at all. In fact, countries doing quite
Speaker 1: well by all the ways we can measure it. Still
Speaker 1: a lot of work to be done, no question, But
Speaker 1: they're they're not good at predicting what's gonna happen. They
Speaker 1: have been predicting Donald Trump's regimes demise, administrations demised for
Speaker 1: quite some time. I don't think it's gonna happen. In fact,
Speaker 1: that we're reports today that Rosenstein has told Trump that
Speaker 1: he is not a part of any criminal investigation. Now,
Speaker 1: unlike the other side, we can't make too much of that,
Speaker 1: because it is true that you can go from being
Speaker 1: not a part to a part of an investigation the
Speaker 1: blink of an eye. And when you have a headhunter
Speaker 1: out there like Mueller who is trying to just take
Speaker 1: people and ruin them, right, who who is on a
Speaker 1: quest for deep state vengeance against Trump and his team,
Speaker 1: you can't take anything for granted. But it feels like
Speaker 1: I'm actually not so bad at predictions. Those of you
Speaker 1: who are listening to the show yesterday, remember that a
Speaker 1: big theme what I started with was, you know, we
Speaker 1: need to fight back, and the good people in this
Speaker 1: country need to push those in positions of power, whether
Speaker 1: appointed officials are elected officials who see things from the
Speaker 1: same perspective as us, meaning that we believe in individual
Speaker 1: rights and liberty and a free society and not some
Speaker 1: kind of Democrat, single party state soft authoritarianism. Right. People
Speaker 1: who don't they don't want that for the country need
Speaker 1: to actually throw some punches. Not I don't mean literally
Speaker 1: punch anyone, but they need to be fighting back, fight
Speaker 1: fire with fire. And today sure as night follows day,
Speaker 1: or is it as sure as day follows night, whichever
Speaker 1: one of those things is the one you're supposed to say.
Speaker 1: We have two instances of very deep swamp state dwellers
Speaker 1: or wait, deep states. Actually, I kind of like the
Speaker 1: way that came about deep state swamp dwellers or deep
Speaker 1: state swamps deep swamp state dwellers, whichever one you prefer. Um,
Speaker 1: they are on the hot seat. Now McCabe and Comy
Speaker 1: may in fact get a little bit of justice that
Speaker 1: they are going to be very unhappy with. Let's let's
Speaker 1: take these, Uh, let's take these piece by piece. First
Speaker 1: and foremost, you have the criminal referral within the Office
Speaker 1: of the Inspector General of Remember of the McCabe situation. Now,
Speaker 1: Andy McCabe was that guy who got fired. And I
Speaker 1: remember when his firing happened. I was on TV. I
Speaker 1: was talking about it over Fox and elsewhere, or I
Speaker 1: guess just a Fox. They didn't want to hear what
Speaker 1: I had to say about it at see ann no surprise,
Speaker 1: not that I would go on anyway. Um, but when
Speaker 1: he was fired, there was all these people in the
Speaker 1: left saying, oh, it's terrible, how would they do this?
Speaker 1: How would you fire McCabe? And then the Inspector General's
Speaker 1: report came out and it's pretty clear, Yeah, you can
Speaker 1: fire him because he was lying and leaking and those
Speaker 1: are problems. Those are things that you're not supposed to
Speaker 1: do when you are, uh, the number two at the FBI.
Speaker 1: That's not the way it's supposed to work. So there
Speaker 1: are real reasons for it. There are real reasons for
Speaker 1: McCabe to get tossed. But then people start to ask
Speaker 1: the other question here, which is, will hold on a second,
Speaker 1: why is it if we are going to live in
Speaker 1: a country where people like James Comey will be thank
Speaker 1: to Comey so haughty about how people can't lie, you know,
Speaker 1: in the process of investigations or to to federal government officials,
Speaker 1: you can't lie. Well, shouldn't that apply even more so
Speaker 1: to those empowered by the federal government than it does
Speaker 1: to the average citizen. If the people that are given
Speaker 1: the authority to show up at your home with guns
Speaker 1: and you are not allowed to defend yourself, you are
Speaker 1: required to just go with them when they say go,
Speaker 1: and they can put you in a cell, and they
Speaker 1: can do all of that because they claim that you
Speaker 1: have had something untrue, even if you've committed no other crime.
Speaker 1: If those people lie, shouldn't we have an even higher
Speaker 1: expectation that they will be punished. Shouldn't we demand that
Speaker 1: they have to live by the same regime, the same
Speaker 1: rules that they enforced against all of us. And oh, yes,
Speaker 1: that's right, Trump and Manafort and Flynn and the whole crew.
Speaker 1: That guy Spurgan Skimmergan from the Netherlands who got like
Speaker 1: thirty days in jail, Smurgan, I forget his name. Uh
Speaker 1: he's Dutch. So I think that's normal that we would
Speaker 1: expect that. In fact, I think it's more than just
Speaker 1: okay for us to think that way. We have to
Speaker 1: think that way. And why I was saying yesterday we
Speaker 1: have to fight fire with fire, And I really came
Speaker 1: in the show and I was just I was pumped
Speaker 1: up about this because I go back. I keep doing
Speaker 1: this in my head. I cycle through all the cases
Speaker 1: the big political corruption case is and the cases where
Speaker 1: there was a huge political outcome that turned on prosecutorial discretion,
Speaker 1: And what do you see immediately when you just I'm
Speaker 1: telling you. As an exercise, do this yourself. Think about
Speaker 1: a major political corruption case where the Democrats wanted one
Speaker 1: outcome and the Republicans wanted another, whatever it may be,
Speaker 1: and somehow every time it goes against the Republicans, and
Speaker 1: there's nothing equivalent on the Democrats side that I can
Speaker 1: think of, And I can think of a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of ones at the top of my head of the
Speaker 1: Republicans Scooter Livery case, Republican got completely post completely ted
Speaker 1: Stevens case, Republican hosed investigations never just even prosecutions, investigations
Speaker 1: of big political figures. How many times do you know
Speaker 1: of where a Democrat was investigated based on flimsy to
Speaker 1: no evidence and either hounded out of office or forced
Speaker 1: to lose an election because of a criminal investigation that
Speaker 1: went nowhere. Because I could think of a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of times has happened to Republicans. Right, Governor Scott Walker, Wisconsin,
Speaker 1: they were trying to get him. You had a rogue
Speaker 1: prosecutor up there in the state of Wisconsin, a state
Speaker 1: prosecutor who was going after the governor. Locked a woman
Speaker 1: up in prison because she made a phone call. And
Speaker 1: I remember I covered the case. This was years ago
Speaker 1: where everyone forgets about what happened Wisconsin now, but the
Speaker 1: Left was they were going all in, throwing the dirtiest
Speaker 1: stuff they could at Walker and his people. They locked
Speaker 1: a woman up because she took a phone call in
Speaker 1: a government building when she was supposed to be outside
Speaker 1: of government building. It was a disgrace, and it was
Speaker 1: a complete, complete backing all of prosecutorial misconduct, and it
Speaker 1: was just grotesque, and yed Rick Perry faced their criminal
Speaker 1: investigation with the threat of a criminal investigation when he
Speaker 1: was a governor. Chris Christie any charges there Bridge Gate, though,
Speaker 1: which I remember Rachel matt Out, who thinks of herself
Speaker 1: as a very erudite person on the I think it
Speaker 1: was a Bill Marshall saying was the most delicious political
Speaker 1: scandal of her lifetime. So she's either really wildly disingenuous
Speaker 1: or just not nearly in the universe of as smart
Speaker 1: as she thinks she is in her audience thing she is.
Speaker 1: It's one or the other. Because that was a boring
Speaker 1: political story and Chris Kristy didn't do anything wrong, and
Speaker 1: that not that I'm some big Christie fan. I don't
Speaker 1: like the thing where he showed up on the beach
Speaker 1: when it was closed. Everybody else, I'm just gonna say
Speaker 1: that he forget about it. But oh, Governor Bob McDonald
Speaker 1: another one. Supreme Court had to slap down those federal
Speaker 1: prosecutors and this, folks, I don't even have notes in
Speaker 1: front of me for this. I'm just rattling this off
Speaker 1: the top of my head. And then you look at
Speaker 1: the other side, Hillary Clinton, anything there, Oh, no no charges,
Speaker 1: no charges. Absolutely violated criminal statutes in the handling classified
Speaker 1: information and the destruction of evidence, by the way, and
Speaker 1: I'm sure if they had tried to actually write down
Speaker 1: what they were saying or cord them, they would have
Speaker 1: gotten Huma and Cheryl Mills and Hillary lying and lying
Speaker 1: and lying. I don't recall the answer to that one.
Speaker 1: Something is really rotten and wrong. And yes, there is
Speaker 1: a cabal. There is a Mulley, mull Mueller, Comy McCabe cabal.
Speaker 1: There is there are these people that are involved in
Speaker 1: these very high profile investigations that have come down on
Speaker 1: on this issue in a way that is obviously partisan
Speaker 1: time and again, and we need to put a stop
Speaker 1: to this. And I used to think that maybe we
Speaker 1: could convince them to stop abusing their power if we
Speaker 1: just spoke up about it. But now I'm convinced. And
Speaker 1: this is where I get back to yesterday and today,
Speaker 1: fight fire with fire. McCabe bled The o i G.
Speaker 1: Makes it clear, The Inspector General, the FBI makes it
Speaker 1: plain and simple. McCabe's a liar lie to federal investigators
Speaker 1: about matters that affect the United States government, affect the presidency.
Speaker 1: He's gotta face, he's got to pay the piper. He's
Speaker 1: got to face the full weight of the law the
Speaker 1: same way time and again in his career. He has
Speaker 1: done that to others. He has jammed up people for
Speaker 1: far less. And if he has a problem with this,
Speaker 1: if he thinks that he's allowed to lie, whereas the
Speaker 1: rest of us can't. Just take a look back at
Speaker 1: what Comey says in his book about how proud he
Speaker 1: is of the Martha Stewart prosecution. Again, I'm not some
Speaker 1: big Martha Stewart fan, but come on, she does make
Speaker 1: the best pheasants scented cinnamon sticks, which she matches to
Speaker 1: all of the drapes in the house. But really, it's
Speaker 1: time that we hold these people accountable. And the only
Speaker 1: way we can do that is to make sure that
Speaker 1: they suffer the same consequences that they would enforce, but
Speaker 1: all the rest of us. So when the i G
Speaker 1: has now, as the i G has now turned over
Speaker 1: McCabe to the U S Attorney for possible criminal charges,
Speaker 1: they better have a darn good reason why they don't
Speaker 1: charge him, and it better not be we're just exercising
Speaker 1: our discretion in his behalf. Enough of that. We know
Speaker 1: that discretion is a one way street these days when
Speaker 1: it comes to high profile federal cases and the Conservatives
Speaker 1: get hosed, that's enough. No more of that. And Democrats
Speaker 1: get to get out of jail free card speaking to
Speaker 1: get out of jail free cards, and Democrats and all
Speaker 1: the rest of it. It's not just McKay who's in
Speaker 1: some hot water today. Call me, well, he's on his
Speaker 1: book tour. He's talking a lot, you know, call me
Speaker 1: forgot something very important. It's probably forgotten a lot of
Speaker 1: things that are very important, like don't be a huge weirdo.
Speaker 1: But when you are even possibly going to be under
Speaker 1: suspicion for anything, don't talk a lot. As I always
Speaker 1: tell you. And this is free legal advice. For me
Speaker 1: to you, if you ever, ever ever are arrested, say nothing,
Speaker 1: not officer, I'm sure I'm innocent. Not Hey, can I
Speaker 1: get a donut? Hey? Do you want a donut? They
Speaker 1: won't like that you say nothing. Comey has been saying
Speaker 1: a lot Comy. He has made it very easy for
Speaker 1: someone us to say, hold on a second, based on
Speaker 1: some of your public statements, show you've got some You've
Speaker 1: got some explaining to do, and we're gonna find out
Speaker 1: some stuff now that could lead to a criminal referral
Speaker 1: about James Comey as well? Oh what am I talking about?
Speaker 1: What is this delicious teas that I have thrown out there?
Speaker 1: Stay with me, We'll be right back. Not everybody loves Comy,
Speaker 1: despite what he seems to think, the entirety of America
Speaker 1: has not round like, Oh, come me is the man
Speaker 1: we've been waiting for. That is not the case. Call
Speaker 1: me got heckled actually at a book signing, and you
Speaker 1: did not look. Anyone can get heckled. But am I
Speaker 1: going to enjoy the audio we have of Comy getting
Speaker 1: heckled in particular? Yes? I am, because why not? It's
Speaker 1: my freedom hunt and I'll do with it what I
Speaker 1: want how is it ethical to brief the president of
Speaker 1: the United States on an unverifiable and salacious dossier, And
Speaker 1: how is it ethical leadership to not tell him that
Speaker 1: his political opposition, Hillary Clinton, paid for that. You are
Speaker 1: not an ethical leader. You're gonna get prosecuted, Comy, You're
Speaker 1: gonna get locked up. Now, you might think that that
Speaker 1: that lady sounds a little bit like she could use
Speaker 1: a nap or something, that she's a little little little tense.
Speaker 1: But maybe she's right about Coby. Maybe uh, maybe com me'
Speaker 1: is in some trouble. Before I get to that, though,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna I'm gonna keep you on the cliffhanger with
Speaker 1: this one before I get to that. Her allegation about
Speaker 1: how you know, he briefed a in unverified dossie. I
Speaker 1: gotta tell you if I had ever tried that, I
Speaker 1: can just tell you this. If when I was a
Speaker 1: little CI analyst, you know, way way down the ORG chart,
Speaker 1: and I had said, Hey, you know what we should do.
Speaker 1: We should tell the president about this piece of total
Speaker 1: garbage oppo research, just so he knows it's out there.
Speaker 1: People would have been like, we're going to escort you
Speaker 1: out now, and you're not allowed back. But calmly thought
Speaker 1: this was a good idea. Comby doesn't have any good
Speaker 1: answers as to why he thought it was a good idea.
Speaker 1: But play a teen. In January two seventeen, when you
Speaker 1: met with President Trump and you did that oral presentation
Speaker 1: of what's in the two page memo summarizing the Steel Dossier,
Speaker 1: we know from the book that you talked about these
Speaker 1: unverified allegations involving him in prostitutes. Um, did you did
Speaker 1: you brief him about any any of the other things
Speaker 1: in the Steel Dossier claims that his associates Michael Colin
Speaker 1: or Paul Manafort were potentially working with the Russians? Or
Speaker 1: was it only about the prostitute? Was only about the
Speaker 1: salacious part of it? Why? Why only about that? Because
Speaker 1: that was the part that the leaders of the intelligence
Speaker 1: community agreed he needed to be told about because we
Speaker 1: knew it and thought it was about to become public,
Speaker 1: and if it was true, we didn't whether it was true.
Speaker 1: It would be important to let him know this as
Speaker 1: part of a defensive briefing. No, no, no, By the way,
Speaker 1: the leaders of the intel community, you mean, like Clapper
Speaker 1: and Brennan who are rapidly anti Trump, I mean hate Trump.
Speaker 1: They wanted him to know. I think they were trolling him.
Speaker 1: I think they were extending a particular finger in Trump's direction.
Speaker 1: I do not think they were trying to do the
Speaker 1: president United States of solid and I do not think
Speaker 1: that they were respecting the power of the offices. They
Speaker 1: held that to the topic intel positions, and also I
Speaker 1: think they wanted to get it into the official record.
Speaker 1: But let's talk about Comy's official record coming up. He's
Speaker 1: holding the line for America. But Sexton is back. The
Speaker 1: Justice Department is also expected today to begin the process
Speaker 1: of letting Congress see your memos detailing your interactions with
Speaker 1: President Trump. Is that the right decision to let Congress
Speaker 1: see them? I don't know, because I don't know what
Speaker 1: considerations the Department has taken into account. It's fine by
Speaker 1: me if you don't care. I don't care. I don't
Speaker 1: have any I don't have any views on it. I'm
Speaker 1: totally fine with transparency. I've tried to be transparent throughout this,
Speaker 1: and I think what folks will see if they get
Speaker 1: to see the memos is I've been consistent since the
Speaker 1: very beginning, right after my encounters with President Trump, and
Speaker 1: I'm consistent in the book and try to be transparent
Speaker 1: in the book as well. Now, Comy's memos might be
Speaker 1: gonna be shared with Congress, but they also, um, they
Speaker 1: also may make their way beyond just that. Comy's memos,
Speaker 1: if they get seen by the public, would be quite interesting.
Speaker 1: I think here's what's going on. We've heard from at
Speaker 1: least I think it was Chuck Grassley that there was
Speaker 1: classified information there, and now reporting from seeing that and
Speaker 1: others is that the memos are going to be made public.
Speaker 1: Here's meaning. So it's one thing for Congress to see them,
Speaker 1: but then they may be made public beyond that, And
Speaker 1: this is how it's gonna go down. Um, they can't
Speaker 1: redact what is in the memos for classified reasons, because
Speaker 1: then there's absolutely no question Comey would have lead classified
Speaker 1: information to the media right after leaving the FBI, and
Speaker 1: he's gonna be facing charges unless he gets the full
Speaker 1: Hillary treatment, and all of a sudden, the law is
Speaker 1: and the law anymore. But I don't know if Comy
Speaker 1: can count on someone else to pull a Comy for
Speaker 1: him the way he did for Hillary. I don't know.
Speaker 1: He might be in some trouble so they can't redact
Speaker 1: the information when I think it's more likely, you know,
Speaker 1: so that you're not gonna get memos released with black outlines,
Speaker 1: because that's gonna be us. You're saying, call me release classified.
Speaker 1: That's not gonna happen. If they released them publicly, though, um,
Speaker 1: then it would be a question of, well, is this
Speaker 1: information that could be even considered at the lowest level
Speaker 1: of classification. For example, is a meeting with the president,
Speaker 1: between the FBI director or with the FBI director just
Speaker 1: that discusses anything of substance considered classified information? The answer
Speaker 1: is yes. So if the FBI director Comey sat down
Speaker 1: with Trump and all they talked about was uh, you know, hey,
Speaker 1: like you know, if it was Hilary yoga and whangs.
Speaker 1: But you know, if they all that, he was talking
Speaker 1: about stuff that no one really cares about. Okay, fun,
Speaker 1: you know, if it's hey, you know, Jim, just want
Speaker 1: to know that you're on board with the new administration
Speaker 1: and be come over to the residents and have you know,
Speaker 1: dinner with me and Milania. Okay, yeah, that's not classified, right,
Speaker 1: I'm not trying to be dishonest about this. And I'm
Speaker 1: not trying to be sancta comus. You like that, right,
Speaker 1: I'm having fun with it now. But if there's any
Speaker 1: substantive information in there, a conversation that deals with even
Speaker 1: policy issues in a with any specificity between the FBI
Speaker 1: director and the President could very well be In fact,
Speaker 1: I would think in most cases would be considered classified
Speaker 1: information at least at the level of confidential, right, lowest
Speaker 1: level of classification. Uh So what would that mean, folks?
Speaker 1: If they release information that's borderline could be classified, but
Speaker 1: they're gonna say it's not classified. A lot of us
Speaker 1: are gonna say, so the fixes it once again, right
Speaker 1: because they know that they can't. They can't release stuff
Speaker 1: that is redacted. And I think that there's a very
Speaker 1: a good chance that we'll see this causes this causes
Speaker 1: some issues one way or another. Um, if the Comy
Speaker 1: memos are made public, then we will see first of all,
Speaker 1: what Comy was trying to construct as a narrative. Keep on,
Speaker 1: this is just his handwritten, so you're not gonna find
Speaker 1: anything bad about Comey in this. This is a one
Speaker 1: sided record. One of the reasons I would note, and
Speaker 1: this is an important aside, This is your free It's
Speaker 1: not really legal advice because I'm not a lawyer, so
Speaker 1: I don't don't I'm not actually giving legal advice, but
Speaker 1: you know your your free bit of legal wisdom. Uh do?
Speaker 1: You never want to sit down and allow and people
Speaker 1: will argue with me on this, and that's fine. You
Speaker 1: want an actual recording of a conversation that you would
Speaker 1: have and by what, by the way, how am I
Speaker 1: wrong here? Already? Don't talk to the FBI. You don't
Speaker 1: have a lawyer, don't talk to the FBI. That's it.
Speaker 1: There's there's not a like a maybe a sort of
Speaker 1: a kind of don't talk to the FBI because I
Speaker 1: know all the people listen to this show. If you
Speaker 1: ever had to talk to the FBI and er bad circumstances,
Speaker 1: it would be you know, for like a minor thing,
Speaker 1: you know what I mean. If you're if if they're
Speaker 1: if there's like the lone ax murder who's listening to
Speaker 1: this show somewhere, you should talk to the FBI, sir.
Speaker 1: You you talk to them a lot. But for the
Speaker 1: rest of you, I don't want you getting jammed up
Speaker 1: on something small or even like getting Scooter libbied. Now,
Speaker 1: granted he had lawyers and everything else, but they were
Speaker 1: going after him, so you could be a h And
Speaker 1: that's why I'm telling you don't talk to the FBI.
Speaker 1: But also if you are going to talk to them,
Speaker 1: don't allow for it to just be a record based
Speaker 1: on their recollections written down, because they will use that
Speaker 1: in court and that will be the only record. You want,
Speaker 1: an actual recording of the conversation, so there can be
Speaker 1: no doubt about not just the specific words, but tone intention.
Speaker 1: You know, look at all the process crimes, Look at
Speaker 1: the way they go after people and what they go
Speaker 1: after them for mine or stuff. When was the last
Speaker 1: time you spoke to so and so. Oh you said
Speaker 1: it was September, It was actually August. Guilty go to prison.
Speaker 1: So with Comy, the memos are going to be a
Speaker 1: one sided commy ist dar I even say, revision of
Speaker 1: whatever the conversation was. So keep that in mind, um,
Speaker 1: and I'm sure you'll see. You know, Comey reminds me
Speaker 1: one of these guys who I think it's Dwight Shrewd
Speaker 1: in office Space, who like writes himself in as the
Speaker 1: hero in his own you know, his own novels or
Speaker 1: books am I right, John, Oh, I'm sorry. The office.
Speaker 1: That's what I meant. Yeah, Dwight shrud in the office.
Speaker 1: I know, I got office space in the mind in
Speaker 1: the office. You know, he's the hero of his own
Speaker 1: his own screenplays or novels or whatever. You know, other
Speaker 1: people have done that. Uh, that's what Comey is. He's
Speaker 1: like the the one great honest man in America who's
Speaker 1: just trying to bring truth and justice for all uh
Speaker 1: and making a lot of money by going around trashing
Speaker 1: and sitting president doing it and playing dirty. There's no question.
Speaker 1: And what he did was really unethical to use his
Speaker 1: position as FBI director to wage a partisan war, to
Speaker 1: engage in his own little petty vendetta and use a
Speaker 1: cutout in the process and get the New York Times.
Speaker 1: And I'm not the only one the things that's gross. Well,
Speaker 1: there's obviously the DIRSH. We'll get to the DIRSH in
Speaker 1: a second. It's up Dirsh. But there's also Jonathan Turley,
Speaker 1: the constitutional law professor. He talked about this play clip seven.
Speaker 1: I think that many career people at the at the
Speaker 1: Justice Department must really find this quite repulsive that the
Speaker 1: very notion of an former FBI director writing a tell
Speaker 1: all book, uh is a virtual contradiction in terms. You know,
Speaker 1: FBI directors have valued their circumspection. You know, they need
Speaker 1: to have presidents trust them, and Comey has just has
Speaker 1: really destroyed that. The fact that he rushed this book
Speaker 1: out is inexcusable. He was the head of this investigation
Speaker 1: and is now one of the cooperating witnesses. Nobody would
Speaker 1: suggest that this book is benefiting the investigation. To the contrary,
Speaker 1: he's undermining his role as a witness. And so the
Speaker 1: question is why is he doing it? And the answers
Speaker 1: where they're obvious. He's gonna make a lot of money,
Speaker 1: but in the process he's gonna do untold harm to
Speaker 1: the institution he once headed. You'll remember, of course, we've
Speaker 1: been told all along that Trump is the one doing
Speaker 1: damage to institutions. Meanwhile, how could after this Donald Trump
Speaker 1: unless he had a you know, I think he trust Pompey, right,
Speaker 1: there are other people, but how could he trust anybody
Speaker 1: who was a holdover from the Obama administration at a
Speaker 1: senior level. He'd be foolish too. And how could any
Speaker 1: incoming president think that the FBI director that he or
Speaker 1: she inherited would be not possibly a political liability. This
Speaker 1: does absolutely undermine the confidence And by the way, on
Speaker 1: my point about the discussions had between a president and
Speaker 1: a and a cabinet level official or were with the
Speaker 1: FBI director. One of the reasons that information, Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: tough that you don't want your enemies to know about,
Speaker 1: so you have to classify it, so it's protected. But
Speaker 1: it all seems to be classified because it's protected within
Speaker 1: the government. If the president can have a candid discussion
Speaker 1: with the attorney general or the heavy FBI, it impairs
Speaker 1: his ability to function as effectively as he could otherwise.
Speaker 1: So commies doing real damage here. Oh yeah, and he's
Speaker 1: also weighing in on an ongoing investigation with a book
Speaker 1: and countless interviews after leaking information. You know, there are
Speaker 1: all these people who were so and I had a
Speaker 1: few ye I don't know if we call them conservatives anymore,
Speaker 1: but I had a few right of center friends. We're saying, Buck,
Speaker 1: you know, I've I've heard you say deep state before.
Speaker 1: You you can't use that term. And then I have
Speaker 1: to smack them around a little bit gently because they're
Speaker 1: you know, people that I'm I'm friendly with say, look,
Speaker 1: first of all, I actually to know the derivation of
Speaker 1: deep state and can tell you the history of it.
Speaker 1: If you want to talk about all the coups in
Speaker 1: Turkey in the twentieth century, I can do that. You know,
Speaker 1: let's let's let's put that aside for a moment. Unlike
Speaker 1: the other people running around. Actually, it can get into
Speaker 1: this at a level that I don't think. I don't
Speaker 1: think you want to go there. But also, what are
Speaker 1: we to call this when you have a cabal, when
Speaker 1: you have a group of politically energized and dedicated opponents
Speaker 1: of the current administration using high office to try to
Speaker 1: bring down a president? What is that if not some
Speaker 1: form of deep state. I'm not saying the deep state
Speaker 1: is the entire federal government. Was saying there is a
Speaker 1: deep state within the federal government. I think that's fair.
Speaker 1: And we see more and more evidence of it all
Speaker 1: the time. You know, when you start to look at
Speaker 1: this and line it all up, Uh yeah, let's understand
Speaker 1: that they're really destroying these institutions that they are pretending
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is destroying. Saw this, uh this tweet. I
Speaker 1: think it's from Chuck Ross over the Daily Caller. Worth
Speaker 1: a reminder. McCabe, who was fired over a lack of
Speaker 1: candor and is now referred for investigation, sent Peter Struck,
Speaker 1: who was demoted from Muller's team, to interview Michael Flynn,
Speaker 1: who was charged with lyne to the FBI. I mean,
Speaker 1: this stuff is a mess and it's just gonna get messier.
Speaker 1: And the more truth we find out, the more we realize, Yeah,
Speaker 1: no collusion, that's been true along. Trump is right, but
Speaker 1: the other side they have gone into the darkness because
Speaker 1: of their anti trump mania and McCabe and Comey, one
Speaker 1: of them, as we say in the NYPD, one one's
Speaker 1: gonna get jammed up. It's gonna get jammed up. It's
Speaker 1: gonna happen. I'm not sure which one, maybe both, maybe
Speaker 1: get a TUFA, but someone's getting jammed eight four four
Speaker 1: night to five. If you want to chat my friends
Speaker 1: eight four four nine Buck, you're back in just a second.
Speaker 1: Lines are lits team, So let's get into it. We've
Speaker 1: got Jake in Ocean Springs, Mississippi. Hey, Jake, I don't
Speaker 1: hear Jake. Yes, I'm right here there you are, sir,
Speaker 1: what's up? Well? I heard you speaking about the reasons
Speaker 1: for uh, Tolly talking about the jossier with Trump, and
Speaker 1: I kind of think of it this way. I think
Speaker 1: because of everything that was going on that he was
Speaker 1: involved with that Tomy was involved with that, he was
Speaker 1: very unstable and insecure about it himself and his position.
Speaker 1: And I think in the meeting that he had before
Speaker 1: this with Trump, Trump kind of dim was dismissing with him,
Speaker 1: and so uh he even said in the interview that
Speaker 1: he had this Panopolis that uh when he did this,
Speaker 1: and Stephanopolis asked him why he did it, and he
Speaker 1: said something about, well, I wanted to show him that
Speaker 1: he needed to have those daily briefs. And I think
Speaker 1: the reason he wanted Trump to have those daily briefings
Speaker 1: is because he needed to have time with Trump so
Speaker 1: he could kiss up to him, so he could ensure
Speaker 1: that he would stay as FBR director. Well, you know, Jake,
Speaker 1: I think you've hit on something that's that's important, and
Speaker 1: that is that Comey would have been perfectly happy to
Speaker 1: work with Trump, work for Trump as FBI director if
Speaker 1: he could stay FBI director. Right, He's kind of Comy
Speaker 1: is is a scorned man. He's not a a guy
Speaker 1: who uh you know, he poses as a martyr, but
Speaker 1: he's really like a scorned individual who feels like he
Speaker 1: was done wrong by the presidents and now he wants
Speaker 1: his revenge. And that's where I that's where I think, Uh, well,
Speaker 1: you know a lot of people, by the way, I've
Speaker 1: noticed the really the the childishness and the nastiness of
Speaker 1: some of Comy's commentary about Trump. But I do think
Speaker 1: you're right, uh, that he wanted face time with him.
Speaker 1: He want to face some of the president. I can
Speaker 1: tell you, and thank you for calling in, Jake. I
Speaker 1: can tell you from my own time and government that uh,
Speaker 1: and and I had some FaceTime with with a previous
Speaker 1: president during briefings that man, when you're in the federal bureaucracy,
Speaker 1: time with Potus FRESI United States, there's uh, there's nothing
Speaker 1: else that gets most folks as excited as that. Professionally speaking,
Speaker 1: they really want to get in front of the the
Speaker 1: guy who's the guy, or one day maybe the gal
Speaker 1: who's calling the shots. Butch in Winston Sale, North Carolina, Hey, Butch,
Speaker 1: how are you, Buck? I'm good, Thank you for your call,
Speaker 1: thank you for what you do and trying to get
Speaker 1: the truth out there. My community. Is that a lot
Speaker 1: of these people. There's only two words used in our
Speaker 1: constitution against people who are trying to overthrow and take
Speaker 1: over our government. And one of those words is treason,
Speaker 1: which everybody knows, but very few people understand the meaning
Speaker 1: of the word sedition. And I recommend they looked that
Speaker 1: word up and look at the definition. That fits a
Speaker 1: lot of people, uh, trying to go against our government,
Speaker 1: against our president, uh, in a lot of cases, including
Speaker 1: somebody like George Soros. You know. So I think if
Speaker 1: they're not guilty of treason, they could easily be brought
Speaker 1: to bear for sedition. But you rarely hear that word
Speaker 1: used anymore, but it is sedition is encouraging others to
Speaker 1: basically turn against state authority. Right, So that's Uh. There's
Speaker 1: the Alien and Sedition Acts of I think eighteen o two,
Speaker 1: which we could talk about another time, but they were
Speaker 1: quite unconstitutional at the time. We actually have a long
Speaker 1: history in this country of truncating free speech when it
Speaker 1: annoys the federal government. Enough, we think we're the free
Speaker 1: speech country, but we barely are. Um. But thank you
Speaker 1: very much for calling in. Butch I do appreciate it,
Speaker 1: and uh, you know, That's where you do run into, Uh,
Speaker 1: you do run into the realities of people being in
Speaker 1: very senior government roles who are advocating for a really
Speaker 1: disruption of the government. You know, they want impeachment, removal
Speaker 1: of the present, all the rest of it. Uh. Carl
Speaker 1: in Lafayette, West Lafayette, Indiana. Hey Carl, Hey buck Uh.
Speaker 1: I sent your message on Facebook. I don't know if
Speaker 1: you got it about the the Swiss lab that it's
Speaker 1: confirming that it was not actually Nova Chok used in
Speaker 1: the assassination at Chimp, and that was it was a toxin.
Speaker 1: It's called something BZ toxins. And the whole point is
Speaker 1: if that wasn't Nova Chok, and we got a whole
Speaker 1: different situation on our hands. Well, I gotta look at
Speaker 1: this up. But I haven't said. I will go through
Speaker 1: more of the Facebook obviously the end of the show
Speaker 1: during roll call and also tonight when I when I
Speaker 1: get home. Um, but I'll take a look at this piece.
Speaker 1: I can't speak to it because I haven't read it,
Speaker 1: and I would want to see. I mean, my first
Speaker 1: impulse is who's the source on this one? You know,
Speaker 1: who's in charge of putting that forward? But we will.
Speaker 1: I'll keep an eye out and I appreciate you raising
Speaker 1: it to my attention. Thank you very much, sir. He's
Speaker 1: back with you now, because when it comes to the
Speaker 1: fight for truth, the fuck never stops. Welcome back to
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show. Our two is here. We've been
Speaker 1: discussing a lot about Kobe and McCabe and how they
Speaker 1: could be in some hot water and it might be
Speaker 1: might be justice in fact that they are going to
Speaker 1: be subject to. But I wanted to follow up on
Speaker 1: our start books story. In fact, earlier today, I was
Speaker 1: in a Starbucks because I'm on the road and I
Speaker 1: was thinking about it. The second most populists or not
Speaker 1: a popular, most numerous there you go. I think it's
Speaker 1: the second most numerous franchise in the country. Now eight thousand.
Speaker 1: I might be making up that. I know it's eight
Speaker 1: thousand stores. Don't quote me on the second most populous.
Speaker 1: That's probably wrong, although there are Starbucks everywhere. But this
Speaker 1: story is continuing on as I knew it would. The
Speaker 1: social justice warriors have leaned into it all the way
Speaker 1: and MSNBC has gone into full uh racial teaching mode. Right.
Speaker 1: They want to they want to have a teaching moment,
Speaker 1: a teachable moment for the country based on this, and
Speaker 1: in order to do that, it has to be about
Speaker 1: not just this incident, not just Starbucks, but you guessed it,
Speaker 1: systemic racism in general, or as it's called now, unconscious bias.
Speaker 1: I think it's interesting they used the term unconscio is biased,
Speaker 1: I think because it's less offensive to some people who have,
Speaker 1: you know, who are of goodwill on this or well intentioned.
Speaker 1: If you tell someone that you need unconscious bias training,
Speaker 1: they may say, yeah, okay, I think I need that.
Speaker 1: If you tell someone that you need to learn to
Speaker 1: not be a racist, they hopefully will say, I'm not
Speaker 1: a racist, though, so what are you doing right? So
Speaker 1: there's reasons why they call these things what they call them.
Speaker 1: But you had Dante Robinson and Rashawn Nelson who have
Speaker 1: spoken out. Now they are the two individuals from the
Speaker 1: Philadelphia Starbucks incident. They have spoken out. We have a
Speaker 1: clip from them. I want to make sure that this
Speaker 1: situation doesn't happen again. So what I want is for
Speaker 1: a young man or young men to not be traumatized
Speaker 1: by this and instead motivated, inspired, And what do you
Speaker 1: want Rashan so you know, take this opportunity as as
Speaker 1: a stepping stone, you know, to really stand up and
Speaker 1: you know, show your greatness and that you are not
Speaker 1: judged by the color of skin as our ancestors where
Speaker 1: or anyone else. Just really taking those actions and putting
Speaker 1: them in a place and you know, help people understand
Speaker 1: that it's not just a black people thing. This is
Speaker 1: a people thing and that's exactly what we want to
Speaker 1: see out of this and that's true change. So put
Speaker 1: action into place and stop using your words. Now it's
Speaker 1: your gentlemen, not are you know, saying very sensible things?
Speaker 1: And uh, you know, I can't I can't fault the
Speaker 1: messaging now. Um, I think that you know that they're
Speaker 1: speaking out and they feel very passionate about the subject,
Speaker 1: and that's all fine. I just would like some answers
Speaker 1: to some some questions, though, if not from them, from
Speaker 1: some others about exactly what happened here. For example, why
Speaker 1: is it now that the Philadelphia Police commission nor has
Speaker 1: completely reversed himself and is backing backing off of supporting
Speaker 1: the cops in this incident. And the chain of events
Speaker 1: here was you have two black eyes in a Starbucks
Speaker 1: they're there for a meeting, they won't buy anything. They're
Speaker 1: asked to buy something, they say they're not going to
Speaker 1: buy anything. And then the police are called within a
Speaker 1: couple of minutes of them being there, and we I
Speaker 1: think we haven't heard anything from the end producer, Mike,
Speaker 1: let me know if this this is off base. I
Speaker 1: don't think we've heard anything from the store manager. Still,
Speaker 1: the police arrived, and I did see reports that these two,
Speaker 1: these two gentlemen, uh, these two uh black men who
Speaker 1: were at the Starbucks, refused to leave when they were
Speaker 1: told to leave by the cops, and then the cops
Speaker 1: put the cups on them. And as far as I
Speaker 1: can tell, that's completely legitimate behavior from the police's perspective. Right,
Speaker 1: if you if you're in, if you're on private property,
Speaker 1: you won't leave, you get arrested, you know. Otherwise the
Speaker 1: whole notion of private property kind of starts to fade
Speaker 1: away real fast. But initially the police. You can't tell
Speaker 1: me that the commissioner didn't know the facts of the case.
Speaker 1: Come on, right, big national story and didn't happen, right,
Speaker 1: He was backing them up until yesterday. Why switch? Why
Speaker 1: the the change? Um? You have the commissioner. I'm trying
Speaker 1: to grab his name here is I'm going and just
Speaker 1: say that that as Starbucks store manager, they said it's
Speaker 1: no longer with the company. But you're right, Yeah, we
Speaker 1: haven't heard from him at all. Yeah, So so we
Speaker 1: know that the manager's gone, but we don't get to
Speaker 1: here from the manager. Do we know anything about the manager?
Speaker 1: As far as I understand, nothing? Uh? And I also,
Speaker 1: like I said, I would want to know why the
Speaker 1: police commissioner, many days after the incident, is saying I
Speaker 1: backed my office is and then is completely changing his
Speaker 1: tune and saying that he quote made the situation worse.
Speaker 1: The police commissioner is African American by the way, I'm
Speaker 1: trying to find his name here, but made the situation worse, um,
Speaker 1: by backing the cops. So I would like to know.
Speaker 1: And by the way, Mike, why don't we grab that
Speaker 1: if we have the audio of the commissioner speaking, I'd
Speaker 1: like to just just play that on an air for
Speaker 1: the for the record. Um, what did he find out
Speaker 1: that was new? What did he get going that was
Speaker 1: or what what did he come upon that was different
Speaker 1: from what he knew yesterday? Is it possible that the
Speaker 1: commissioner feels a bit of political pressure here to change
Speaker 1: what he said. And what does that mean for those
Speaker 1: those officers who made the arrest. Are they gonna be
Speaker 1: sacrificed in this whole effort to be on the right
Speaker 1: side of this politically charged issue. I don't want to
Speaker 1: know some stuff. Also would like to know. This is Starbucks,
Speaker 1: I'm assuming and Mike told me Richard Ross is the
Speaker 1: name of the police commissioner in Philadelphia. And also producer
Speaker 1: Mark said it was almost fourteen thousand Starbucks stores in
Speaker 1: the US. I thought it was eight thousand Samson night,
Speaker 1: I was way off. Um, So I would like to
Speaker 1: know is there a video this is Remember it's been
Speaker 1: a few days here and then they look no. Also,
Speaker 1: let's keep in mind, it's not the police are overwhelmed. Okay,
Speaker 1: they're they're not. You know, they're not combing through the
Speaker 1: wreckage after an explosion. You know, a couple of guys
Speaker 1: were asked to leave. It seems like people have very
Speaker 1: real concerns that there was some racial bias involved, and
Speaker 1: we'd like to just know what happened. But I would
Speaker 1: like additional information, and I think, uh, one of the
Speaker 1: things we want to know is isn't there a video camera?
Speaker 1: Do we do? We get the so so we don't
Speaker 1: get to hear the cop side of the story. The
Speaker 1: police commissioner changes his side of the story, we don't
Speaker 1: hear from the store manager in question, and we don't
Speaker 1: seem to be shown. We only were only showing the
Speaker 1: the social media video which the people that were claiming
Speaker 1: there was racism. We're the ones who posted I would
Speaker 1: like to know what the store video shows. Is everything
Speaker 1: exactly as described by those who are claiming a bias here?
Speaker 1: Uh so this is this is not gonna Like I said,
Speaker 1: it's not gonna go anytime soon. By It's gonna cost
Speaker 1: Starbucks a lot of money. It's not gonna be cheap
Speaker 1: to shut down all of their many thousands of stores
Speaker 1: for a day to do unconscious bias training. Um. And
Speaker 1: I'm telling you it's just a matter. This now sets
Speaker 1: a precedent that when there's a company that is not
Speaker 1: as woke friendly as Starbucks, that has even the mere
Speaker 1: allegation of any kind of racial bias or impropriety, the
Speaker 1: entire social justice machinery and activists and everything else will
Speaker 1: just they will make the place crumble. I mean they
Speaker 1: will go after it with everything they've got. Um and uh,
Speaker 1: one more thing before I switch out the topics here. Oh,
Speaker 1: and I can't switch up. Yesterday we had the guy
Speaker 1: whose video is going kind of viral who went into
Speaker 1: the stores. I've got to follow up for you on that.
Speaker 1: But one other thing I can't help but notice and
Speaker 1: now I'm really tying together our conversation from the last hour.
Speaker 1: What we're talking about now, isn't it funny to you?
Speaker 1: And I don't mean funny like ha ha, I mean
Speaker 1: funny like that when the press reports on local law enforcement,
Speaker 1: they don't get the benefit of the doubt. Right, Cops,
Speaker 1: constables on patrol do not get the benefit of the doubt.
Speaker 1: They are uh often covered by the press in any
Speaker 1: incident that's newsworthy. Police in general are going to be
Speaker 1: treated as uh systemically, if not racist, at least racially insensitive.
Speaker 1: And the the you know part of the school the
Speaker 1: prison pipeline problem, and there there's just a lot of
Speaker 1: and when there's a cop said versus purp said, as
Speaker 1: that's what the cops would call it, per per perpetrator.
Speaker 1: When there's a cops said purp said situation. We know
Speaker 1: that the mainstream media always sides with the purp right
Speaker 1: or or this, because the the the would be perp
Speaker 1: would be what you could say if you don't believe
Speaker 1: the person is even a perpetrator, but or the alleged
Speaker 1: purp um. When it comes to the FBI, there can
Speaker 1: be no criticism. The FBI is beyond approach, especially FBI
Speaker 1: senior leadership, which has to be praised constantly and defended vociferously.
Speaker 1: It seems weird, right because actually federal law enforcement is
Speaker 1: much more likely to be politically abusive. Federal law enforcement
Speaker 1: has all kinds of authorities and and resources that local
Speaker 1: law enforcement do not, so you would think that they'd
Speaker 1: be even more on the watch for the abuse. And
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that federalaw enforcement is good or bad
Speaker 1: in this area. I'm just saying their watchdogs, the meteor
Speaker 1: watchdogs against local cops, state police, they're they're always on
Speaker 1: the lookout for what they're doing. But the FBI all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, all of a sudden, the FBI is uh,
Speaker 1: they hollowed institution that is beyond suspicion or approach. I
Speaker 1: think that's what you I think that's a little convenient.
Speaker 1: I think there's some clues here they'll make us think
Speaker 1: that perhaps there's a there's an agenda behind that and
Speaker 1: the wagon circling around McCabe at Comy and and then
Speaker 1: also outside of that, in the I C. Brennan and
Speaker 1: uh Clapper and Yates and Strock and all these people
Speaker 1: interesting that they're willing to put aside all their concerns
Speaker 1: about abuse of federal government power and police power and
Speaker 1: the disparities between class and race and culture as to
Speaker 1: how the federal government deals with them. And that's all gone.
Speaker 1: FBI good, local cops not so good. That's the way
Speaker 1: that that's where the media treats it. I'm always like, hmm,
Speaker 1: I think we should give that a little more attention,
Speaker 1: because it's not because they love the FBI so much. Folks,
Speaker 1: Uh eight four or four to five lines open, stay
Speaker 1: with me. Discus the unfortunate incident that has been in
Speaker 1: the news about this great city, um an incident that
Speaker 1: I fully acknowledge that I played a significant role in
Speaker 1: making them worse. For starters, I should have said the
Speaker 1: officers acted within the scope of the law, and not
Speaker 1: they did did they didn't do anything wrong. Words are
Speaker 1: very important. While it is no excuse, my lack of
Speaker 1: awareness of the Starbucks business model played a role in
Speaker 1: my message. So what I'm confused here? That's the police
Speaker 1: commissioner in Philadelphia was backing up his officers in the
Speaker 1: Starbucks incident. Now he's saying they acted within the scope
Speaker 1: of the law, but it was still a problem. Um,
Speaker 1: I mean over active within the scope of their duties.
Speaker 1: So okay, what what's the issue then, and why isn't
Speaker 1: he explaining what they did wrong or how they were
Speaker 1: wrong if they acted within the scope of the law.
Speaker 1: Also note that he's taking personal responsibility for making it worse.
Speaker 1: I think this is just you know, look, the the
Speaker 1: woke activists out there have become very powerful and they
Speaker 1: but they woke is now that you've heard me saying
Speaker 1: in a lot Just in case you're wondering, it's the
Speaker 1: It's the term for being socially conscious as a social
Speaker 1: justice warrior. Basically. I think that's a good working definition
Speaker 1: of it. But I look, I can tell you this,
Speaker 1: I wouldn't want to be those two officers. You got
Speaker 1: your commissioner saying that, yeah, what they did was technically okay,
Speaker 1: but it was really bad. No, that's not how this
Speaker 1: is supposed to work. Uh. By the way, I mentioned
Speaker 1: yesterday where we actually played the audio for you of
Speaker 1: this guy demanding free coffee. Just in case you forgot
Speaker 1: play Levin, I heard you guys don't like black people,
Speaker 1: so I wanted to get my Starbucks operations I give
Speaker 1: to you. Yeah, I saw that on my Twitter last night.
Speaker 1: I was like, yeah, I need I need a free cloth.
Speaker 1: That's what I'm talking about. This is justice. I'm like,
Speaker 1: we couldn't authenticate this, and it seemed, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: it looked like he might just be doing and it
Speaker 1: turned out it was a stunt. It is a stunt.
Speaker 1: So I don't want to just let this, let this lie.
Speaker 1: I wanted to actually come back to it. This guy
Speaker 1: was intentionally trolling Starbucks, if you will, And he explained
Speaker 1: his name is Brian Sharp. Um, here's what he had. Now,
Speaker 1: He's upright. He was doing it for effect, right, It wasn't.
Speaker 1: It's not that he thought that this was really a campaign,
Speaker 1: that he was demanding reparations for coffee or anything like that.
Speaker 1: He was just trying to show how people can use
Speaker 1: these situations for their own benefit. But I'll let him
Speaker 1: speak for himself. Play clip twelve. I am sick and
Speaker 1: tired of liberals using black people and making us look
Speaker 1: like victims, making us look off with their liberal dogma.
Speaker 1: It is disgusting. The other thing I hate about the
Speaker 1: liberals is if you're a black man, as I am
Speaker 1: in America, they will not hand you a microphone unless
Speaker 1: you follow the liberal narrative. And I said, you know what,
Speaker 1: I bet if I go into Starbucks and I follow
Speaker 1: a liberal narrative, I'll make the news. And while I
Speaker 1: here I am Indeed, he made the news and he's
Speaker 1: here on the show. Um, that's what calls I want
Speaker 1: to take here David and Allentown, Pennsylvania. Hey David, how's
Speaker 1: it going. It's good, Thanks for your call. I had
Speaker 1: a speculation that the reason why you haven't heard anything
Speaker 1: about the manager at the Starbucks is maybe the manager
Speaker 1: as the of the same national origin of the two gentlemen.
Speaker 1: That's positive, certainly, that's what. By the way, I don't
Speaker 1: expect that somebody in this situation would like come out
Speaker 1: and address the press or something. But we, as far
Speaker 1: as I understand it, we know very little. I haven't
Speaker 1: really seen any reporting on even who the manager was
Speaker 1: or or anything about him. I don't even know are
Speaker 1: we assuming? Do we know if he's male producer Mike,
Speaker 1: I can't remember. I know the other one was female,
Speaker 1: she's in the video. But so as you're saying, David,
Speaker 1: that that would affect it because you know, because it's
Speaker 1: people aren't racist against their own race, I'll just tell
Speaker 1: you that they they'll say, because this comes up with
Speaker 1: police racism. They'll say that even for example, a black
Speaker 1: or Latino police officer who engages with minorities as an
Speaker 1: officer in certain ways can be imposing unconscious bias because
Speaker 1: they're in a position of authority and a structure that
Speaker 1: is created to oppress non white minorities, right, I mean
Speaker 1: this is I obviously do a lot of reading about
Speaker 1: how the or I'm very familiar with how the the
Speaker 1: left frames these these issues used. But so that wouldn't
Speaker 1: necessarily be a game changer for the narrative. But I
Speaker 1: do have my questions about why is that we don't
Speaker 1: know more about this, and there's certainly more information that
Speaker 1: could be brought to bear. I appreciate you calling in, David,
Speaker 1: Thank you very much for that, Um, and uh yeah,
Speaker 1: I I this is uh. I have a feeling we're
Speaker 1: not going to get complete answers here anytime soon. And
Speaker 1: Starbucks is using us as a as a teachable moment
Speaker 1: and it's going to be literally teaching its own employees.
Speaker 1: I guess how to deal with these situations. I would
Speaker 1: also note that it was fun to read some of
Speaker 1: these pieces that were out there about how uh you know,
Speaker 1: and people were saying it to on social media. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, it's not really clear that you have to,
Speaker 1: you know, because of restaurants for customers only. It's not
Speaker 1: a real thing. Um, well, it is a real thing.
Speaker 1: It's a real thing, and we all know it is, right.
Speaker 1: So why am I reading think pieces? Not that there's
Speaker 1: much thinking going on in them in USA today or
Speaker 1: other places. I think I saw him in USA today.
Speaker 1: I've seen a few of these articles were like, as
Speaker 1: does Starbucks really require a purchase to sit there? And
Speaker 1: I mean, I can tell you this my you know,
Speaker 1: unless I get some other permission. My assumption is that
Speaker 1: if I'm gonna be using the facilities for a public
Speaker 1: accommodation like a restaurant or a cafe or whatever, I
Speaker 1: always acting on the assumption that, yeah, that's right. They're
Speaker 1: running a business, and you know, if you can't pay
Speaker 1: for some reason, let's say I lost my wallet or
Speaker 1: how many money on me or something, you know, maybe
Speaker 1: i'd ask management. But if management said no, I wouldn't
Speaker 1: have some big problem with it, because I understand right
Speaker 1: they they're running a business, and yeah, I don't even
Speaker 1: have to sit down and talk about it this way.
Speaker 1: But you know they're buying paper, towel and toilet paper,
Speaker 1: and you know that there's there's stuff that goes into it. Right,
Speaker 1: So the Starbucks thing is something we're gonna have to
Speaker 1: keep falling because it's gonna gonna be staying around for
Speaker 1: a bit. Uh. We've got some updates on the case
Speaker 1: into the musician Princes overdose from opioids, and I wanted
Speaker 1: to talk to you a bit about that case. I
Speaker 1: was reading up on it today. So what happened to
Speaker 1: Prince we will discuss. He's holding the line for America,
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton his back. Prince the musician died of a
Speaker 1: drug overdose in today. We have the final decision of
Speaker 1: the authorities not to file any criminal charges against anyone,
Speaker 1: despite all the speculation and the fact that you know,
Speaker 1: they know what the drug was that he had, and
Speaker 1: everything else that was going on around it. A doctor,
Speaker 1: Michael Schulenberg, who had been treating Prince right before his death,
Speaker 1: has agreed to a thirty thousand dollar federal civil violation
Speaker 1: for an illegal prescription, but he admits no liability as
Speaker 1: part of the settlement and will not um and he
Speaker 1: has said along that he never gave someone prescription drugs
Speaker 1: with the idea that they would be rerouted to Prince.
Speaker 1: I'm just realizing that I actually don't know Princes. I
Speaker 1: would call him by his legal name, but anyway, I
Speaker 1: was gonna call him Prince. So here's what we found
Speaker 1: out about the case. Though I didn't know this, and
Speaker 1: it was interesting to me. Prince thought he was taking
Speaker 1: vicating And this is going to tie into our discussions
Speaker 1: about um opioids and the opiate epidemic. Obviously Prince thought
Speaker 1: he was taking vicating, but they found a lot of
Speaker 1: pills that he had that were illegal that had fentanyl.
Speaker 1: Now fentanyl can be actually know someone who's UH had
Speaker 1: a family member who was on Fenton Al I was
Speaker 1: talking to about it recently because he was battling cancer.
Speaker 1: So fentanyl can be used legally, and it's in patch
Speaker 1: form when you use it legally, but it's coming into
Speaker 1: the US in large quantities illegally because it's a simple
Speaker 1: process to make. Fentanyl is not hard to make. I
Speaker 1: don't know how to make it, but I think it's
Speaker 1: a either three or four step chemical process to make it.
Speaker 1: And it is a hundred times more powerful than or
Speaker 1: can be a hundred times more powerful than the over
Speaker 1: the counter opioids that people have become familiar with, percocet, percocet,
Speaker 1: vic it in, OxyContin. And what happened here with Prince
Speaker 1: was that he thought he was taking vicating but because
Speaker 1: he got the pills on the black market, what he
Speaker 1: was taking, we're actually illegal fentanyl pills that they were
Speaker 1: being that they were selling as vica into people. So
Speaker 1: this is just a reminder of how dangerous it is
Speaker 1: and one of the reasons why I understand why the
Speaker 1: regulations in place on drugs that are I guess scheduled
Speaker 1: to write Schedule one is just illegal stuff scheduled to
Speaker 1: under the Controlled Substances Act is prescriptions that are prescription
Speaker 1: drugs that have a use but are still very tightly
Speaker 1: controlled their controlled substances, and they need to regulate this
Speaker 1: stuff because it's one very dangerous It can be very
Speaker 1: dangerous even if you're trying to not engage in the
Speaker 1: illegal market. But the moment you step out of the
Speaker 1: regulator markets, you don't know what you're getting, the moment
Speaker 1: you're buying something that's been put in some bottle or
Speaker 1: I don't even I don't know how people get these
Speaker 1: illegal pills in the black market these days. Uh, because
Speaker 1: if you take fent atyl one time and it's the
Speaker 1: wrong dose, you can die very easily. Um. Fentanyl's potency
Speaker 1: is so strong that people have to show up and
Speaker 1: has matt suits. E. M. S Has to come in
Speaker 1: and has matt suits for fear of coming into skin
Speaker 1: contact with fentanyl at an overdose site. So the Prince
Speaker 1: is one of the more visible, one of the more visible,
Speaker 1: one of the most visible, I think in the last
Speaker 1: decade or so of those who are either celebrities and
Speaker 1: have overdosed on something that's either heroin or an opioid
Speaker 1: or opiate and what Philip symour Hoffman as well and
Speaker 1: ends up happening with these guys. They get into it
Speaker 1: via the pills. Prince apparently had chronic pain in his
Speaker 1: hip and he started taking the pills and they helped.
Speaker 1: But then you develop a tolerance for you start taking more,
Speaker 1: start taking more, and then you find out that it's easier.
Speaker 1: Uh two, especially if you become addicted. It's easier to
Speaker 1: get it illegally in many ways, and it is to
Speaker 1: have to go through a legitimate doctor, because the doctor
Speaker 1: may say, well, hold on, we gotta slow you down,
Speaker 1: we gotta figure this out. And if you are addicted
Speaker 1: to any opiate or any opioid, you you do not
Speaker 1: want to hear from anyone that you can't have it.
Speaker 1: The more I've read, and this is some of my
Speaker 1: thoughts on this come from being almost done with the book.
Speaker 1: Dre Land actually tweeted at Sam Canonas to tell him
Speaker 1: how much I'm enjoying his book. He's an l A
Speaker 1: Times reporter, or was an l A. Times report. I
Speaker 1: don't know what he does these days. He might still
Speaker 1: be there. I just don't know. But his book Dreamland
Speaker 1: Is is phenomenal and really all of you should read it,
Speaker 1: and those of you it's one of those books that
Speaker 1: I've mentioned on ERE a few times just because I
Speaker 1: think it's so important to have for us to have
Speaker 1: an understanding of what's going on in the country right
Speaker 1: now with the opioid epidemic. Um those who have actually
Speaker 1: taken me up on it and started to read it
Speaker 1: have been writing me to say, you know, that's a
Speaker 1: really it's a really good book, and it's a it's
Speaker 1: a story that we all should know how this happened,
Speaker 1: how we got to this point where if you are
Speaker 1: you know aged, uh, you know, it's what I think
Speaker 1: it's fifty five now or eighteen to fifty five, and
Speaker 1: you're you're suffering an untimely demise this country. It's not
Speaker 1: it's more likely to be opiates then from a car accident.
Speaker 1: So that's really that's just a profound statement and of itself.
Speaker 1: But there's so much danger in taking these substances and
Speaker 1: there they flooded into the country. They're all over the place.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of them on the on the black market,
Speaker 1: just from people that are reselling their prescriptions. Uh, there
Speaker 1: are a lot of people that are bringing them into country.
Speaker 1: I mean, look, I'm if I had more time, I'd
Speaker 1: actually try to go down to the border. Right now,
Speaker 1: I'm only about thirty minute drive from Tijuana, maybe thirty
Speaker 1: five minute drive. And I would like to go see
Speaker 1: what's going on in the San Diego border sector. But
Speaker 1: I gotta get back to the east coast. But that's
Speaker 1: something on my list for another time. I'm really curious
Speaker 1: see how things are going down there, and i'd like
Speaker 1: to set up some discussions and interviews with whoever could
Speaker 1: speak to me from border patrol. I know that's gonna
Speaker 1: be very, uh as politically sensitive. Right now, you've got
Speaker 1: the governor, Governor Brown, who won't allow basically anything to
Speaker 1: be done to help border patrol by the national Guard. Right.
Speaker 1: National Guard is not to be used in any way,
Speaker 1: shape or form that take takes the load off of
Speaker 1: a border patrol. Which is just another way of the
Speaker 1: governor California saying he is he has pro illegal immigration.
Speaker 1: He's not trying to limit it. He's not sympathetic to
Speaker 1: illegal immigrants. He is pro illegal immigration full stop. That's
Speaker 1: a big change from even where the Democrat Party was
Speaker 1: ten or fifteen years ago. I like how Trump is
Speaker 1: responding by saying that we're not gonna order that. That's
Speaker 1: you know, he's not gonna pay for it now. You know,
Speaker 1: I like it. Trump needs to hit back on this stuff.
Speaker 1: The country needs to see what some of these elected
Speaker 1: officials really believe and how they're spending tax dollars. But
Speaker 1: you know, if I were in my in my earlier days,
Speaker 1: I guess I'm still you know, I'm not married, don't
Speaker 1: have kids, so maybe I could justify my head to
Speaker 1: do it. I still want to get down into the
Speaker 1: southern tip of Baha and the Baha Peninsula and just
Speaker 1: talk to some of the authorities, journalist whoever I could
Speaker 1: about what's going on now in the Cabo, the area
Speaker 1: of the of Cabo San Lucas and and the cities
Speaker 1: around it, which is now more violent than at any
Speaker 1: time any time in history, I believe so. And the
Speaker 1: drug cartels are all tied into this. Drug cartels are
Speaker 1: making so much money now via the heroin trade, and
Speaker 1: it's all coming in through Mexico. Even the illegal fentonel
Speaker 1: that China is making in big vats come into Mexico
Speaker 1: and then are trans shipped in the United States via
Speaker 1: the same smuggling pipelines to get illegal aliens in the country,
Speaker 1: and then the dealers hide in the illegal immigrant population
Speaker 1: and the illegal alien population of major cities and in
Speaker 1: smaller cities where there's been so much illegal immigration in
Speaker 1: the last twenty or thirty years that places you wouldn't
Speaker 1: necessarily think of. And I know a lot of your
Speaker 1: listening like, oh buck, trust me my time. We got
Speaker 1: a lot of legal immigrants. And you know, we're a
Speaker 1: city of fifty or a hundred thousand and not not
Speaker 1: a big city. But the dealers hide among the rest
Speaker 1: of the population, and they switched them out too. It's
Speaker 1: a very very important part of the strategy. The dealers
Speaker 1: come and go, so they go back to Mexico, and
Speaker 1: that means that it's a lot harder to bring cases
Speaker 1: against them, and you gotta get them while they're here.
Speaker 1: And uh, and people are losing their life. Prince, philipsymor Hoffman,
Speaker 1: philipsy More Hoffman, and just last year alone, sixty four
Speaker 1: thousand other Americans who had futures that they never were
Speaker 1: able to see because of what's going on with illegal
Speaker 1: illegal drugs, primarily now uh, fentanyl top of the list,
Speaker 1: and also heroin. So interesting that they couldn't figure out
Speaker 1: who gave Prince the pill was really what it came
Speaker 1: down to, who gave him this fentanyl that he thought
Speaker 1: was Viking, and they have information to to prove that
Speaker 1: he didn't think he was taking fentanyl. He I don't
Speaker 1: know if he would have known how dangerous that was
Speaker 1: or but they couldn't prove it. So no one's gonna
Speaker 1: be charged with anything even though someone gave him illegal
Speaker 1: drugs that were miss mislabeled. And now we you know,
Speaker 1: we lost a great a great musician. Um. Well, we
Speaker 1: lose Americans every day to this, whether someone's a musician
Speaker 1: or not. We really shouldn't, you know. You think about
Speaker 1: this in terms of what gets attention, but each each
Speaker 1: American life that's lost this epidemic as a tragedy and
Speaker 1: it requires a much more robust not just government response.
Speaker 1: Right we think the government's going to solve this. We
Speaker 1: need to know more about this and how it happens
Speaker 1: and where it's happening, and how to combat it, and
Speaker 1: why we are in the midst of this as a country.
Speaker 1: And this is this is an all hands on deck situation.
Speaker 1: This is a a true crisis. So I I was
Speaker 1: thinking about this today as I was reading the update
Speaker 1: from the case UM dealing with Prince Um. And we've
Speaker 1: got we've got more common team. I will be discussing
Speaker 1: the latest with North Korea, a big concession coming from
Speaker 1: the North Korean side of the upcoming summit between Trump
Speaker 1: and Kim Jong And that makes me think, Okay, this
Speaker 1: is actually moving in a direction where we could see
Speaker 1: some stuff happen and it's not just gonna be uh,
Speaker 1: you know, they show up, shake hands or high five
Speaker 1: or whatever, and then Trump and Kim Jong un go
Speaker 1: their separate ways. Um. And then the second hour of
Speaker 1: also our third hour that I've got to talk to
Speaker 1: you about the wisdom of Kanye, the life philosophy of
Speaker 1: Kanye West. He's putting it all over Twitter, some interesting
Speaker 1: stuff you want. I think you will want to hear that.
Speaker 1: And the Governor New York is acting like a Bozoh,
Speaker 1: that's nothing new. We'll have some fun with that, so
Speaker 1: I stay right there. I think the judge is setting
Speaker 1: up a sensible system where there will be a review
Speaker 1: of these documents to see whether any are covered by
Speaker 1: the attorney client privilege, and those will be excluded, and
Speaker 1: that's proper, But most of these documents will not be
Speaker 1: You'll recall that I made that suggestion on this show
Speaker 1: and Jeffrey said it was a terrible idea. It was
Speaker 1: a terrible idea and unnecessary. It's a good idea. Well,
Speaker 1: I think I still think it's a good idea. Look,
Speaker 1: you're gonna have judge or somebody assigned by the judge
Speaker 1: to look through the papers, and I hope he's right.
Speaker 1: If there's nothing that's lawyer client privilege here, let the
Speaker 1: prosecutors see it all. Let them prosecute. But if they
Speaker 1: find communications between a lawyer and a client that all legitimate,
Speaker 1: no FBI agents should get to see that and leak it.
Speaker 1: The dirsh laying it down versus CNN's uh shockingly inept
Speaker 1: in my opinion, legal analyst Jeffrey Tuban. But nonetheless, uh
Speaker 1: Durst was given a bit of a buck slab. Perhaps
Speaker 1: we could say it theirst slap um, But that was
Speaker 1: what was happening there. Uh. Now they might have this
Speaker 1: other person, they might have some set up where they
Speaker 1: don't allow they don't allow those who are prone to leak,
Speaker 1: for example, to get their hands on the information the
Speaker 1: first place. And that's very important here, especially when you're
Speaker 1: talking about such a high profile I mean, it doesn't
Speaker 1: get more high profile than this does it. And he
Speaker 1: might have folks that think that, okay, it's attorney client
Speaker 1: privilege information, but they want to even the score a
Speaker 1: little bit against Trump. We've seen We're not paranoid. They
Speaker 1: are out to get us. We've seen plenty of this
Speaker 1: against Trump. One more thing on this, Uh, I just
Speaker 1: saw the breaking news. Rudy Giuliani best known by me
Speaker 1: for being the guy who cleaned up New York City
Speaker 1: when I was there, when I was a kid there
Speaker 1: and it was a really dangerous place for a large
Speaker 1: US city, A lot of bad stuff going on in
Speaker 1: the early nineties in New York rough time. Juliani cleaned
Speaker 1: it up. He has now joined the legal team that
Speaker 1: Trump has put together. So Juliani is, in fact, Uh,
Speaker 1: Giuliani is in fact the guy who is getting added
Speaker 1: onto the roster. Now Giuliani knows Muller, so that'll be interesting.
Speaker 1: And the reporting at least from CNNY year is that
Speaker 1: Giuliani may ask for essentially a list of compliance material
Speaker 1: that they would need to bring the investigation to a
Speaker 1: close and try to speed this thing up. How effective
Speaker 1: can Rudy be in this whole thing. I'm affective with
Speaker 1: Giuliani be and trying to want to help Trump and
Speaker 1: protect his flank on all this and also to speed
Speaker 1: things long. I don't know, you know, Rudy has been
Speaker 1: I don't think he's been. I know he's been a
Speaker 1: security consultant, does a lot of TV stuff. I don't
Speaker 1: think he's been practicing much in the way a law
Speaker 1: at a long time. But I could I could be
Speaker 1: wrong on that. Uh So we shall see. But yeah,
Speaker 1: Giuliani has joined the Trump defense team. Left the breaking
Speaker 1: breaking news. Giuliani joins Trump defense team. So there is
Speaker 1: that Patrick in Wabash, Indiana? Did I say that right? Patrick? Yeah? Whoa, Hey, Yeah,
Speaker 1: we're here, man. We can all hear you. Wabash or
Speaker 1: Wabash Wabash. I was close. I want to ask a
Speaker 1: question that's I have been asked by anybody, and I
Speaker 1: don't know. I thought, but it's it's true, Hillary Obama
Speaker 1: and it all call me and such. Why shouldn't they
Speaker 1: be prosecuted for conspiracy to overturn the United States? Because
Speaker 1: if that's what they can do with their lives and
Speaker 1: successfully get Trump out of office, they could do it
Speaker 1: to anybody. Well, Patrick, I I appreciate where your heart
Speaker 1: is in this one. But if we couldn't get if
Speaker 1: we couldn't get charges against Hillary for over a hundred
Speaker 1: instances of classified on her home Brew server, and all
Speaker 1: the lies and all the destruction of evidence that followed it, Um,
Speaker 1: we're not I don't think we're gonna get on a
Speaker 1: complicated overturning the government charge never mind. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: that's something that could even be proven under any circumstances.
Speaker 1: But I do appreciate your calling in from Indiana. I
Speaker 1: had one more thing I wanted to get here to
Speaker 1: the dirt because it is important. Um playlip nine. Please.
Speaker 1: You never can have a crime with the intent is
Speaker 1: the whole thing. You have to have an illegal act,
Speaker 1: and you can't have an illegal act when the president
Speaker 1: acts within his constitutional authority. You can't have an act
Speaker 1: that is both constitutionally authorized under Article one under Article two,
Speaker 1: and at the same time is criminal. And you must
Speaker 1: have an act. As Grays, you must have any illegal act,
Speaker 1: and it would undercut the power of the president to
Speaker 1: start questioning why he pardoned, why he fired. Once he
Speaker 1: did it and it's within his authority, you can't question,
Speaker 1: just like you can't question a senator for his vote
Speaker 1: on the Senate floor, and you can't question a judge
Speaker 1: for their vote in the Supreme Court. You know, It's
Speaker 1: kind of like, uh, you know, in the NFL, there's
Speaker 1: some things that that cannot be reviewed. And even if
Speaker 1: you think, oh man, that guy's food was out of bound,
Speaker 1: you're like, well, I can't be reviewed, right, we all
Speaker 1: know the rules. This is not non There are rules
Speaker 1: we all know. And Ther's just saying here and he's
Speaker 1: going up against Tube and there as well that you
Speaker 1: can't There is not any scenario where the president's decision
Speaker 1: to fire, because the president can fire for any reason.
Speaker 1: So if the president can fire, call me for any reason,
Speaker 1: how can the president's firing of Comey be a prosecutable act?
Speaker 1: The answers that can't be. So what the heck are
Speaker 1: they even talking about? The answer that is, they don't
Speaker 1: you know, the Democrats don't even know. They just want
Speaker 1: to take Trump down. Uh, We've got some interesting news
Speaker 1: on North Korea that makes me think that this may
Speaker 1: actually get further down, further down field. To borrow from
Speaker 1: our NFL analogy, here, further downfield and people would have anticipated.
Speaker 1: So I've got some stories for you on that, plus
Speaker 1: the wisdom of Kanye and the stupidity of Cuomo. That's
Speaker 1: coming up. You're gonna wanna stay around for it. He's
Speaker 1: back with you now, because when it comes to the
Speaker 1: fight for truth, the fuck never stops. M You are
Speaker 1: now entering the Freedom Technical Operations Center. All programs must
Speaker 1: be kept strictly. Need to know Team Bucket is cleared
Speaker 1: and ready for the buck Brief. We hope to see
Speaker 1: the day when the whole Korean peninsula can live together
Speaker 1: in safety, prosperity, and peace. This is the destiny of
Speaker 1: the Korean people who deserve and have gone through so
Speaker 1: much over the years. We hope it all works out.
Speaker 1: We'll be trying very hard. I want to thank the
Speaker 1: Prime Minister for his inside and support over the past
Speaker 1: year as we have pursued the dream of a peaceful,
Speaker 1: nuclear free Korea. Shinzo, you have worked very hard along
Speaker 1: with us and all of our people, and we thank
Speaker 1: you very much, and we're with you, and you're a
Speaker 1: lot closer than we are, but we're working on this together.
Speaker 1: We are weeks away from what is anticipated to be
Speaker 1: one of the biggest foreign policy and diplomacy gambles of
Speaker 1: the last twenty years um, and that's just I'm just
Speaker 1: taking a wild guest there. I mean, you could take
Speaker 1: this back probably the Berlin Wall. In terms of the
Speaker 1: geopolitical ramifications. North Korea is the single most authoritarian, most
Speaker 1: totalitarian state on the planet. It is the most disturbing
Speaker 1: rogue state when it comes to its weapons programs, the
Speaker 1: most isolated from the international community, and the most militaristic
Speaker 1: even more so than Iran or others in its rhetoric.
Speaker 1: And the President of the United States right now, despite
Speaker 1: all of the naysayers and the people that have aligned
Speaker 1: against whatever foreign policy movie makes, has decided that he
Speaker 1: is going to approach this with fresh eye days and
Speaker 1: engage in what could honestly be And I'm not trying to,
Speaker 1: you know, take a line from what you might have
Speaker 1: heard on The Apprentice here, but this would be the
Speaker 1: most high stakes negotiation of Donald Trump's life. I think
Speaker 1: that that's pretty clear. If he sits down with Kim
Speaker 1: Jong on face to face and they have a discussion
Speaker 1: about the future of that country. Doesn't get any bigger
Speaker 1: than that, because the possibility if this fails, and we
Speaker 1: need to put this into the proper context so we
Speaker 1: understand why these discussions have so much writing on them.
Speaker 1: If this fails, the prospect of a war with North
Speaker 1: Korea at some point in the not distant future UH
Speaker 1: gets larger with each passing day, becomes much more serious
Speaker 1: and much more likely. So the President United States has
Speaker 1: decided to embark on this path, and it would be
Speaker 1: an amazing thing, wouldn't it. After I mean, we could
Speaker 1: go back on Google and we could look at the
Speaker 1: tweets and see journalists who were saying Trump's Twitter accounts
Speaker 1: gonna start a nuclear war with North Korea, you know,
Speaker 1: calling him a little rocketman. Remember that one, a little
Speaker 1: rocket man that's going to get aust into hot water
Speaker 1: with North Korea, And there's going to be huge ramifications
Speaker 1: from it. What if Trump is the one that manages
Speaker 1: to put the Korean Peninsula on a path to stability
Speaker 1: where you don't have the North constantly threatening not just
Speaker 1: retaliation against the US for any active aggression that it sees,
Speaker 1: but UH trying to enforce its will upon South Korea
Speaker 1: at the point of a sword. It would be a
Speaker 1: game changer. And we have more information now about just
Speaker 1: what we can expect from UH these talks. But first
Speaker 1: I want to I want to note that this is
Speaker 1: not just the result of a gamble that Trump took
Speaker 1: by setting up these direct talks. It's also a policy
Speaker 1: response that he's had in place. You have tougher sanctions
Speaker 1: now on North Korea that at any point previously, more
Speaker 1: sanctions that target those who try to help them evade sanctions,
Speaker 1: and going after vessels that are used to do transhipment
Speaker 1: of North Korean goods. And this is all very smart policy,
Speaker 1: and it is also bearing it is also bearing out
Speaker 1: its effects here. And remember this is what the president
Speaker 1: that we're told doesn't know anything. He's an agramus on
Speaker 1: foreign policy. Meanwhile, his sanctions regime against North Korea is
Speaker 1: better than anything that we have seen previously. And you'd
Speaker 1: probably like to think why is that. Well, maybe the
Speaker 1: Obama administration, for example, didn't want things to get two
Speaker 1: tends with North Korea because they didn't ever want to
Speaker 1: have to actually use the stick, just the carrot, right,
Speaker 1: they didn't want to have to come down on North
Speaker 1: Korea if there was some kind of a reciprocal action
Speaker 1: taken by Kim Jong un meant to you know, rattle us,
Speaker 1: you know, we put sanctions on him. He decides to
Speaker 1: come back at us with some things. So the sanctions
Speaker 1: are critical. Play clip two. We have come a long
Speaker 1: way with North Korea. We were, as you know, and
Speaker 1: when I say we, for many years, they've been talking
Speaker 1: to North Korea and nothing's happened. They should have been
Speaker 1: taken care of by past administrations when they were not
Speaker 1: nearly so far along. But we put unbelievably powerful sanctions
Speaker 1: on and many other things. He's right about the previous administrations,
Speaker 1: and that includes Republican administrations, bipartisan failure in the issue
Speaker 1: of North Korea. You know what the safe move was
Speaker 1: was a North Korea keep keep more or less the
Speaker 1: policy or predecessor, whether it was Obama with Bush or
Speaker 1: Bush with Clinton, or keep whatever was there before, and
Speaker 1: don't rock the boat too much, stay within with the
Speaker 1: foreign policy the so called foreign policy smart set says
Speaker 1: you should do. You know, don't do anything that puts
Speaker 1: you in a position where you could be held accountable
Speaker 1: for a man ager disruption of the status quo and
Speaker 1: the fallout from it. And start talking to fall out.
Speaker 1: You can think nuclear fallout too. Um Trump is like
Speaker 1: enough is enough, No more kicking the can down the
Speaker 1: road on North Korea. Let's let's take this head on.
Speaker 1: You know, you've had Comy sank to Comy out there
Speaker 1: on his media tour and he's talking about political courage.
Speaker 1: You know what political courage is. It's when you don't
Speaker 1: have to tackle something as an elected official. You can
Speaker 1: leave it for the next guy and protect your poll numbers,
Speaker 1: but you would rather protect an ally global stability and
Speaker 1: thirty thousand plus American troops in South Korea and whoever
Speaker 1: else we'd have to get involved with. Things really hit
Speaker 1: the fan in dealing with Pyeong yang. That's what political
Speaker 1: courage actually is. It's not writing a book when you're
Speaker 1: gonna get a lot of money for it and a
Speaker 1: lot of press and attention, and you're going to be
Speaker 1: messing up a current administration for your own personal gain.
Speaker 1: That's not courage. Saying despite all the so called foreign
Speaker 1: policy conventional wisdom which has been arrayed against Trump in
Speaker 1: on almost every issue where he's decided to go his
Speaker 1: own way, right, it's not like he can say, well,
Speaker 1: some agreed with the some don't. Whenever Trump steps away
Speaker 1: from the consensus opinion, whether it's on trade, is the
Speaker 1: is the big one and now we're seeing in North
Speaker 1: Korea as well. There's a bipartisan backlash against him, but
Speaker 1: he believes that it's necessary and he's gonna lead. You know,
Speaker 1: Leadership implies being out front, being first in the line,
Speaker 1: and for Trump that means sitting across from Kim Jong
Speaker 1: un and perhaps striking a deal. I mentioned there was
Speaker 1: a news update on it, and and I wanted to actually
Speaker 1: give you what that was. North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Un,
Speaker 1: according to the New York Times and other well, I
Speaker 1: was gonna say reputable sites, but however reputable you think
Speaker 1: they are, has decided that there will no longer be
Speaker 1: the upfront demand the prerequisite of a removal of all
Speaker 1: U S troops from the Korean peninsula from I mean
Speaker 1: from South Korea. Right, we don't have troops in North Korea,
Speaker 1: so from South Korea. So Kim Jong un is now
Speaker 1: officially and this has com do us through UH intermediaries
Speaker 1: in the well, through the press, I believe I said that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: South Korea's President Moon j In has told us this
Speaker 1: that there is not the precondition of all U S
Speaker 1: troops have to leave South Korea, which had been the case.
Speaker 1: And this so this is a change. This shows a
Speaker 1: serious willingness to negotiate. Right. That was a nonstarter. That
Speaker 1: was a deal breaker. There was the possibility, and I
Speaker 1: had thought that it might come into play here. I
Speaker 1: couldn't rule it out that Kim Jong un was going
Speaker 1: to say, hold on a second, before we really get
Speaker 1: to anything, we need you to agree to take all
Speaker 1: U S troops off the Korean penins because then it
Speaker 1: becomes this game of well, how do we verify whether
Speaker 1: they really whether they're cheating on their nuclear regime or not,
Speaker 1: you know, whether they've actually gotten rid of everything they've
Speaker 1: said they've gotten rid of. And if we don't have
Speaker 1: troops in the Korean peninsula, we have way less leverage,
Speaker 1: especially if things got really ugly, really fast between North
Speaker 1: and South Korea. So that was a nonstarter. That's not
Speaker 1: on the that's not a problem anymore. That's off the table.
Speaker 1: So this is another positive sign. I'm not trying to
Speaker 1: get ahead of things. I know this is gonna be
Speaker 1: very tough, but it is the biggest negotiation of this
Speaker 1: president's life, no question about it, and the benefits could
Speaker 1: be huge. It could really affect our relationship with China
Speaker 1: in positive ways, which could affect our economy in positive ways,
Speaker 1: or that you've got to think of the second order
Speaker 1: effects that could come from this, And I think in
Speaker 1: this instance you'll see it's very very important. Um, the
Speaker 1: Governor New York is trying to show everyone he's woke,
Speaker 1: and we are going to discuss in just a few
Speaker 1: minutes here how unwoke he is. He's very very into
Speaker 1: big a social jot. You'll see. You'll see just a
Speaker 1: few stay with me, whether you're drinking it's straight up
Speaker 1: on the rocks or mixing it into your favorite margarita.
Speaker 1: G four tequila is simply the best you can get
Speaker 1: out there on the market right now. G four is
Speaker 1: the pinnacle of master distiller for Leape Camarina's passion for
Speaker 1: crafting truly great tequila. What I think you're gonna remember
Speaker 1: about G four is that it's it has this incredible
Speaker 1: process where it uses fifty harvested rainwater and fifty fifty
Speaker 1: spring water. The rainwater is harvested from the advanced rain
Speaker 1: collection system that was built into the roof at L.
Speaker 1: Pandio Distillery, and the spring water comes from a spring
Speaker 1: right on the ranch. This brings a distinctive, clear crisp
Speaker 1: smell and flavor to G four, it sets it apart
Speaker 1: from all the rest. Try for yourself and see I
Speaker 1: love drinking it. I think you really enjoy it. To
Speaker 1: visit G four Tequila dot com for more details, or
Speaker 1: give them a like on Facebook at facebook dot com
Speaker 1: slash G four tequilas that's G four tequila dot com.
Speaker 1: Craft your own luxury. You want to talk about undocumented
Speaker 1: and the way they torture the docta children. I'm an
Speaker 1: Italian American. I came from poor Italian Americans who came here.
Speaker 1: You know what they called Italian Americans back in the day,
Speaker 1: They called them wops. You know what whops stood for
Speaker 1: without papers. I'm undocumented. You want to deport an undocumented person,
Speaker 1: start with me, because I'm an undocumented person. The governor
Speaker 1: of New York is apparently a more on. He gives
Speaker 1: speeches that he thinks sound good until the words leave
Speaker 1: his mouth and then he realizes he is a buffoon
Speaker 1: of the highest order. That's Cuomo, the governor of one
Speaker 1: of our biggest and most important states, at least by
Speaker 1: population and wealth. I'm not I'm not trying to hate
Speaker 1: on your Rhode Island, but not exactly carrying the same
Speaker 1: weight as New York. And this is now, this is
Speaker 1: now a thing that we're all undocumented. You're going to
Speaker 1: see more and more of this, right because it used
Speaker 1: to be we're all immigrants, and then we realized that's
Speaker 1: not really true. It's not really an accurate state. Now
Speaker 1: you're seeing, Oh, people like the governor of New York
Speaker 1: are saying that he's undocumented and deport him. I know
Speaker 1: that he's trying to make a point here, but it's
Speaker 1: a point that's so or rather, he's doing it in
Speaker 1: so stupid a fashion that I think we gave him
Speaker 1: far too much credit to think that there's even a
Speaker 1: point to be made. Nobody needs a hundred rounds to
Speaker 1: kill a dear Remember that was him after he decided
Speaker 1: to push for gun control legislation in New York State,
Speaker 1: and he was talking about hunting all the time, And
Speaker 1: anyone who knows anything about the Second Amendment knows that
Speaker 1: hunting has literally nothing to do with it. Would it
Speaker 1: be unconstitutional to tell people they were only allowed to
Speaker 1: use a bow and arrow, or or perhaps a Roman
Speaker 1: Empire style peelum, which is like a weaited javelin spear.
Speaker 1: I just wanted to throw that in there because you know,
Speaker 1: fun fact of the day. Um. Yeah, actually you could
Speaker 1: require people the only hunt with whatever implements you want. Technically,
Speaker 1: at at a state level, it probably passed a federal
Speaker 1: lass as part of commerce. But but guns are not
Speaker 1: about hunting. But he doesn't care because he wants still
Speaker 1: bad fire arms. And if you'll notice, every time the
Speaker 1: Governor of New York give the speech, it's up in
Speaker 1: the same register. It's like he doesn't think that the
Speaker 1: words will come out until they do, and then the
Speaker 1: words are out of his mouth that he said from
Speaker 1: or else stop. So so he says he's undocumented. That's
Speaker 1: clearly not true. He's the governor of New York State. Um.
Speaker 1: And then he also took this even further with the
Speaker 1: I am you know this is uh. You see this
Speaker 1: hashtag sometimes if you know, I am whatever um and
Speaker 1: and Cuomo is trying to get in on some of that.
Speaker 1: He's trying to be he's trying to be woke Cuomo.
Speaker 1: He's trying to be woke Cuomo here. And this is
Speaker 1: what he says about all the different identities that he
Speaker 1: identifies with twenty two. As a New Yorker, I am
Speaker 1: a Muslim as a New Yorker, I am Jewish as
Speaker 1: a New Yorker, I am black, I am I am disabled.
Speaker 1: I am a woman seeking to control her health and
Speaker 1: her choices because as a New Yorker, we are one community.
Speaker 1: I have a question for you. First of all, do
Speaker 1: you own a mirror? Second of all, why are you
Speaker 1: saying something so dull? Uh? Notice how he's not a
Speaker 1: he's not just a woman in this. I understand he's
Speaker 1: taking some uh some poetic license here with us, But
Speaker 1: notice how he's only a woman who's pro choice. That's
Speaker 1: what he's saying. He and he didn't say pro choice
Speaker 1: because it's preferential for people who are pro choice to
Speaker 1: believe it. They're really all about health, that it's a
Speaker 1: health choice. You know, some people like to have oh
Speaker 1: brand the morning. Other people like to make the terrible
Speaker 1: choice of terminating a pregnancy. It's just about health. No,
Speaker 1: it's not. No, it's not. But that's the formulation and
Speaker 1: that he uses. Um, that's the formulation that he uses
Speaker 1: because he is a uh really a grotesque panderer. And
Speaker 1: don't ever forget that he's the same governor who there
Speaker 1: was something called the Moreland Commission. And remember, Democrats played
Speaker 1: dirty and Republicans are boy scouts who sometimes don't understand
Speaker 1: the street fight that they're in and therefore they lose.
Speaker 1: As a recurring theme, I've been hitting that with you
Speaker 1: here on the show. But Cuomo set up the Moreland Commission,
Speaker 1: or the Moreland Commission got started and it was getting
Speaker 1: a little too close for comfort. So guess what he
Speaker 1: did with his corruption Commission. He shot it down because
Speaker 1: they were looking for corruption and c stands for Cuomo
Speaker 1: as well as corruption. So he's a guy that I
Speaker 1: think you've looked at him more, you'd find out, Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: he's dirty. He's a bad guy too. I've heard from
Speaker 1: people in New York politics that not not a nice
Speaker 1: fellow at all. But oh we one more quote from
Speaker 1: him before I move on from this. It is just
Speaker 1: this is what you're seeing, folks. Big states, very democrats states.
Speaker 1: Now it's not enough to even be a Democrat. You
Speaker 1: have to be wearing your wokeness on your sleeve. Plate.
Speaker 1: As New Yorkers, we are especially aware of issues of diversity.
Speaker 1: We're aware of issues of intolerance because we are eighteen
Speaker 1: million people from countries all across the globe. We are
Speaker 1: probably the most diverse state on the globe. Uh And
Speaker 1: it is the essence of who we are. And we
Speaker 1: have no tolerance for intolerance, period. And now it's going
Speaker 1: to stand up and set This gets much more interesting
Speaker 1: when you look at what he means by intolerance though.
Speaker 1: Is is it intolerant, if a for for a Christian
Speaker 1: to have traditional beliefs about marriage? Oh? Yeah, that's intolerance.
Speaker 1: Is it intolerant for someone to think that abortion is
Speaker 1: evil and should be illegal? Oh that's intolerance. So what
Speaker 1: they mean by intolerance is actually just anything that opposes
Speaker 1: the political orthodoxy of the left. They'll find a way
Speaker 1: to shoehorn that into the intolerance category because they're they're
Speaker 1: in a constant propaganda war. They're really not in a
Speaker 1: war for ideas as such. It's not about competing goods
Speaker 1: and principles, and we're squaring off against them battlefield of ideas. Now,
Speaker 1: this is the Left presenting itself as the moral choice.
Speaker 1: It's already been decided. They're the good guys. If you're
Speaker 1: not with them, you're the bad guy. And they're just
Speaker 1: gonna keep yelling about it. They are not looking for converts.
Speaker 1: They are hunting heretics. And that is what you see
Speaker 1: from the governor of New York State. Uh and everything
Speaker 1: that he does. But I just I couldn't help. But
Speaker 1: I am an unbocumented person. I also do not and
Speaker 1: to say things that are very smart. My speech writer
Speaker 1: does sometimes right gobbledegook on the page because I will
Speaker 1: there is place, go up, dog cat move, Hey, not funny,
Speaker 1: I'm the governor. Wait a quick break, team back with
Speaker 1: uh some thoughts from the one and only philosopher of
Speaker 1: our age? Who is it? Who is it? You'll have
Speaker 1: to stay and I'll let you know. I looked for
Speaker 1: wisdom wherever I can find it. I like to spend
Speaker 1: as much of my time as I can acquiring more
Speaker 1: knowledge but inside about life and being able to leverage
Speaker 1: the life philosophy of others is something that I think
Speaker 1: we should all seek to seek to gain right. We
Speaker 1: should look for those who have insights on on just
Speaker 1: the day to day. I'm not talking about the deep
Speaker 1: philosophy like the meaning of life or religion. I just
Speaker 1: mean how you approach your job, how you approach waking
Speaker 1: up in the morning. And I just thought it was
Speaker 1: kind of funny because I spend time looking for these
Speaker 1: things online, looking for people that have real insights, and
Speaker 1: sure enough, there's an unexpected source of what I guess
Speaker 1: you could call daily philosophy out there, Mr Kanye West.
Speaker 1: I've been reading some of Kanye recently because his Twitter account,
Speaker 1: which has a mere sixteen million followers, so a lot
Speaker 1: of folks get to see what Kanye is thinking. Uh,
Speaker 1: they can see what the what the Kanye is cooking
Speaker 1: if you will. I guess the Rock is going to
Speaker 1: be upset about this, but he said some interesting stuff
Speaker 1: on Twitter really kind of got my attention. But he
Speaker 1: also says really weird stuff, and so it's kind of
Speaker 1: fun because you can separate out the wisdom of Kanye
Speaker 1: from the weirdness of Kanye. And that's kind of what
Speaker 1: they spent a few minutes on this before we get
Speaker 1: into a roll call, which will obviously be just all wisdom,
Speaker 1: no weirdness, because it's coming from all of you. Like
Speaker 1: Kanye wrote, and this is just in the last couple
Speaker 1: of days, things like today will be the greatest day
Speaker 1: so far. Life keeps getting better and better. Now, you
Speaker 1: you could dismiss that as tried to be sure, But
Speaker 1: you know, isn't it better wake up and think that
Speaker 1: maybe if it's not even true, it's a worthwhile way
Speaker 1: to approach your day, I would think. He also writes,
Speaker 1: if you want to see the true character of a person,
Speaker 1: watch the way they treat someone who can't do anything
Speaker 1: for them. Now, this is quite true. This got retweeted
Speaker 1: a hundred and sixty one thousand times. I would note,
Speaker 1: but uh, this is also well known and it is obvious.
Speaker 1: And I will tell you that whenever I have seen
Speaker 1: someone who has acted badly towards someone that I knew
Speaker 1: wouldn't be able to stand up for themselves or retaliate
Speaker 1: in any way, I'm never able to. I've never able
Speaker 1: to let that go entirely about that person's character. You
Speaker 1: know that that, to me is very very telling. And
Speaker 1: people say this like, oh, pay attention to how someone
Speaker 1: treats those who serve them or weight on them, and uh,
Speaker 1: and those who work for them. I'm very proud of
Speaker 1: the fact, although may be proud is too strong a word,
Speaker 1: because it's also just what I would expect for myself.
Speaker 1: But I've never of all the people that I have, uh,
Speaker 1: that I've had work for me in some capacity in
Speaker 1: my ears and media. I've never mistreated any of them.
Speaker 1: So that's something that I take pride in. How about that? Um?
Speaker 1: Other things that Kanye. They're going back to the philosophy
Speaker 1: of Kanye West, he wrote, be Les, this is just
Speaker 1: the last couple of days he's been like an online
Speaker 1: philosophy tear. I'm just trying to share it with you.
Speaker 1: You know, Kanye is a Some of you will say
Speaker 1: he's a megalomaniac and overrated and all that, and whether
Speaker 1: or not that's true, He's an interesting fellow. He's an
Speaker 1: interesting fellow. Um, he wrote, Let's be less concerned with
Speaker 1: ownership of ideas. It is important that ideas see the
Speaker 1: light of day, even if you don't get the credit
Speaker 1: for them. Let's be let's let's be less concerned with
Speaker 1: credit awards and external validation. Um. This little zen, little
Speaker 1: zen for Kanye. I think here is somebody who makes
Speaker 1: a living in the creative space and who relies on
Speaker 1: intellectual property law to allow him to be so wealthy.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure this idea of just put your ideas
Speaker 1: out there and let anyone have them, just put them
Speaker 1: out in the universe. Man I don't think that's good advice.
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna say, uh, where, there's some other ones
Speaker 1: here that were really oh here, Oh wait, where did
Speaker 1: it go? Where did my Where did Kanye go? It
Speaker 1: disappeared for a second off my screen. But I've got more.
Speaker 1: I'm up here. Uh. It's not where you take things from,
Speaker 1: it's where you take them to. Okay, that's a fortune cookie.
Speaker 1: That that's a fortune cookie. We don't have to spend
Speaker 1: much time on that one. Uh. And then there's one
Speaker 1: in particular that in life. Oh, here we go. In life,
Speaker 1: we are all trained actors. When we're born, we're ourselves.
Speaker 1: And then one of the first things were thought is
Speaker 1: how to act if you see a kid screaming at
Speaker 1: a restaurant because he feels something and can't express himself
Speaker 1: in a conventional manner, where the kids just a just
Speaker 1: a baby. Um. Then Kanye writes, I can't argue this one.
Speaker 1: Stop lying about stuff, just stop lying. And oh here's
Speaker 1: here's a particularly uh interesting one. You will be a
Speaker 1: drop of water with the ocean as your army. If
Speaker 1: you move out of fear, then you move on your own.
Speaker 1: Then it's just you and the money and the countless
Speaker 1: people you have lied to and manipulate to build a
Speaker 1: man made path that will never leave the true happiness.
Speaker 1: Uh what does that mean? I don't really know, but
Speaker 1: I just me. I just know that Kanye is something
Speaker 1: of a Twitter philosopher now. And uh, I've been enjoying
Speaker 1: some of the insights and the really really random stuff
Speaker 1: courtesy of Mr Kanye West. Like I said, I look
Speaker 1: for insight everywhere, folks, and with that your insights coming
Speaker 1: up in Roll Call. It's been quite a week out
Speaker 1: here on the West Coast, the Left Coast, my first
Speaker 1: time ever in San Diego, hoping that I can at
Speaker 1: least go take a quick peek at the beach in
Speaker 1: La Joya, which sounds like a lovely place before I
Speaker 1: have to head back on an airplane and get back
Speaker 1: into the fight in New York City. Man, traveling is tiring.
Speaker 1: I gotta say, you know, the whole traveling salesman thing.
Speaker 1: Those guys were gals earn their money though it's a lot,
Speaker 1: and airline travels also just it's just a bummer. It
Speaker 1: just is. You know. Maybe one day, well I'll have
Speaker 1: buck Force one and I'd like to think it's like
Speaker 1: a g seven or something, but it will probably be
Speaker 1: a a prop plane. Um, then I'll have to learn
Speaker 1: to fly it myself. But Buck Force one is a
Speaker 1: goal of the future. It'd probably be more likely a
Speaker 1: hang glider even you know, not even motorized. But I
Speaker 1: need some set of of wheels for the sky, if
Speaker 1: you will. And now with that completely nonsensical interlude, let's
Speaker 1: get into your much more sensible commentary, your thoughts, your questions,
Speaker 1: analysis of all things. It's time for some roll call. Hey,
Speaker 1: Team Buck, it's time for roll call. See some of
Speaker 1: you love the dub step, so I gotta put the
Speaker 1: dub step in. If some of you are such big fan,
Speaker 1: I know others of you are not. Scrill X was
Speaker 1: the most famous dub step DJ that I knew of
Speaker 1: at least, and he I don't see as much of
Speaker 1: him anymore. All right, now let's get into it. If
Speaker 1: you want to write to me, by the way, if
Speaker 1: you want to be a part of this final segment
Speaker 1: of the show. Uh it is Facebook dot com, slash
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton or official Team Buck at g mail dot com. Uh.
Speaker 1: Let's go. Let's go into uh Seth who writes Buck.
Speaker 1: I'm a couple of days behind you on the podcast.
Speaker 1: But I heard you are in San Diego. Are you
Speaker 1: having any meet and Greek opportunities for fans? Shields high uh, seth.
Speaker 1: Nothing planned, but I will be wandering around downtown, popping
Speaker 1: into random bars and and hanging out tonight, and I'm
Speaker 1: sure i'll be tweeting out or instagramming. And if you
Speaker 1: don't follow me on Instagram, it's just Buck Sexton on Instagram.
Speaker 1: So it's mostly photos of me doing work and then
Speaker 1: photos of Ms Molly because she's way prettier than I am. Uh,
Speaker 1: And that's pretty much my Instagram. And and dogs dogs,
Speaker 1: me doing media stuff Miss Molly that is a pretty
Speaker 1: compret Oh and food occasionally, but not my only food
Speaker 1: that I cook, not food that someone else cooks for me, right,
Speaker 1: because I'm not a savage. If I make a perfectly
Speaker 1: seared ribbi using my cast iron at home, if I
Speaker 1: have the the appropriate amount of coated seasoning around it,
Speaker 1: ample salt and pepper, if I really get that caramelization
Speaker 1: of the meat on the yeah, then I'll share that
Speaker 1: on Instagram. But I'm not gonna sit there and be like, oh,
Speaker 1: look at this, I've got a kale beat salad with
Speaker 1: goot cheese and extra virgin olive oil. That's someone else put. No, no,
Speaker 1: that's just for me to eat in, you know, in
Speaker 1: front of me eating my ribbi, or rather ahead of
Speaker 1: me eating my ribbi. Uh So, anyway, seth. Hopefully I'll
Speaker 1: maybe we'll we'll bump into each other tonight at some
Speaker 1: point with some of the rest of the team. But
Speaker 1: I'm gonna be one around downtown San Diego. If you
Speaker 1: see a guy looks like a lost tourist wearing a hoodie,
Speaker 1: because I'm trying to fit out here in Cali Fornia,
Speaker 1: Mark Zuckerberg style. I'm rocking a a hipster hoodie today. Um,
Speaker 1: that will be me. So please come over and say hi.
Speaker 1: Next up, we've got Adam. All right, Hey Buck, I
Speaker 1: just want to say you've inspired me to start speaking
Speaker 1: my mind about current events, history, philosophy, and how all
Speaker 1: these things relate back to promoting freedom. Started on Facebook, page, Twitter, etcetera, etcetera.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much for continue to inspire others. Well, Adam,
Speaker 1: that's a really high compliment, my friend, And I'm so
Speaker 1: glad that you feel in any way what I do
Speaker 1: here on this show. My My My Day, to day
Speaker 1: passion my life's work. Uh. If it inspires you to
Speaker 1: do your own version of the Freedom hudd or if
Speaker 1: you feel like now you're empowered to just share your
Speaker 1: thoughts more family and friends and or um put a
Speaker 1: platform out there where you're doing your own analysis. That's
Speaker 1: great and it's very very high praise indeed, and uh
Speaker 1: keep at it and shields high, Uh, Daniel, next up,
Speaker 1: I enjoy your show. Hopefully sank to comis sank to
Speaker 1: comy and all its grammatical forms become part of our language.
Speaker 1: You're a clear voice among the babble. Well, Daniel, you
Speaker 1: are a man who understands clarity when he hears it.
Speaker 1: So thank you so much for your time, message and
Speaker 1: your support. You know, on days like today, where I'll
Speaker 1: be honest with you, I've been driving around, running around
Speaker 1: just lots and lots of meetings, and I can't give
Speaker 1: you any previews really of what the meetings are gonna are,
Speaker 1: what they're about. But I can tell you that we've
Speaker 1: just got a lot of projects in mind for the
Speaker 1: Freedom hut here also knowne as the Buck Sexton Show,
Speaker 1: that will be coming your fruition soon, and there's gonna
Speaker 1: be more audio additions to what we do here, and
Speaker 1: more video additions to what we do here. It is
Speaker 1: all in the mix. It is it is getting done.
Speaker 1: And by the way, also, all of you who have
Speaker 1: decided to check out some of our sponsors on the show,
Speaker 1: I've been getting feedback about that. It just it helps
Speaker 1: so much. And there's no bigger vote of confidence you
Speaker 1: can give for what I'm doing day in and day
Speaker 1: out than when I read off uh some ideas or
Speaker 1: some some copy points give you a U r L
Speaker 1: to go to for one of our sponsors. Check them out, please,
Speaker 1: because that's the way. Look, that's the way we fund
Speaker 1: all the projects we're doing, including the future expansions of
Speaker 1: the Hut, And it really means a lot. And those
Speaker 1: of you who have been doing it, and there are
Speaker 1: a lot of you really appreciate, and those of you
Speaker 1: haven't yet, please give it some thought and with that
Speaker 1: we will go to Sarah here. Roll call is always fun,
Speaker 1: but even more so when I hear my own stuff. Sarah,
Speaker 1: She's in the roll call feed now. Fun to feel
Speaker 1: connected somehow, as I listened to the last ninth show
Speaker 1: and realized I wasn't the only one who caught it.
Speaker 1: I thought perhaps you might feel glad we all listen
Speaker 1: so carefully. Yes, Sarah, there was a bit of a
Speaker 1: preview that was unintended of perhaps Buck spending more time
Speaker 1: in our nation's capital starting very soon. So, like I said,
Speaker 1: neither confirmed nor deny. But those of you who mistic
Speaker 1: can go back and listen on the podcast and you
Speaker 1: can make up your own minds about it. Uh, let's
Speaker 1: see we have. I I gotta say, I don't know
Speaker 1: how to how to pronounce this. Let me know when
Speaker 1: you get to San Diego, big fan here, Well, I
Speaker 1: uh thank you, and I'm here, So there you go.
Speaker 1: And I'm gonna be downtown tonight in San Diego. Wandered
Speaker 1: around probably whatever the best seafood restaurant in San Diego is,
Speaker 1: that is probably where I will be tonight. So whatever
Speaker 1: that is. I'm an oyster guy. I'm a seafood guy.
Speaker 1: And Ms Molly hates all that stuff. Loves tuna. I
Speaker 1: mean there's some seafood she likes, but it does not
Speaker 1: like any of the raw shellfish. So when I'm when
Speaker 1: we're separated, she had to go back to New York.
Speaker 1: When we're separated, I tend to really indulge my inner
Speaker 1: post sidon so poetic bucks so poetic. Uh. Dr Lee, Hey,
Speaker 1: Dr Lee, have heard from you in a while. That's
Speaker 1: really nice. Dr Lee is one of my OSS squad
Speaker 1: here and she's got more degrees than I have, uh
Speaker 1: fingers on my hands, she writes in as always love
Speaker 1: the show. Shout out to my fellow OSS peeps from
Speaker 1: Dr Lee today. I was especially moved by the story
Speaker 1: you shared about the young man who realized how self
Speaker 1: involved he was and ultimately changed his attitude. Thankfully, I
Speaker 1: work at a university allows me to even encourage me
Speaker 1: uh to share my faith with students. Thus, every morning
Speaker 1: at the beginning of class, I have spiritual reflections where
Speaker 1: I share inspirational stories. Today I use this story as
Speaker 1: our time to reflect on compassion for others. Since today's
Speaker 1: topic was on energy balance and obesity. Because of this story,
Speaker 1: I think they will look at Obesi with a different
Speaker 1: set of eyes shields. I can't wait to see all
Speaker 1: in Austin. Well, Dr Lee, I'll certainly give you a
Speaker 1: heads up when I'm gonna be down in the Austin
Speaker 1: area working on that trip uh, and I'm hopefully gonna
Speaker 1: be bringing it to fruition. Maybe not this summer because
Speaker 1: it's like a little hot in Austin over the summer,
Speaker 1: but the fall, like October, maybe November be like a
Speaker 1: great time for me to go check out what's going
Speaker 1: on in Austin, I think, um, but might be sooner
Speaker 1: than that too. And yeah, I thought that story that
Speaker 1: guy told was really moving. And you know I I
Speaker 1: still um, yeah, there's there's a couple of stories that
Speaker 1: it reminded me of that I might share with you
Speaker 1: later on later on, Well it wouldn't be this week,
Speaker 1: but next week. Um. And I will tell you that
Speaker 1: one thing that I've I've really never been able to shake.
Speaker 1: It's just me sharing some truth, sharing some of my
Speaker 1: truth with you here, which I try to do all
Speaker 1: the time. But this is on a personal side. Is
Speaker 1: whenever I have mistreated somebody who has been good to me,
Speaker 1: and even a small way, I have a really hard
Speaker 1: time with that, meaning that I remember it for for
Speaker 1: years and I always want to make amends. And fortunately,
Speaker 1: I will say I think the incidents are few and
Speaker 1: far between, but I mean even kind of more minor ones,
Speaker 1: you know, or before I got into media, if anyone
Speaker 1: when I was in the agency or before that, you know,
Speaker 1: kind of looked up to me and I didn't. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I didn't live up to the expectation of one where
Speaker 1: or another or not even the expectation. Just live up
Speaker 1: to my own standards. So it's important always always keep
Speaker 1: in mind those around you who are trying to show
Speaker 1: you kindness in respect, and they may not be doing
Speaker 1: it in the way that you necessarily would assume they would, right,
Speaker 1: and they may not be. They may not be the
Speaker 1: smoothest or the coolest and how they do it. But
Speaker 1: you know, never forget the person that does a little
Speaker 1: a little nice thing here or there for you. Um
Speaker 1: and and always try to be thankful for it. Uh
Speaker 1: we have, Eric, He writes, hope you're enjoying the Left Coast.
Speaker 1: I was trying to think of something to challenge you
Speaker 1: with for movie quote Friday, and I was wondering, did
Speaker 1: you ever catch Boondocks Saints? I guarantee you'll be entertained
Speaker 1: or your money back. I will literally reimburse you for
Speaker 1: the cost of the rental. Also, the Hillary impressions get
Speaker 1: me every time I'm breaking laws. I love it. That's
Speaker 1: what Hillary says. So and he wrote in the quote
Speaker 1: that's gonna be it for the Freedom Hunt. For today,
Speaker 1: my phone, my folks, my friends, my fellow patriots, all
Speaker 1: of the above, thank you so much for being here
Speaker 1: with me. Excited to get back to home based freedom
Speaker 1: Hunt and tomorrow my friend Mike O. Pelca. Those of
Speaker 1: you who are original Saturday Squad, no that Mike was
Speaker 1: one of my earliest guests on radio. He was a
Speaker 1: guy who before it was even clear there was gonna
Speaker 1: be much of a freedom hut, he was my buddy.
Speaker 1: So you should uh definitely give him a listen, give
Speaker 1: him a chance tomorrow and he will be uh in
Speaker 1: for me. So we call him the Godfather, and if
Speaker 1: you want, you can call it and ask him why
Speaker 1: that is. But Michael Pelica intomorrow, So I'll be back
Speaker 1: with you all Monday. I means please do catch up
Speaker 1: on any podcast. You best share it with a friend
Speaker 1: if you can, have a great weekend. See you Monday.
Speaker 1: Shields High