Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. A fantastic State of
Speaker 1: a Union address from President Trump last night lays out
Speaker 1: what he is trying to accomplish in the coming year
Speaker 1: and also how the Democrats are going to try to
Speaker 1: stop him using whatever tactics at their disposal, but also
Speaker 1: a massive political crisis in the state of Virginia that
Speaker 1: calls into question whether the Democrats have any scruples at all.
Speaker 1: That are more coming up on The buck Sexton Show.
Speaker 1: This is the buck Sexton Show or the mission or
Speaker 1: mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence.
Speaker 1: Magnoma stake America. You're a great American Again, the Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Show begins. I am asking you to choose greatness.
Speaker 1: No matter the trials we face, no matter the challenges
Speaker 1: to come, we must go forward together. We must keep
Speaker 1: America first in our hearts. We must keep freedom alive
Speaker 1: in our souls, and we must always keep faith in
Speaker 1: America's destiny that one nation under God must be the
Speaker 1: hope and the promise and the light and the glory
Speaker 1: among all the nations of the world. Thank you, God,
Speaker 1: Bless you, and God bless America. Thank you God. Welcome
Speaker 1: to the Bucks extent show. The President absolutely nailed it
Speaker 1: last night. He nailed it, and we will do a
Speaker 1: bit more in depth analysis later on in the show
Speaker 1: of some of what he said. I was there at
Speaker 1: the Trump Hotel with a lot of friends, really a
Speaker 1: social visit, did a little bit of live tweeting, which
Speaker 1: was always fun. President a great job last night. We'll
Speaker 1: talk about some of the policy specifics. Of course, the
Speaker 1: media unhinged media reaction, that's all coming up. I want
Speaker 1: to put that on a pause though, for a moment,
Speaker 1: because I know that a lot of you, first of all,
Speaker 1: probably don't even instead of the Union address interesting to you,
Speaker 1: but only in small doses, and also you've probably had
Speaker 1: a chance to read and hear about it throughout the
Speaker 1: course of the day. So we will get to it,
Speaker 1: but I want to I want to just put a
Speaker 1: hold on that for a moment and focus on a
Speaker 1: different story, really series of stories that is causing huge
Speaker 1: problems for the Democrats. Now you will recall it over
Speaker 1: the weekend, because there's there's new developments on all three
Speaker 1: of these today. You will recall it over the weekend.
Speaker 1: There was this news story about Ralph Northam in Virginia.
Speaker 1: The governor of Virginia who had this photo on his
Speaker 1: yearbook page from when he was a medical student at
Speaker 1: Eastern Virginia Universe Virginia Medical School of him in blackface
Speaker 1: and standing next to a clientsman. So just really grotesquely
Speaker 1: racist stuff. I mean, true racism, right, I would truly
Speaker 1: beyond the pale stuff, not that maybe kind of sort
Speaker 1: of racism the Democrats often talk about. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is the real deal racism, right, this is real deal racism.
Speaker 1: And he had this bizarre Oh I'm it was me.
Speaker 1: I'm so sorry. Oh no, I don't think it was me.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to resign. All these democrats said he
Speaker 1: should resign, and I would be willing to if it
Speaker 1: were up to me, perhaps for give, although I do
Speaker 1: think democrats should be forced to live under the draconian
Speaker 1: and often unfair rules they make the rest of us
Speaker 1: live by. I would perhaps be able to move beyond
Speaker 1: if he said he was sorry. It was thirty some
Speaker 1: odd years ago. It was a photo, and you know
Speaker 1: he's lived a very different life since then, and that's
Speaker 1: not what he thinks now. I would be willing, but
Speaker 1: I'm not willing to move beyond. That's not me and
Speaker 1: the photo, because we're not all morons and we should
Speaker 1: not be spoken to by a senior government official from
Speaker 1: a very important state like we're all a bunch of idiots.
Speaker 1: I'm just not okay with that. Okay, that's where the
Speaker 1: Northam controversy still stands. Okay, he he is an unethical liar.
Speaker 1: Notice how much, how rarely that term has be used.
Speaker 1: They always tell us Trump lies. Oh Trump said that,
Speaker 1: you know, he's the best negotiator. He's a liar. That's
Speaker 1: an opinion. It's not a lie. We'll get into the
Speaker 1: fake fact checking of the fake news later. But oh
Speaker 1: Trump said that, you know he does he does the best.
Speaker 1: Trump says that he's got the best hair. Fact check false.
Speaker 1: Yours truly has something to say about this? No, but
Speaker 1: really Trump says things and they claim that it's a lie.
Speaker 1: It's false. Okay. Where are the people that are jumping
Speaker 1: on Northam for not just the racist photo, but for
Speaker 1: lying about what is clearly a photo of him? I mean,
Speaker 1: this is this is like it reminds me. I think
Speaker 1: it was a long time ago, an SNL sketch, and
Speaker 1: this just kept running through my mind where they did
Speaker 1: this whole bit where OJ Simpson was in the courtroom
Speaker 1: and they asked somebody on the witness stand to identify OJ,
Speaker 1: and when the person tried to point at OJ, he
Speaker 1: hid under the desk, and his defense attorney, Johnny Cockers
Speaker 1: was saying, you know, let the record show that he
Speaker 1: pointed at somebody in the back of the room, not
Speaker 1: at my client. You know, this is that by hiding
Speaker 1: from the person pointing in the courtroom, that he was
Speaker 1: avoiding being identified as a double murderer, which is as
Speaker 1: we know what OJ Simpson was and got away with it.
Speaker 1: That's kind of what Northam's at that level. It's like, oh,
Speaker 1: it's not me, I just can't remember, all right. But
Speaker 1: Northam is only one one piece of this Democrat terribleness tripod.
Speaker 1: This triumvirate of terrible that the Democrats have assembled for
Speaker 1: us in Virginia is crumbling. You have Northam, you also
Speaker 1: have fair facts. Fair facts is the lieutenant governor. And
Speaker 1: I want you to keep in mind as we work
Speaker 1: through this, that the way the state of Virginia, and
Speaker 1: I'm sure this is true in most states, the way
Speaker 1: the government works is top as the governor. Lieutenant governor
Speaker 1: would take over if the governor had to step down
Speaker 1: or leave or whatever. And then the state attorney general
Speaker 1: is below the lieutenant governor. Oh, we're gonna get We're
Speaker 1: gonna get to the state attorney general from Virginia because
Speaker 1: he's now a part of this too. Then you have Fairfax,
Speaker 1: and he's the one that I think is probably in
Speaker 1: the great the most dire jeopardy because the allegation against
Speaker 1: him is a criminal allegation, not just a bad judgment
Speaker 1: racism allegation. It's a criminal allegation that about fifteen years ago,
Speaker 1: he sexually assaulted a woman, essentially forced a woman who
Speaker 1: he met while out on the campaign, out of a
Speaker 1: campaign event of some kind, to perform a sex act
Speaker 1: on him. That she forced, that he forced her to
Speaker 1: do this against her will, and she was crying. And
Speaker 1: she is now out there. She is named Vanessa Tyson
Speaker 1: is the individual here. She has come forward, she has
Speaker 1: hired attorneys. She this is an encounter that both parties
Speaker 1: agree happened. They know each other, they had a sexual interaction.
Speaker 1: You know, this is something that there's it's certainly plausible,
Speaker 1: and you know, I can't say if it's probable, but
Speaker 1: I can tell you that's plausible, meaning that there's no
Speaker 1: reason why this sexual assault clearly did not happen, and
Speaker 1: it very well may have happened. I can't adjudicate this properly.
Speaker 1: No one can adjudicate this properly without additional facts. But
Speaker 1: this is to be taken seriously. This is a real
Speaker 1: allegation of a sexual assault, of a man using force
Speaker 1: against a woman to make her do something, to perform
Speaker 1: a sex act that she did not want to. And
Speaker 1: you know she has come forward. She released a statement
Speaker 1: today that he assaulted her in two thousand and four,
Speaker 1: and NBC News reported earlier today that Fairfax said, of
Speaker 1: his accuser, blank, that be word. So that gives you
Speaker 1: a sense of where this guy's mindset is. You know,
Speaker 1: that's you know, this is not somebody who I think
Speaker 1: many of us. Let's just put it this way. Imagine
Speaker 1: if it had ever come out, because Cavanaugh is the
Speaker 1: standard here. They created this world. They've made this world.
Speaker 1: Now they should have to live in it. The Cavanaugh allegation,
Speaker 1: the first one was not even credible. It was not plausible.
Speaker 1: It was unbelievable to think that this woman knew these
Speaker 1: specifics about an incident that you couldn't remember anything else about,
Speaker 1: and the seasoned and the media of course dropped this.
Speaker 1: The seasoned sex crimes prosecutor who sat down and interviewed
Speaker 1: her very straightforward, not aggressive fashion, said yeah, this would
Speaker 1: not have even this would not have even led to
Speaker 1: an arrest. They had nothing on Kavanaugh. The second woman
Speaker 1: couldn't even remember it herself, so I don't even know
Speaker 1: how that's an allegation. The third woman was a straight
Speaker 1: up psycho fabricator, liar, But the media said that she,
Speaker 1: any of them, had a right to be believed, that
Speaker 1: blasi For was some kind of a hero to women everywhere.
Speaker 1: The media said she had a right to be believed
Speaker 1: and that she was not to be questioned and that
Speaker 1: her word was good enough. I need to understand where
Speaker 1: the media is now that you have a man who
Speaker 1: is a politician in the state of Virginia, a senior politician,
Speaker 1: second in command of the state, and he has a
Speaker 1: credible allegation of sexual assault against him from when he
Speaker 1: was an adult fifteen years ago. By the way, I
Speaker 1: don't know what the statue of limitations is in Virginia
Speaker 1: for this, but they are treating this like, well, we
Speaker 1: don't know yet. Now all of a sudden, the journalistic
Speaker 1: even handedness and skepticism and other things, now they all
Speaker 1: kick in because a Democrat has been accused. This is
Speaker 1: disgusting hypocrisy. And this is why people like me during
Speaker 1: the whole cabinall debacle, when they were destroying due process,
Speaker 1: just just destroying justice. I mean, they were slowly torturing
Speaker 1: justice in front of all of us. That's what the Democrats,
Speaker 1: including Democrats like Corey Booker and Kamala Harris who think
Speaker 1: that they should be the next president, That's what they
Speaker 1: did on TV in front of the whole country. Someone
Speaker 1: needs to explain to me how Fairfax should not get
Speaker 1: the cabinal treatment from the media. And the answer is
Speaker 1: they have. They cannot explain it other than to say, well,
Speaker 1: it's our guy. Now. This exposes what disgusting, rotten cowards
Speaker 1: most of the mainstream media are. This is who they are.
Speaker 1: They pretend to care about women, they pretend to care
Speaker 1: about sexual assault, they pretend to care about justice, and
Speaker 1: they just use all of those things for their own
Speaker 1: purposes and abandon them the moment that it's inconvenient. But wait,
Speaker 1: there's more. Turns out that there's more than one senior
Speaker 1: official in the state of Virginia who has a problem
Speaker 1: with showing up at parties in blackface. Mark Harring is
Speaker 1: the attorney the state attorney for Virginia, Virginia, sorry, Virginia
Speaker 1: Attorney General. You make sure I get the title correct.
Speaker 1: He has now come out. The Washington Post report on
Speaker 1: this says that guess what, when he was in college,
Speaker 1: he wore black face. Now you might say to me,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, by you know, let's let's not
Speaker 1: just start start throwing everybody on the bonfire here because
Speaker 1: of what they did a long time ago, and those okay, well,
Speaker 1: and some of you are probably like, no, buck, that's unacceptable.
Speaker 1: Let me say this. Herring was one of the people
Speaker 1: calling for Northam to resign over his black face photo.
Speaker 1: You can't make this stuff up. So now you have
Speaker 1: the number three official for the state of Virginia, who
Speaker 1: had just days ago said the number one state official
Speaker 1: for Virginia should resign because of a black face photo.
Speaker 1: Number three had to admit that he wore black face
Speaker 1: and one of the most just obvious and disgraceful things
Speaker 1: to the media. You know what they were calling this today,
Speaker 1: They were referring to it initially as Attorney General Virginia
Speaker 1: Attorney General at Mark Harring claims that he wore quote,
Speaker 1: dark makeup to party in college. Oh so when a
Speaker 1: Democrat wears blackface, it's dark makeup. They've since updated it
Speaker 1: because they were getting hammered. I mean, I mean the
Speaker 1: New York Times and some of these major organizations. Dark
Speaker 1: makeup or brown colored makeup was what some I couldn't.
Speaker 1: I said, you guys, this is why people hate the media.
Speaker 1: These are activists. They have infiltrated the apparatus of news
Speaker 1: gathering and dissemination. They've overtaken journalism the same way they've
Speaker 1: overtaken Hollywood. They are dishonest, they are scummy, and we
Speaker 1: need to fight back this Virginia situation. This could result
Speaker 1: in theoretically a Republican becoming the governor of Virginia. I
Speaker 1: don't think that will happen because the Democrats have no scruples.
Speaker 1: But talk about a bad week for the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: in the state of Virginia. When Terry mccauliffe is the
Speaker 1: most or let's just say the least distasteful when it
Speaker 1: comes to ethics politician in your state. Wow, you've got problems.
Speaker 1: We have so much more showcoming. As I said, we'll
Speaker 1: get into dive into some of the state of the Union,
Speaker 1: and I have other things to add into the mix
Speaker 1: as well. So team, it's going to be a great show.
Speaker 1: Stay with me. Lawmakers in New York cheered with delight
Speaker 1: upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby
Speaker 1: to be ripped from the mother's womb moments from birth.
Speaker 1: These are living, feeling, beautiful babies who will never get
Speaker 1: the chance to share their love and their dreams with
Speaker 1: the world. And then we had the case of the
Speaker 1: governor of Virginia where he stated he would execute a
Speaker 1: may be after birth to defend the dignity of every person.
Speaker 1: I am asking Congress to pass legislation to prohibit the
Speaker 1: late term abortion of children who can feel pain in
Speaker 1: the mother's room. That's your President, everybody giving a speech
Speaker 1: last night that I think anyone, any one of us,
Speaker 1: should be proud of. And on an issue where the separation,
Speaker 1: the immoral separation between the two political sides in this
Speaker 1: country could not be more apparent or more of an imperative.
Speaker 1: It is not lost on me that the reason that
Speaker 1: we know at this point, all this stuff, it seems
Speaker 1: at least that it's come out about northumb and Fairfax
Speaker 1: and now this Herring Attorney General for Virginia. The reason
Speaker 1: we know it is because of Northam's comments about that
Speaker 1: Virginia legislature bill that would have said that would have
Speaker 1: made it legal to kill a baby all the way
Speaker 1: up to the moment of birth. You know, woman's having contractions,
Speaker 1: you know, water breaks still, and people who say that
Speaker 1: would never happen, let me just shoot that down one.
Speaker 1: We cannot have laws that allow murder, whether the murder
Speaker 1: is likely to happen or not. We cannot have laws
Speaker 1: that legalize murder because then we have codified immorality at
Speaker 1: on the most important of issues into our society. And
Speaker 1: if you're going to allow for that in this instance,
Speaker 1: there's opportunity to expand it into other instances as well.
Speaker 1: Other areas of life will offer if life is not
Speaker 1: protected at all points. For all, those who claim to
Speaker 1: be conservative, claim to be such stalwart and principled Republicans.
Speaker 1: I hear the president's speech last night, I think about
Speaker 1: what he has done, what he has signed, who he
Speaker 1: has appointed, what he is pushing and using his bully
Speaker 1: pulpit to try and accomplish. And I think where is
Speaker 1: the conservative rage against this coming from? And I think that,
Speaker 1: unfortunately increasingly, it comes from people who have made common
Speaker 1: cause with the very same Democrats who want to murder
Speaker 1: babies in New York and Virginia and anywhere else for
Speaker 1: that matter, and cover for people like Fairfax and Northam
Speaker 1: and Warren. He's holding the line for America bucket his back.
Speaker 1: I believe that the governor's team is spreading misinformation about you.
Speaker 1: You know, I don't know precisely where this is coming from,
Speaker 1: and you know, we've heard different things. But but here's
Speaker 1: the thing. Does anybody think it's any coincidence that on
Speaker 1: the eve of potentially my being elevated, that that's when
Speaker 1: this uncorroborated smear comes out. Does anybody believe that's a coincidence.
Speaker 1: I don't. I don't think anybody believes that's a coincidence.
Speaker 1: It goes away for a year and then crops back
Speaker 1: up right at this moment. You don't have to be cynical.
Speaker 1: You don't have to understand politics how to understand when
Speaker 1: someone's trying to manipulate a process to to harm someone's
Speaker 1: character without any basis whatsoever. That's Fairfax. Again, that's the
Speaker 1: lieutenant governor of Virginia. And remember he was after the
Speaker 1: Northam controversy broke out. He was somebody that was already
Speaker 1: being talked about as a very you know, fit and
Speaker 1: excellent replacement for Northam. So the Democrats thought, oh, you know,
Speaker 1: if we got to lose Northam, you know who's kind
Speaker 1: of a guy who's not exactly that in the world
Speaker 1: on fire, kind of you know, or disordered. There's guys
Speaker 1: here and he dances to be all nice. Turns out
Speaker 1: he actually fights really dirty. But you know, they want
Speaker 1: to get rid of Northam, they want Fairfax. And well,
Speaker 1: now it turns out Fairfax got a big problem because
Speaker 1: the whole me Too movement, which we know is already
Speaker 1: and I said this from the earliest days of it,
Speaker 1: that it was going to be weaponized against Republicans, and
Speaker 1: it was weaponized against Kavanaugh. But not only do we
Speaker 1: see that it was to us to be used for
Speaker 1: that political purpose explicitly part as in political purpose, there's
Speaker 1: this additional layer now that we have to take into account,
Speaker 1: which is that it is a standard the any accusation
Speaker 1: from a woman should be met with consequences to the individual,
Speaker 1: even if they're not necessarily legal consequences, although they can be.
Speaker 1: There should be professional and reputational consequences from the accusation alone.
Speaker 1: That is the standard that Democrats set up during Kavanaugh,
Speaker 1: and they are abandoning that standard now. Now that standard
Speaker 1: is all of a sudden not fair. Well never was fair,
Speaker 1: but when it was useful for them, they pretended that
Speaker 1: it was. Now, what happens with all of this, that's
Speaker 1: the question that a lot of people are asking. And
Speaker 1: I got to this a little bit before the break.
Speaker 1: If you had these three Democrats all resign, you would
Speaker 1: have a Republican governor of Virginia with the twenty twenty
Speaker 1: election looming. Virginia is a battleground state. There's just there's
Speaker 1: no way the Democrats are going to allow that. But
Speaker 1: then what you have is who is to be sacrificed.
Speaker 1: They've already had the Democrats, senior Democrats, calling for Northam
Speaker 1: to step down. He hasn't stepped down. You had Warren.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, no, not not Warren. I keep I keep
Speaker 1: getting this guy's herring. Pardon me. We're gonna have a
Speaker 1: Warren in a minute Mark Herring say that Northam should
Speaker 1: step down, when now we find out that Herring was
Speaker 1: guilty of the exact same conduct around the same time.
Speaker 1: So how can he keep his joe? If Northam goes,
Speaker 1: doesn't Herring have to go? And forget whether or not
Speaker 1: you agree with that standard. That is the standard that
Speaker 1: the left has in place. If you have a racist
Speaker 1: incident in your past like this and you're a Republican,
Speaker 1: you should go. So you know that means that anybody
Speaker 1: who has this sort of incident we should say, all right,
Speaker 1: I guess you got to go. So if Northham goes,
Speaker 1: doesn't Herring have to go? And if neither Northham nor
Speaker 1: Harring go, what does that say about the Democrats willingness
Speaker 1: to police racist behavior from people's backgrounds? You know what,
Speaker 1: are we still going to listen to them say oh,
Speaker 1: what about what Trump said this time or that time
Speaker 1: on a racial issue and act like and we're supposed
Speaker 1: to take them seriously as though they really care about
Speaker 1: underlying racially insensitive language or racially insensitive conduct when they're
Speaker 1: willing to justify this stuff or say that there should
Speaker 1: be no consequences for this. But if one or both
Speaker 1: of them leave. You're gonna have Fairfax, who's been accused
Speaker 1: by a woman on the record, she's named something happened.
Speaker 1: I mean that they had a sexual encounter. This isn't
Speaker 1: like some person who's just fabricating a crazy tale, which
Speaker 1: is what happened to Kavanaugh. How does this play out
Speaker 1: at Producer, Mike, I know you would run on DC.
Speaker 1: What do you think happens here? Man? What's your take
Speaker 1: on this one? I don't know, man, it was It's
Speaker 1: one of the crazier stories I've seen in a long time. One, two, three.
Speaker 1: What are the chances? Yeah? I think three, you know.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the equivalent for the state of
Speaker 1: Virginia if you had the president, of the the vice president,
Speaker 1: the speak of the House all about to resign. Yeah,
Speaker 1: at the federal level, that's what's happening right now in Virginia.
Speaker 1: I think that they all stick it out. I think
Speaker 1: none of them resign, and that the Democrats just rely
Speaker 1: on the media apparatus that's in their pocket and just
Speaker 1: the just the complete lack of ethics the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: thrives on. I think they just they just stick with it.
Speaker 1: What do you think, man, I think that they're all
Speaker 1: gonna stay. I agree, it's going to be interesting to
Speaker 1: see who they rally behind, because now that it's you know,
Speaker 1: all three are in hot water. Um, they can't let
Speaker 1: this go Republican. They can't. So somebody's gonna have Todd
Speaker 1: is Cash is Cash hanging out? Cash knows that you're
Speaker 1: on the radio, and if he's trying to get is
Speaker 1: he putting his demo tape out there for the program directors?
Speaker 1: Actually he's putting Actually he's putting his pall in the
Speaker 1: race for governor of Virginia. So he's like, he's like,
Speaker 1: at those guys are such idiots. I can do it
Speaker 1: if they if they if they all get to stay.
Speaker 1: Cash Cash has got an interesting point that he makes there.
Speaker 1: But anyway, you gotta get him at a little chewy
Speaker 1: bone or something so he can he can hang out. Obviously,
Speaker 1: Mike's up in New York right now. I'm down here
Speaker 1: in the swamp in DC. I think that I think
Speaker 1: that this thing is gonna this thing is gonna be
Speaker 1: a real problem for the Democrats because they're not gonna
Speaker 1: at least when a resignation occurs, there's some sense that
Speaker 1: there's finality or maybe not justice, but there's been action taken.
Speaker 1: They're not. They can't take any action here because if
Speaker 1: one of them goes, all of them goes. Pretty much.
Speaker 1: The only one that I guess you could say, you know,
Speaker 1: shouldn't under Democrats standard be forced to step down is
Speaker 1: fair facts. But keep in mind that, and I'm pro
Speaker 1: fair facts being able to make his case publicly, and
Speaker 1: I believe in due process, and I want to be
Speaker 1: very clear about that. I'm just applying the left standard
Speaker 1: of these three cases. I'm applying the Democrats standard to
Speaker 1: these three individuals. These are not my standards necessarily, but
Speaker 1: I also so no longer think that we can we
Speaker 1: can let this stuff go where there's a different standard
Speaker 1: for Republicans and there's for Democrats. I just think that
Speaker 1: people have had enough. And the only way this stuff
Speaker 1: stops is if we forced the other side to live
Speaker 1: under the rules that they make us live under. If
Speaker 1: our politics of our expectations for politicians are the same
Speaker 1: across the board, then maybe we can have a discussion
Speaker 1: about you know, forgiveness and mercy and repentance. These are
Speaker 1: important concepts, not just as Christians and as good human beings,
Speaker 1: but in public life. That's okay, we don't need to
Speaker 1: expect now. I'm not talking about the sexual assault here,
Speaker 1: but I'm talking about these other guys that have these
Speaker 1: these you know, racist incidents from their past. I mean
Speaker 1: it was thirty years ago. I was a baby when
Speaker 1: this stuff was happening. You know, this goes back quite
Speaker 1: a long ways. And if people are gonna say, well, buck,
Speaker 1: they did something racist when they were eight or nineteen
Speaker 1: years old thirty years ago, does that mean they can
Speaker 1: they never hold the job, Are they never allowed to
Speaker 1: to are they not allowed to have lives afterwards? I mean,
Speaker 1: how far? How extreme is the public punishment and shaming
Speaker 1: of racist conduct from a long time ago? Whatever? You know?
Speaker 1: And there's also a sense of scale that we should
Speaker 1: take into account here. Right, what I'm saying racist conduct.
Speaker 1: We're not talking about cross burnings on front someone's law
Speaker 1: with a threat of violence and or actual violence. You know,
Speaker 1: there's this there's a scale here. This isn't like they
Speaker 1: attacked somebody and beat them to death because of their
Speaker 1: you know, that's a that's a heinous crime that you know,
Speaker 1: you need to pay your debt to society for that.
Speaker 1: That that never goes away. We're talking about essentially really
Speaker 1: stupid and an insensitive racist college pranks. Okay, so we
Speaker 1: need to keep this in and keep this in the context.
Speaker 1: But I think they're all gonna stay and they're gonna
Speaker 1: rely on And this is why, you know, fair acts.
Speaker 1: When he said that he thought that Northam maybe he
Speaker 1: indicated that he thought maybe Northam or maybe Herring leaked
Speaker 1: disinformation about him. They all realized that, you know, it's
Speaker 1: kind of like, you know, when you owe the bank
Speaker 1: a million dollars, the bank owns you. When you owe
Speaker 1: the bank a billion dollars, you own the bank. The
Speaker 1: Democrat Party can't afford to lose all three of these guys,
Speaker 1: so they kind of all point the finger at each
Speaker 1: other and say, hey, you know, if you're gonna get
Speaker 1: rid of someone, get rid of that guy. And as
Speaker 1: a result, no guy I think is going to step
Speaker 1: down and leave. What a disaster though Democrats. I haven't
Speaker 1: even talked about socialism. I haven't even talked about some
Speaker 1: of that stuff from from last night, which I also
Speaker 1: want to spend a bit of time on. And with
Speaker 1: that in mind, actually, why don't we just take a
Speaker 1: moment because this is I think going to the State
Speaker 1: of the Union here. This was one of those those
Speaker 1: moments where you saw the real separation between what Trump
Speaker 1: and the Republicans stand for and what the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: is more obviously standing for now than ever before. This
Speaker 1: fight over socialism is a fight over the trajectory over
Speaker 1: the future of this country, a very important one. Here's
Speaker 1: what Trump said last night in the State of the
Speaker 1: Union play five. Here in the United States, we are
Speaker 1: alarmed by the new calls to adopt socialism in our country.
Speaker 1: America was founded on liberty and independence and not government coercion, domination,
Speaker 1: and control. We are born free and we will stay free.
Speaker 1: Tonight we renew our resolve that America will never be
Speaker 1: a socialist country. Ten years ago, that statement, at least publicly,
Speaker 1: would have I think, received universal support publicly from both
Speaker 1: parties last night. Democrats wouldn't stand wouldn't support it. Democrat
Speaker 1: Party in this country is the socialist party. They don't
Speaker 1: call themselves that, but they're a socialist party. Look at
Speaker 1: European socialists and what they advocate for, and look at
Speaker 1: what Democrats advocate for here. Democratic Party is the party
Speaker 1: of socialism. People are figuring this out and there's more
Speaker 1: honesty about this, even from the Democrats themselves, because they
Speaker 1: think that this perhaps is their moment. I think that
Speaker 1: they're waiting for some kind of an economic not collapse,
Speaker 1: but at least reversal in the Trump era, and then
Speaker 1: they'll strike. Then they'll say, see this whole free market,
Speaker 1: this this idea of American prosperity, that, unshackled by the government,
Speaker 1: will just continue to bring us all up and make
Speaker 1: us wealthier and freer and happier than ever before. That's
Speaker 1: all a mirage. Give the government more power, Let the
Speaker 1: government make these decisions for you, and let the government
Speaker 1: take from those who owe you something because the Left
Speaker 1: and the Democrats say they do. That's a very scary
Speaker 1: place for this country to go. And I think that
Speaker 1: is where we are heading. If the Democrats managed to
Speaker 1: take back power, and Trump made that case eloquently, forcefully
Speaker 1: and brilliantly last night, we'll be right back about tribal
Speaker 1: citizenship and tribal sovereignty and for harm cost, I am
Speaker 1: also sorry for not being more mindful of this. Decades
Speaker 1: tribes and only tribes to determine tribal citizenship. I had
Speaker 1: a good conversation with Chief Baker. He was very gracious
Speaker 1: and we continued to talk about issues and continue to
Speaker 1: work on issues that Madam deeply to Indian Hunt Green.
Speaker 1: So that's Elizabeth Warren update here, folks, pokahonas pokehonas herself.
Speaker 1: She has another little problem to handle. It's not just
Speaker 1: her DNA tests that we all know show that she
Speaker 1: is one one twenty fourth Native American. I believe less
Speaker 1: Native American than me based on my brother's DNA results
Speaker 1: that he told me about recently. So, Producer, Mike, any
Speaker 1: any Native American DNA in your background? Not that I know,
Speaker 1: but I gotta. If I do, it's probably more than
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren. I think that's probably true. Brandon, you got
Speaker 1: some Native American DNA, I don't think so. We did
Speaker 1: our family tree in fourth grade with your beard, Dude,
Speaker 1: you almost got like a Viking level beer. So that's
Speaker 1: that's legit. No, But here's the thing. Elizabeth Warren wrote
Speaker 1: on her Texas State bar application that she was This
Speaker 1: was handwritten in it. It's in her handwriting that she
Speaker 1: was an American Indian. My friends, they've tried to cover
Speaker 1: for her so much. They've tried so hard to make
Speaker 1: it seem like, oh, it was just a little nothing.
Speaker 1: It was just a little nothing, you know. It was
Speaker 1: just like the equivalent of a server in the basement
Speaker 1: with a hundred plus classified emails on it, you know nothing.
Speaker 1: It was a little nothing that she put she was
Speaker 1: Native American when she was at Harvard. It wasn't nothing.
Speaker 1: Her career is built on racial fraud. There are bright
Speaker 1: neon flashing signs here. We're all aware of it. Who
Speaker 1: goes through life for no apparent reason in their professional
Speaker 1: life harping on this fact? I mean, really promoting the
Speaker 1: fact that they're a quote American Indian when they're not
Speaker 1: even a little bit American Indian. Who does that? Who
Speaker 1: does that? You know this? If I had gone around
Speaker 1: for the last twenty years of my life and at
Speaker 1: every moment of my political or of my professional life,
Speaker 1: made sure that everybody knew that I was in fact
Speaker 1: a you know, Samoan, and there were clearly incentives for
Speaker 1: me to be Samoan for diversity programs and other things,
Speaker 1: and then people found out that I was not, in fact,
Speaker 1: in any way, shape or form Samoan. I think not
Speaker 1: to pick on Samoa, lovely place, but you know, I
Speaker 1: think that this would be a problem for me. I
Speaker 1: don't think people would just skip past this looks she
Speaker 1: and I don't. Rutgers is a fine institution. I do not.
Speaker 1: I hate school elitism. I think that it's built on
Speaker 1: crapp and garbage. But just to be detectives here and
Speaker 1: be honest. Elizabeth Warren j D from Rutgers. As I
Speaker 1: understand it, I believe she's JD from Rutgers. I think
Speaker 1: she's probably the only she would have been the only
Speaker 1: theme I mean, the only Caucasian professor at Harvard Law
Speaker 1: School who went to Rutgers, which is a state university
Speaker 1: for New Jersey. She gained the system. Folks, She's a fraud.
Speaker 1: She's a fraud, and she you want to talk about it.
Speaker 1: If there is such a thing as cultural appropriation, which
Speaker 1: as I've said, there isn't, but let's just say there.
Speaker 1: If there is such a thing as cultural appropriation, it
Speaker 1: is pretending to be from another race and culture for
Speaker 1: the purposes of professional gain. Warren's got no shot. I
Speaker 1: don't even know if she's gonna make it to the primary.
Speaker 1: I don't even think. I think she might have to
Speaker 1: just bow out. It's just too hard to defend her,
Speaker 1: and look at Democrats, They're already stretched thin with all
Speaker 1: of the double standards and the hypocrisy and the unethical
Speaker 1: behavior that they have to try to prop up and
Speaker 1: pretend is not a problem. I think Elizabeth Warren's in
Speaker 1: trouble here. I think she may be on the way
Speaker 1: out of this race for twenty twenty. I also think
Speaker 1: that we need to talk more about the state of
Speaker 1: the Union address and get into some specifics about the
Speaker 1: media reaction to at the polling, how it went, and
Speaker 1: much much more coming up. Team. So the show is
Speaker 1: just getting started. Stay with me Global Verification Network, my friends.
Speaker 1: It is the only dual certified and veteran owned background
Speaker 1: investigation and vetting company out there. And you know this
Speaker 1: is a really important part of leasing out a property
Speaker 1: that you have, or hiring anybody, anybody that you're going
Speaker 1: to work with, or anybody you're gonna be doing business with,
Speaker 1: you need to have background checks done. And why not
Speaker 1: go with a veteran owned, operated and founded small business
Speaker 1: that understands how to do this for a business of
Speaker 1: any size, because they are the risk mitigation experts that
Speaker 1: I trust the most. Know none of your data or
Speaker 1: client information is ever offshored, and all employees are located
Speaker 1: here in the States. A lot of those other background
Speaker 1: check companies will send your stuff overseas for some other
Speaker 1: foreign company to deal with. Call eight seven seven six
Speaker 1: nine five one one seven nine. That's eight seven seven
Speaker 1: six nine five one seven nine. Or go to my
Speaker 1: GVN dot com again, that's my GVN dot com. He
Speaker 1: mistates the situation on Iran mistakes what the reality is
Speaker 1: about the I n F tread in Russia. The phrase
Speaker 1: theater of the absurd is running through my head. A
Speaker 1: psychotically incoherent speech with cookies and dog poop. How can
Speaker 1: anyone see this as a good speech? How can anyone
Speaker 1: see this at unifying when he is spewing out lies
Speaker 1: to the American people? The speech was just packed for
Speaker 1: the lies. Doal Trump raised to a new level. The demagoguery,
Speaker 1: the hyperbole, the chauvinism. We already know this guy, no
Speaker 1: matter how much kumbayah. It was so grandials and over
Speaker 1: the top. It was brown scary. Not mentioned climate change
Speaker 1: in even a sentence is just frankly a disgrace. Someone
Speaker 1: with absolutely no attachment to anything. He says Trump talking
Speaker 1: about unity is like Jack the Ripper talking about banning knives.
Speaker 1: The media is crazy. I mean, I know for some
Speaker 1: of you, you're probably like bucks, stop stop playing these
Speaker 1: clips of these media loot. But you gotta know, folks,
Speaker 1: you gotta be exposed to how insane? What speech were
Speaker 1: they watching? What State of the Union address were they
Speaker 1: referring to? Because no intelligent human being could have watched
Speaker 1: that speech last night and come away saying what did
Speaker 1: Van Jones say? Like it was psychotic and cookies and
Speaker 1: rainbows or so, I mean, what Van Jones said some
Speaker 1: nonsense about it. I was surprised Rick Santorum, who is
Speaker 1: allegedly a conservative and a Republican, said that it was
Speaker 1: the worst speech Trump has ever given. Now, I know
Speaker 1: CNN can do bad things to a person, but yeah,
Speaker 1: what is Rick Santorum thinking? I mean, the public came
Speaker 1: away from it overwhelmingly understanding that it was a It
Speaker 1: was a great speech. It was as good as a
Speaker 1: State of the Union address could have been. Should have
Speaker 1: been needed to be checked all the boxes I see.
Speaker 1: I don't think the State of the Union address is
Speaker 1: some kind of a game changer. I don't think anybody
Speaker 1: who pays close attention to politics does. But to watch
Speaker 1: that speech and to think that there was anything about
Speaker 1: it that was off, offbeat, off tone somehow, you know,
Speaker 1: not enough, insufficient, or what those people were saying that
Speaker 1: the whole media montage you played for you, which is, oh,
Speaker 1: how negative they were and how you know they They
Speaker 1: just don't get it. This Trump hatred has just infected
Speaker 1: their minds. And it's so weird because there are things
Speaker 1: that I could under stand them criticizing the president on,
Speaker 1: opposing the president on, but to say that speech was
Speaker 1: terrible and all this nastiness around it, they just sound petty.
Speaker 1: They sound petty and small. I mean, if you if
Speaker 1: you want to know, you know where I think, if
Speaker 1: you want to know where I think. The biggest issue
Speaker 1: I have with the speech was the length. I'm I'm
Speaker 1: kind of a stickler for this stuff. I have a theory,
Speaker 1: and the theory is that wetting toasts and really toasts
Speaker 1: in general, but wedding toasts sixty seconds or less. State
Speaker 1: of the Union address sixty minutes or less. I do
Speaker 1: not want to have to sit there for more than
Speaker 1: an hour while you know so much of it. It's
Speaker 1: just applause. And people clapping, and oh and all this stuff.
Speaker 1: No no, no, no no, no, no, no, not necessary. You
Speaker 1: can get it done in sixty minutes or less. Think
Speaker 1: about what how much more effective I would say the
Speaker 1: messaging is if it were condensed thirty or forty minutes,
Speaker 1: you'd really be able to remember a lot more of it,
Speaker 1: you know, with the sinning and the standing and oh
Speaker 1: who was standing and who was sitting. I kind of
Speaker 1: wanted Trump to make a shout out to Karl Marx
Speaker 1: just to see if he could get Alexandria Occasio Cortez
Speaker 1: to stand for something. She was very unhappy all these
Speaker 1: women and they're white for you know, suffrage women, suffrage
Speaker 1: movement and all that stuff. Oh, you know, I would,
Speaker 1: I would have to say, I'd be more inclined to
Speaker 1: celebrate the female contingent of the of the Congress, that is,
Speaker 1: that has just been seated if they weren't a bunch
Speaker 1: of looney radical maniacs that are in favor of unrestricted
Speaker 1: abortion for nine months of a pregnancy and socialism, and
Speaker 1: I mean all kinds of stuff, bad news, bad news.
Speaker 1: But the polling on this is all very clear. Anyone
Speaker 1: who's watching this honestly would have to come away and
Speaker 1: say that it was a very very effective speech for
Speaker 1: the president. It got the job done. Do I think
Speaker 1: that it changes much. No, Well, they hate him, let's no,
Speaker 1: of course not. But you know, it also reminds me,
Speaker 1: and there are a few things that are just kind
Speaker 1: of a personal feeling, all this stuff about how Obama
Speaker 1: was so brilliant and Obama was so amazing. I used
Speaker 1: to always say, the moment you got Obama off prompt,
Speaker 1: it was really a lot of uh oh this, uh
Speaker 1: this another look all, you know, really not compelling, not
Speaker 1: not particularly charismatic off the cuff, not insightful. People say, oh,
Speaker 1: he gives such a good you know some people that
Speaker 1: they would say that he had this you know, incredible.
Speaker 1: You know. Yeah, he was good at giving a speech
Speaker 1: that was written for him, but he was not good
Speaker 1: at just letting it rip. Not good, not really that
Speaker 1: good on the stump. I mean, I was always pretty unimpressed.
Speaker 1: And I just think it's funny because you know, no
Speaker 1: one ever says wow when Trump's on prompt or he's
Speaker 1: so amazing. He's just as effective as Obama was for
Speaker 1: his own side, right, I mean, Obama was very effective
Speaker 1: for Democrats. I heard what you're saying, and on the
Speaker 1: content side, I'm like, this is just blather. But Trump
Speaker 1: is every bit the showman. And then some that Obama
Speaker 1: was giving a scripted speech. But you know, the media
Speaker 1: net they never give him credit for anything. They never
Speaker 1: gave him credit for anything. You know, they they are
Speaker 1: so invested in trying to tear him down. And that's
Speaker 1: why their analysis of this was just delusional. I mean,
Speaker 1: there was nothing nasty, there's nothing mean, nothing that was,
Speaker 1: you know, meant to tear other people down in some
Speaker 1: vicious way. Wow. Interesting State of the Union numbers here.
Speaker 1: Fox News eleven million people watched, NBC seven million, CBS
Speaker 1: six million, ABC five, and then MSNBC three point eight million,
Speaker 1: CNN three point four million. Interesting. I was last last night.
Speaker 1: I was at the Trump Hotel, which is a gathering
Speaker 1: place for a lot of a lot of people who
Speaker 1: are favorable to MAGA, who are pro MAGA, they will
Speaker 1: hang out of the Trump Hotel. It's a nice place
Speaker 1: to go spend some time. Very expensive. I would not
Speaker 1: recommend going to get lunch in there, but it's a
Speaker 1: nice place to spend some time because you will often
Speaker 1: in DC in the swamp end up seeing people that
Speaker 1: are are our people. How else do I put it?
Speaker 1: They are conservatives, they believe in in the and that's
Speaker 1: the only place I can think of. You're more likely
Speaker 1: to find people who are conservatives in the Trump Hotel
Speaker 1: lobby than you are walking around on Capitol Hill, I
Speaker 1: can tell you. I can tell you that. And it
Speaker 1: was just it was nice last night to see a
Speaker 1: bunch of what people from the Blaze media were there
Speaker 1: and lots of different journalists that I know, servative journalist
Speaker 1: that I know were there, And I could tell you
Speaker 1: it was funny because whenever they have this, it's a
Speaker 1: huge space, and I know a lotty probably haven't had
Speaker 1: a chance to go. If you ever come to DC,
Speaker 1: it's it's worth it. Maybe one day we can do
Speaker 1: a Team Buck meet up in the Trump Hotel lobby.
Speaker 1: But there's this enormous soaring lobby lounge area. Then the
Speaker 1: ceilings must be a hundred feet high or something. I mean,
Speaker 1: they're way up there. And they have these massive screens
Speaker 1: in this bar at one side with these big screens,
Speaker 1: and there's a restaurant one end in the bar with
Speaker 1: the big screens at the other, and they turned on Trump,
Speaker 1: giving the stay of the union of the screens, and
Speaker 1: then the whole sound system for the entire hotel was
Speaker 1: turned to the Trump speech. You must have had five
Speaker 1: hundred to a thousand people in this lobby just watching
Speaker 1: the speeches that happened. But it was just funny because
Speaker 1: every time the camera would pan to Pelosi or to
Speaker 1: Okazia Cortez, boom boom, I mean, the booze would break out.
Speaker 1: It was a music. I mean, it was just it
Speaker 1: was an entertaining situation. Um. It was something that I think,
Speaker 1: you know, as we look at politics and have all
Speaker 1: these serious moments and have to get get into some
Speaker 1: very intense topics, it was it was funny last night
Speaker 1: to see people a little bit of the atmosphere of
Speaker 1: a sporting event. Hey, it was better viewing than the
Speaker 1: super Bowl. I'm just saying. It was better viewing than
Speaker 1: the super Bowl, more entertaining than that super Bowl, which
Speaker 1: was may have been the most boring football game I've
Speaker 1: ever seen, and that includes you know, d three AMers
Speaker 1: college football. I mean it was it was really weak action. Anyway,
Speaker 1: enough enough about the super Bowl, but it was it
Speaker 1: was a good night for the president and the media
Speaker 1: people who are running around saying that he had a
Speaker 1: bad night, It's just it just erodes their credibility for
Speaker 1: anybody who has any interest in honesty and for part
Speaker 1: of their brand, whatever that means for them to be that.
Speaker 1: They'll tell it like it is. If you came away
Speaker 1: from that speech last night as a journalist, as a Democrat, whomever,
Speaker 1: and you said that it was really ineffective and that Trump,
Speaker 1: you know, it was terrible or whatever, you're just making
Speaker 1: yourself look bad. It was a fantastic speech. I give
Speaker 1: it an A and maybe even you go a plus,
Speaker 1: although I like to reserve those for special occasions. There
Speaker 1: is a conservative alternative to all those far left, progressive
Speaker 1: superlib email services out there. Okay, you know how they operate,
Speaker 1: the big guys in Silicon Valley. They take your information,
Speaker 1: they sell your information, they scan your information, and oh,
Speaker 1: by the way, the money they're making from all that
Speaker 1: they use to support stuff that you hate. That's why
Speaker 1: I go with ipatriots dot us. I patriots dot us
Speaker 1: is secure in private and does not have any of
Speaker 1: the liberal nonsense attached to it. Your email and files
Speaker 1: are safe with ipatriots premium anti virus, anti spam, two
Speaker 1: hundred fifty six bit encryption, and it's patible with the
Speaker 1: mobile devices that you got, and they don't decide to
Speaker 1: push progressive nonsense on you. There's a new offer here
Speaker 1: from my patriots. Enter promo code buck. Just sign up
Speaker 1: for month to month service today and you'll get the
Speaker 1: first month free. You won't be charged until your second
Speaker 1: month of service at the specified month to month rate,
Speaker 1: and you can cancel anytime. Input your desired ipatriots email
Speaker 1: addressed during checkout. Again, enter promo code buck at ipatriots
Speaker 1: dot us now from our CBS News instant pull here.
Speaker 1: Following the President State of the Union, seventy six percent
Speaker 1: of speechwashers said they approved of what they heard. Seventy
Speaker 1: two percent said they approved of the President's ideas for immigration.
Speaker 1: That seems pretty darn positive, doesn't it. Here's a CNN
Speaker 1: poll play clip eleven. But looking with this a very
Speaker 1: positive reaction from those who watch the speech tonight, fifty
Speaker 1: nine percent very positive, seventeen percent somewhat positive, of twenty
Speaker 1: three percent negative. So you know the numbers don't lie
Speaker 1: here right Well, While we had that that media montage
Speaker 1: fory before, but people, oh, Trump, who was terrible? Who's
Speaker 1: so bad? Bull? It's a fantastic speech. It was an excellent,
Speaker 1: excellent speech, and they light him on immigration. And this
Speaker 1: is really important. You know, I know that we look
Speaker 1: at this shutdown situation and we're supposed to take away
Speaker 1: from an Oh, you know, Pelosi's the master negotiator, the
Speaker 1: master legislator, all this stuff. Truth is, the more people know,
Speaker 1: and there's a lot of unwinding of the falsehoods, right.
Speaker 1: The more people know about what's happening with illegal immigration,
Speaker 1: the more they agree with Trump. The more people know
Speaker 1: about what's going on at our southern border and the
Speaker 1: illegals and the cartels and the human smuggling and the drugs,
Speaker 1: the more they agree with Trump. It's becoming irrefutable. Even
Speaker 1: for the d Trump media. I mean, they may not
Speaker 1: say this out loud, but they know that Trump is
Speaker 1: winning on immigration. Trump is right on immigration, and the
Speaker 1: American people are picking up on this. This could have
Speaker 1: big implications for twenty twenty because whoever Trump runs against,
Speaker 1: he is just going to be able to wipe the
Speaker 1: floor with them. Any Democrat on immigration absolutely wipe the floor.
Speaker 1: Only maybe exceptions. Actually Bernie Sanders, because Bernie put aside
Speaker 1: like socialism, honey won't help, you know, the people with
Speaker 1: the millionaires and the billionaires, and the tax isn't yet right.
Speaker 1: Bernie takes a more pro labor position in this country
Speaker 1: and therefore understands that supply and demand applies to the
Speaker 1: labor market and dumping a lot of low wage workers
Speaker 1: on the country through illegal immigration does not have you know,
Speaker 1: it does not go without cost. It does not go
Speaker 1: without cost. One other thing that came up last night
Speaker 1: that's just fascinating to me. The media likes to hold
Speaker 1: themselves up as the firefighters of democracy, right. They're just
Speaker 1: there to make sure that you know, everything is going
Speaker 1: to be okay. They're on the front lines of the truth.
Speaker 1: When as I've been saying, and other people started to
Speaker 1: say enemy of truth. It was on this show first
Speaker 1: where I said, don't call them the enemy of the people,
Speaker 1: because then they all whine and say, oh, it sounds
Speaker 1: so so we call them the enemies of truth because
Speaker 1: the mainstream media is the enemy of truth. But they
Speaker 1: say that CNN had their whole Apples Versus Bananas campaign,
Speaker 1: and there's this focus on how Trump we're always sharing
Speaker 1: the media about how Trump is wrong when it comes
Speaker 1: to facts, and what we see from the fact checkers
Speaker 1: is an embarrassment. These fact checkers, so called fact check
Speaker 1: fact checkers in the media cannot help themselves. They will
Speaker 1: find a way even when Trump is saying something that
Speaker 1: is true, even when he's right, they will find a
Speaker 1: way to make it seem like what he said isn't true,
Speaker 1: even if it is accurate. You know, you go through
Speaker 1: this and time and again. Here, let me give you
Speaker 1: a few. There's actually, ah, what is it? This is it? Yeah?
Speaker 1: John Nulty over at Breitbart pulled up a few of these,
Speaker 1: and you look at them, and they keep doing things
Speaker 1: like they'll say, here we go. Here's here's the fact check.
Speaker 1: President Trump said that the United States was making it
Speaker 1: clear to China that can no longer steal jobs in
Speaker 1: intellectual property from American companies. This is true, mister Trump
Speaker 1: has placed punishing tariffs or whatever, and then the fact
Speaker 1: check says President Trump, Sorry, President Trump. Is a claim
Speaker 1: that a border barrier in San Diego almost completely ended
Speaker 1: illegal crossings. New York Times says this is misleading. Border
Speaker 1: apprehensions decreased by YadA YadA, but According to the Congressional
Speaker 1: Research Service, the primary fens by itself did not have
Speaker 1: a discernible impact on the influx of unauthorized aliens come
Speaker 1: across the border. This is idiocy. How do you prove
Speaker 1: I mean, they build a fence, crossings decreased, and they're saying, whoa,
Speaker 1: but we can't prove the fence of the reason the
Speaker 1: crossings decreased. Well, gee, or we're just going to separate
Speaker 1: cause and effect. Here, here's another fact check for New
Speaker 1: York Times. President Trump claimed the American troops have been
Speaker 1: fighting the Middle East for almost nineteen years. This is false.
Speaker 1: It has been almost eighteen years. Okay, I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: thanks for fact checking that. But you know, I obviously
Speaker 1: that's a that's an honest and honest error. I think
Speaker 1: that they could they could ease it up a little bit. Um.
Speaker 1: There are so many of these. My one of my
Speaker 1: when I say my favorites, one of the most egregious ones.
Speaker 1: I'm just trying to find this. When I was I
Speaker 1: was talking all these fact checks where they they're just dishonest,
Speaker 1: and it's so clear, it's so clear that they do
Speaker 1: not care that they're obviously part of here we go.
Speaker 1: Trump claimed that Holocaust survivors this was a real thing.
Speaker 1: From Washington Post. Trump claimed that Holocaust survivors viewed the
Speaker 1: American soldiers liberating Dachau as angels. They gave him four pinocchios.
Speaker 1: You know why the liberating forces consisted entirely of human beings.
Speaker 1: They are fact checking rhetorical flourish. They are fact checking
Speaker 1: figures of speech. And even when they fact check something
Speaker 1: and it turns out that it is factually accurate, they
Speaker 1: will add this other layer to it of well, yes
Speaker 1: that's true. But yes that's true. But that's not fact checking.
Speaker 1: That's editorializing. That's a very different thing. Right. It is
Speaker 1: not the same thing to do a fact check as
Speaker 1: it is to say, well, yeah, but I don't like
Speaker 1: here's that. One of the pieces this is from David Harsanyi,
Speaker 1: the state of American fact checking is completely useless. With
Speaker 1: a veneer of impartiality, fact checkers engage in a uniquely
Speaker 1: dishonest style of partisanship. And yeah, that this is what
Speaker 1: they do it. He goes through how they do this
Speaker 1: partisan talking point masquerading as a fact check. That's one
Speaker 1: thing they do fact checking subjective political assertions you know,
Speaker 1: I'm the best, I'm the best pizzeria in the world
Speaker 1: is not a fact checkable thing. If I own a pizzeria,
Speaker 1: I'm allowed to say that, you know, that's my opinion. Man.
Speaker 1: They do this all the time, though, They act like morons,
Speaker 1: just so they can have some opening to quote fact
Speaker 1: check Trump when really what they mean is opinion check Trump.
Speaker 1: They don't like what he says, they don't like how
Speaker 1: he says it, and so with this this falsehood of
Speaker 1: actual inaccuracy, they will try to undermine him and go
Speaker 1: after him. It's it's disgusting, it's disgusting. But yeah, the
Speaker 1: fact checkers are ridiculous. PolitiFact all these Washington posts, oh
Speaker 1: the fact they're They're just yet another politicized partisan instrument,
Speaker 1: and they were making fools of themselves last night. I
Speaker 1: give the fact checkers a million pinocchios. How about that.
Speaker 1: We do have to have control of our borders. You've
Speaker 1: got to say to the undocumented workers, you have to say, look,
Speaker 1: you've broken the law. You didn't come here the way
Speaker 1: you were supposed to. So this is not going to
Speaker 1: be a free ride. It's not gonna be some instant
Speaker 1: amnesty what's gonna happen is you are going to pay
Speaker 1: a significant fine, you are going to learn English, you
Speaker 1: are going to you are going to go to the
Speaker 1: back of the line so that you don't get ahead
Speaker 1: of somebody who was in Mexico City applying illegally. All
Speaker 1: of that is a lie. That was Obama back in
Speaker 1: two thousand and nine talking about illegal immigration. And isn't
Speaker 1: it fascinating how he says, look, we need to control
Speaker 1: our borders and illegal immigrants did something wrong because he
Speaker 1: knows that that's what the American people think. We're not
Speaker 1: okay with illegal immigration. We don't think that this is
Speaker 1: just something that people should be able to do. But
Speaker 1: the pretense that we're united on that falls apart when
Speaker 1: you listen to these other things that he says about
Speaker 1: you're gonna pay a fine, you're gonna go to the
Speaker 1: back of the line, you're gonna none of that is true.
Speaker 1: They're not going to be any fines. In fact, a
Speaker 1: lot of people believe that if you if you legalize illegals,
Speaker 1: they will they will try to get retroactive tax benefits
Speaker 1: or the work that they've done here. I mean, there's
Speaker 1: gonna be so many ways they're going to get on Obamacare.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's so many ways that they will they
Speaker 1: will immediately benefit. And the things that he says about
Speaker 1: the enforcement mechanisms, about what they'll do to prevent these
Speaker 1: things from happening again, right, we'll prevent this kind of
Speaker 1: illegal immigration from occurring. None of that is going to
Speaker 1: come through. None of that is a reality. None of
Speaker 1: that is serious. Right. So you know, here we have
Speaker 1: a circumstance where Obama back in two thousand, ten years ago,
Speaker 1: ten years ago, is saying undocumented workers have broken the law,
Speaker 1: you know, illegal aliens, They've broken the law. It's a problem.
Speaker 1: We can't be okay with this, we don't like this, etc.
Speaker 1: Et cetera. Okay, fine, And then beyond that, beyond that,
Speaker 1: you go to today and you hear what Trump is
Speaker 1: saying about it. And why is it that Trump's position
Speaker 1: on this is considered moral, racist, evil, and terrible when
Speaker 1: the only real difference between Trump and Obama on immigration
Speaker 1: is that Trump means what he says and says what
Speaker 1: he means. Obama says things, doesn't mean them, and some
Speaker 1: of the things he says aren't true. Here's what Trump
Speaker 1: said on the border in illegal immigration last night, play seven.
Speaker 1: This is a moral issue. Klawless state of our southern
Speaker 1: border is a threat to the safety, security, and financial
Speaker 1: well being of all America. Tonight, I am asking you
Speaker 1: to defend our very dangerous southern border out of love
Speaker 1: and devotion to our fellow citizens and to our country.
Speaker 1: Wealthy politicians and donors push for open borders while living
Speaker 1: their lives behind walls and gates and guards. Working class
Speaker 1: Americans are left to pay the price for mass illegal immigration.
Speaker 1: Tolerance for illegal immigration is not compassionate. It is actually
Speaker 1: very cruel. What about what Trump says is wrong there?
Speaker 1: It's true the Pelosi's of the world, the wealthy, disconnected,
Speaker 1: elitist politicians and media personalities and Hollywood types, and you know,
Speaker 1: they all say that they want open borders, but they
Speaker 1: don't live in neighborhoods where people who are illegal are
Speaker 1: going to live. They might have illegals as as cooks
Speaker 1: or maids or gardeners, as many of them I'm sure
Speaker 1: have and probably still do, but they're not going to
Speaker 1: be affected. Their day to day life won't be affected
Speaker 1: negatively because of the drain on schools and hospitals. I
Speaker 1: mean just just go to it. Go to a city
Speaker 1: emergency room. I told you, and I had to go
Speaker 1: to an eye hospital for an eye emergency. All these
Speaker 1: people there that are in line. This is a New
Speaker 1: York City and there yeah, a lot of some of
Speaker 1: them are there and they're on Medicaid. But I can
Speaker 1: tell from talking to them and hearing them because you're
Speaker 1: behind them in line and you can hear the discussions
Speaker 1: going on that you know they don't have status and
Speaker 1: they're there to get pretty basic medical care for you know,
Speaker 1: eye stuff, whatever, whatever, maybe whatever. Maybe the reason they're
Speaker 1: they're getting essentially prescription glasses in some cases, Well, if
Speaker 1: you're sitting there and you you know, want someone to
Speaker 1: pull a pencil out of your eyeball, you don't really
Speaker 1: want to have to sit behind a hundred people who
Speaker 1: are there because they want to see if they need
Speaker 1: reading glasses. But that's what happens in rs standard medical
Speaker 1: care in urban parts of the country, in major cities.
Speaker 1: A lot of it is with people that are illegal
Speaker 1: aliens because they're not going to quality for health insurance,
Speaker 1: so where do they go? And they're not going to
Speaker 1: qualify for Medicaid, so they go to the er this
Speaker 1: is what happens. And I just wish there was greater
Speaker 1: honesty when we're talking about the immigration issue, with one
Speaker 1: what the Democrats have been saying for a long time
Speaker 1: their positions are, and also what the realities of illegal
Speaker 1: immigration across the country really are like for people. You know,
Speaker 1: Obama was saying illegal immigration was bad, but then he said, oh,
Speaker 1: you know, and people need to be punished were here illegally,
Speaker 1: but none of the punishments were real. And they just
Speaker 1: wanted amnesty because the only certainty, as we know from
Speaker 1: what happened with Reagan back in nineteen eighty six, the
Speaker 1: only certainty is the amnesty. Everything else is up for discussion, debate, lawsuits.
Speaker 1: They were still having court cases as of twenty eleven
Speaker 1: relating to the Reagan amnesty from nineteen eighty six. Okay,
Speaker 1: think about that. You're gonna tell me that DACA and
Speaker 1: DAPPA and this other stuff that they're proposing deferred action
Speaker 1: for the child for childhood arrivals, right for the dreamers.
Speaker 1: Do you think it's just going to stop at the dreamers?
Speaker 1: That's laughable. But the Democrats used to lie about how
Speaker 1: they want a secure border, and they wanted punishment. Now,
Speaker 1: they they just are so close to open borders that
Speaker 1: it's hard from even keep a straight face when they
Speaker 1: talk about this. I mean, the question that I always
Speaker 1: want to post the Democrats is why do you why
Speaker 1: do you disapprove of illegal immigration? You think illegal immigrants
Speaker 1: are better than Americans? All they do is health the economy,
Speaker 1: less crime than than Americans. You think illegal immigrants are
Speaker 1: better than Americans. So why shouldn't we just want and
Speaker 1: there's no downside? Why shouldn't we want an endless flow
Speaker 1: of illegal immigrants into this country and illegal aliens? I
Speaker 1: want to know what Nancy Pelosi's answer to that is.
Speaker 1: You know, they'd stammer, heh, yeah, we have a process.
Speaker 1: They always fall back on there's a process and we
Speaker 1: want an orderly system. But that's just a talking point.
Speaker 1: They don't care what the process is. They just fall
Speaker 1: back on that because they can't actually get They don't
Speaker 1: want to go on record and say that illegal immigration
Speaker 1: does result in crime, does result in problems, human smuggling,
Speaker 1: enriching the cartels, you know, all kinds of misery and
Speaker 1: suffering that comes from this process. They don't want to
Speaker 1: talk about any of that. So what Obama used to
Speaker 1: be able to say, though, is now racist for any
Speaker 1: Republicans to say anyone who makes the claim that illegal
Speaker 1: immigration should end and that we should take action to
Speaker 1: completely shut it down, they are now open to charges
Speaker 1: of racism. Because the Democrats no longer feel the need
Speaker 1: to even say that stuff. They just won't talk about it.
Speaker 1: I am concerned here that the Republican Party is going
Speaker 1: to get its way once again, because there will be
Speaker 1: a lot of talk about, Oh, if Trump declares an
Speaker 1: emergency and it goes in the courts, they'll say, oh,
Speaker 1: we tried really hard. It's not over. It's not over.
Speaker 1: The President should do everything in his power up to
Speaker 1: and including not just a declaration of emergency, but just
Speaker 1: say build the wall. Just do it. And if you
Speaker 1: see you know and coulter Man, she is feisty, she
Speaker 1: is a fight and she's a smart she's a smart cookie,
Speaker 1: and she is feisty, and she's run around saying why
Speaker 1: doesn't Trump just tell them to do it? And I
Speaker 1: think that's a good question. I also I talk to
Speaker 1: the governor of Puerto Rico today and the governor we
Speaker 1: interviewed on my show, and the government the governor said,
Speaker 1: you know that he essentially he's worried that Trump is
Speaker 1: going to raid funds earmark for Puerto Rican recovery for
Speaker 1: the wall. And I'm like, I don't know. I don't
Speaker 1: think that's gonna happen. But people are already aware that
Speaker 1: there might be some ways that the president could, under
Speaker 1: existing appropriations try to get additional fence built. I mean,
Speaker 1: I think that would be a great thing. I'm all
Speaker 1: for it if he could, But it does not. It's
Speaker 1: not enough to just throw in the talent say all right,
Speaker 1: you know it's not on the courts, we'll leave it there. Uh.
Speaker 1: Trump needs to do everything that he can here because
Speaker 1: this issue is also a reminder of what can government
Speaker 1: solve anything? Can government keep its faith and keep covenant
Speaker 1: with its own citizens? Why do we go through all
Speaker 1: of this? Why do we care about politics? Why do
Speaker 1: we vote for these people? Why do we have this
Speaker 1: system of participation in place? You know? So that's I
Speaker 1: think all very very important. That's important to look at. Now.
Speaker 1: If Trump can't do this, what can he do? What
Speaker 1: is he able to do? Investigation? Did you say Adam Schiff?
Speaker 1: Oh never heard of him, So that wouldn't make partisan
Speaker 1: parties are not only transactions to us. I don't know
Speaker 1: what basis would he do that. He has no basis
Speaker 1: to do that. He's just a political hack who's trying
Speaker 1: to build a name for himself. And I think that's
Speaker 1: fine because that's what they do. But there would be
Speaker 1: no reason to do that. No other politician has to
Speaker 1: go through that. It's called presidential harassment, and it's unfortunate
Speaker 1: and it really does hurt our country. It is presidential harassment.
Speaker 1: One of the most damaging legacies of this era in
Speaker 1: American politics, one that's going to stay with us, I
Speaker 1: think for a long time, is the obvious, naked utilization
Speaker 1: of law enforcement powers and authority for political purposes at
Speaker 1: the very highest level, both going after your political enemies
Speaker 1: at the highest level, in this case Trump, the president,
Speaker 1: and people at the highest levels of law enforcement FBI
Speaker 1: and the DOJ pushing this through and allowing this to happen.
Speaker 1: You know, Jeff Sessions, as much as I like Jeff,
Speaker 1: should have seen what was happening here and stepped in.
Speaker 1: There was never a need for a special counsel in
Speaker 1: the first place. This was an obvious political hit from
Speaker 1: the beginning, and this is what you know, this is
Speaker 1: a recurring theme. This is what Democrats do. They turn
Speaker 1: to us and they say, oh, but aren't you aren't
Speaker 1: you going to be the people who abide by the rules.
Speaker 1: Don't you want to be the honorable people, the good people.
Speaker 1: They use our honor and integrity against us all the time.
Speaker 1: They say, oh, don't you respect the need for answers
Speaker 1: of Russian intervention in the election. Russian intervention The election
Speaker 1: was a joke. If it wasn't a joke, the Obama
Speaker 1: administration wouldn't have let it go without a peep until
Speaker 1: Hillary lost. It was only what Hillary lost that all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, we're supposed to care so much about
Speaker 1: Russian intervention, Russian memes on Facebook, and I don't even
Speaker 1: like this Russian interference in the election. That overstates the problem.
Speaker 1: You know, what we're really talking about here is some
Speaker 1: Russian fake news on websites. That's the huge threat to
Speaker 1: our democracy. Some Russian fake news to websites and hacking
Speaker 1: of DNC emails that all they really had to do
Speaker 1: with was Bernie Sanders getting completely you know, blanked over
Speaker 1: by Hillary Clinton's people and the Democrat apparatus. But that
Speaker 1: wasn't some big game change, right, and we all knew
Speaker 1: that was the case. I mean, the Podesta email, There's
Speaker 1: nothing in there that was that important. All it showed
Speaker 1: is that they were completely in the tank, that the
Speaker 1: Democrats and the arbiters of the Democrat primary, we're in
Speaker 1: the tank for Hillary. But this whole notion of oh,
Speaker 1: we need a full accounting of Russian interference in the election,
Speaker 1: here's the full accounting. The Russians messed around, did some
Speaker 1: hacking here and there of personal email accounts or corporate
Speaker 1: email accounts, and put some stuff on Facebook that supported
Speaker 1: different political candidates to try to sew further divisions in
Speaker 1: an already very divided country. I mean, it's just this
Speaker 1: is it's all complete crap. It's complete crap, and it
Speaker 1: now is in a phase. And I have I have
Speaker 1: something to tell you about. I'll hold it till the
Speaker 1: top of the next hour, but I've gotten some information
Speaker 1: recently about this that thinks very interesting, some information you
Speaker 1: probably won't hear anywhere else, or at least, well, you'll
Speaker 1: have to wait and see. But the shift maneuver here
Speaker 1: and what the Democrats are going to do is they're
Speaker 1: all going to try to make a name for themselves
Speaker 1: by being the ones who are the most ruthless. With
Speaker 1: the law enforcement and investigatory investigative powers that they have,
Speaker 1: they're going to go after Trump in every way that
Speaker 1: they can't. They're just going to try to bury him
Speaker 1: in legal nonsense. They're just going to try to take
Speaker 1: all of his people. And this is lawfare, this is lawfair.
Speaker 1: This is what democrats do because these people have no scruples,
Speaker 1: they have no principles, they don't care what they're doing
Speaker 1: to the system. And a major legacy of what they're
Speaker 1: doing to Trump is that people now know that those
Speaker 1: in power on the left will abuse the law itself.
Speaker 1: They will abuse law enforcement and the discretion of prosecutors
Speaker 1: to go after their political enemies. This is third world
Speaker 1: banana republic stuff. This is not what you would expect
Speaker 1: to be happening in the United States of America. And
Speaker 1: we should be greatly troubled that this is going on
Speaker 1: in such an obvious, obvious fashion. Mueller's going to have nothing.
Speaker 1: They've got more for your on that. A second, the
Speaker 1: investigations aren't going to end. The investigations as far as
Speaker 1: the liberals are concerned or just beginning. They're going to
Speaker 1: go after this on Trump and that on Trump, and
Speaker 1: you know what's amazing is they're never going to get
Speaker 1: anything that ends his presidency. And all they're really doing
Speaker 1: is radicalizing their left wing base even further with hatred
Speaker 1: against this president and venom against this president. That's that's
Speaker 1: what they're doing. And they they've then pretend to be
Speaker 1: the ones that want, you know, a return to normalization
Speaker 1: and politics. They pretend to be the ones who want
Speaker 1: things to be you know, won't want this country to
Speaker 1: be more united, They don't want a united country. They
Speaker 1: are doing everything they can to tear down Trump and
Speaker 1: everybody who voted for him, everybody who believes in what
Speaker 1: he's doing. You Know, someone told me today somebody that
Speaker 1: I really I really like and respect, and as it
Speaker 1: was in and off the record, so I'm not going
Speaker 1: to say who it was, but let's you know, Trump
Speaker 1: is an imperfect vessel, but he's an imperfect vessel for
Speaker 1: a righteous cause. I mean, I want to make a
Speaker 1: bumper sticker of that and just just hand it out
Speaker 1: to people. That's exactly right, and no vessel is going
Speaker 1: to be perfect, and that's what I think people that
Speaker 1: support Trump have understood for a long time the politicians
Speaker 1: that present themselves is beyond reproach and just interested in
Speaker 1: being public servants. That I've never made any mistakes, It's all,
Speaker 1: It's all a facade, It's a fraud. Everybody is flawed. Yes,
Speaker 1: not everyone's as flawed as everybody else, I mean their degrees.
Speaker 1: But so Trump is not not a perfect person, and
Speaker 1: nobody's a perfect person. What is he trying to do
Speaker 1: in office? And how is that benefiting the American people?
Speaker 1: As I've told you, the more successful he is, the
Speaker 1: more the Democrats hate him for. It got to start
Speaker 1: every day the best way, with some black Rifle coffee.
Speaker 1: How could you at this point not want to taste
Speaker 1: black rifle coffee. I've been telling you about it for
Speaker 1: how many months? How many years? Now? This is my
Speaker 1: coffee of choice. It's delicious, and I'm a little bit
Speaker 1: of a coffee snob. I'm not gonna lie. I don't
Speaker 1: like the gross swill that you get in some places.
Speaker 1: I like good coffee, and I like a company owned
Speaker 1: and operated by veterans who love this country, are patriots
Speaker 1: and are building a great American brand. Also, black Rifle
Speaker 1: gives a portion of their sales to veteran and first
Speaker 1: responder causes. So these guys are getting it done at
Speaker 1: every level. Wake Up with America's Coffee, Black Rifle Coffee.
Speaker 1: Visit Black Riflecoffee dot com, slash buck and receive fifteen
Speaker 1: percent off your order. That's Black Riflecoffee dot com, slash
Speaker 1: buck for fifteen percent off Again, wake Up with America's Coffee,
Speaker 1: Black Rifle Coffee. Go to Black Riflecoffee dot com, slash
Speaker 1: bucke You'll get fifteen percent off your order. These are
Speaker 1: the guys you should be drinking coffee from every day. Well,
Speaker 1: I think it's a matter of perspective, and that's the
Speaker 1: president's perspective. If you opened up a newspaper or turned
Speaker 1: on a television set every day for two straight years
Speaker 1: and saw accusations that you are an agent of the
Speaker 1: Russian government or colluding with Russia or obstructing justice despite
Speaker 1: the absence of any evidence or charges to that, you
Speaker 1: might call it a ridiculous investigation too. So do I
Speaker 1: think it's fair for him to refer to it that
Speaker 1: way from his perspective? Absolutely, of course, the Muller investigation
Speaker 1: is ridiculous. I'm not going to be satisfied when it
Speaker 1: stops either. I've got some things to tell you team,
Speaker 1: some things to tell you for your ears only, you
Speaker 1: across the country and around the world. I have it
Speaker 1: on good authority. I can't tell you obviously, it can't
Speaker 1: tell you the source. But I have it on very
Speaker 1: good authority that the Muller probe, and you've never heard
Speaker 1: me say this before, the Muller Probe is rapidly coming
Speaker 1: to a close. As in, if everything goes according to now,
Speaker 1: that could change. And everybody. The thing is, they always
Speaker 1: tell you this. Oh, but you know when you talk
Speaker 1: to people that are that are in the know on this,
Speaker 1: they will say, well, if they open another in, open
Speaker 1: another file or another pull another thread or whatever. As
Speaker 1: of right now, the Muller probe is going to be
Speaker 1: over this month, and I have that from people who
Speaker 1: know the Mueller Probe will be over this month. I
Speaker 1: also think that you can expect that there will be
Speaker 1: some and on this one, I still need to do
Speaker 1: a little bit of additional sourcing and get in this
Speaker 1: a little bit further. But when we know the full
Speaker 1: scope of how out of control some elements in the FBI.
Speaker 1: It was really the FBI, by the way. I mean,
Speaker 1: DJ was involved, but there were at Komey's FBI there
Speaker 1: was rot. I mean, there was really bad stuff going on,
Speaker 1: political targeted, bad bad stuff. And I know I'm speaking
Speaker 1: slightly in vague terms here, but i don't want to
Speaker 1: tell you things that are not rock solid yet. And
Speaker 1: I've been telling you for a long time, and you've
Speaker 1: heard it from others as well, that that Komey's a
Speaker 1: Comey's a dirt bag. The stuff he's been doing is
Speaker 1: you know, the stuff he did rather and then even
Speaker 1: when he left left his position, he's shown us exactly
Speaker 1: who he is. He's a partisan hack who's only out
Speaker 1: for himself, and he did tremendous damage to public confidence
Speaker 1: in the FBI. There's worse stuff. There's one story in
Speaker 1: particular that I I'm still trying to track down. I'm
Speaker 1: still trying to make sure that I source it out
Speaker 1: before I might break it on the Hill and then
Speaker 1: be able to tell you about it here on the show,
Speaker 1: or rather I'll break it here on the show and
Speaker 1: I'll have it posted on the Hill. But the FBI
Speaker 1: was running some rogue political operations. Really and needs to
Speaker 1: be held to account for it if what I'm told
Speaker 1: is true, and you know I don't. I don't push
Speaker 1: things that are are weak or that are innuendo or
Speaker 1: conspiracy or any of that stuff. It's really bad. It's
Speaker 1: really bad what was going on the FBI, and there
Speaker 1: needs to be instituten See here's the thing. There needs
Speaker 1: to be institutional accountability for it. There needs to be
Speaker 1: an understanding that at the top level of the FBI,
Speaker 1: there were decisions made among multiple senior FBI officials that
Speaker 1: cast a lot of doubt on the FBI's ability to
Speaker 1: operate as a nonpartisan law enforcement investigation our premiere law
Speaker 1: enforcement law enforcement agency rather in this country, our premiere one.
Speaker 1: I think that when people know the full scope and
Speaker 1: scale of what's going on, they will be utterly appalled.
Speaker 1: I mean, they will just be in shock. So that's coming,
Speaker 1: and it's coming relatively soon, and this Mueller probe will end,
Speaker 1: and when it ends, we will see that the Democrats,
Speaker 1: just as they've been exposed for being complete phonies, hypocrites, hacks,
Speaker 1: with this political catastrophe that's been unfolding in Virginia, where
Speaker 1: they might I mean, by all rights they should have
Speaker 1: three senior that the three most senior senior officeholders in
Speaker 1: the state of Virginia should be resigning, all three of
Speaker 1: them by liberal rules. I'm not even saying that I
Speaker 1: agree with those rules necessarily put by liberal rules, all
Speaker 1: three of them should be resigning and a Republicans should
Speaker 1: be taking their place. It's not going to happen. In fact,
Speaker 1: I think none of them are going to resign. That's
Speaker 1: the new which just shows us. This is why, this
Speaker 1: is why you can't allow Democrats to play this. Oh
Speaker 1: don't you have scruples and morals? Republicans? Why don't you
Speaker 1: get more angry about when Trump FIBs about this or that?
Speaker 1: Why don't you turn on the president when he tells
Speaker 1: a little a little lie about this or that. Don't
Speaker 1: you have principles? Yeah, we do have principles. We also
Speaker 1: know what you're trying to do across the other side
Speaker 1: of the aisle, Democrats, and we know how you play
Speaker 1: the game rules for us, not for you, and we're
Speaker 1: not going to let that happen anymore. With Trump though,
Speaker 1: which you'll see is that the Mullar probe was always
Speaker 1: was always, always, always nothing but an excuse in a
Speaker 1: pretext to go after Trump. Because even when the probe
Speaker 1: does not bring any charges against Trump or any of
Speaker 1: his top people, when there's nothing to see for collusion,
Speaker 1: there was no collusion. It was a lie, a lie,
Speaker 1: a lie. Even with all of that, they will continue.
Speaker 1: The Democrats will will act like there was Russia collusion.
Speaker 1: They'll say there need to be house investigations. They need
Speaker 1: the Southern District of New York, which is full of libs,
Speaker 1: by the way, full of libs, the Southern District of
Speaker 1: New York. They need that to continue investigating the president,
Speaker 1: continue investigating his deals. They will not stop. We are
Speaker 1: entering a period of trench warfare against the Trump administration.
Speaker 1: They don't care what the truth is. So just grab
Speaker 1: your helmet and get ready. Get in the trench with me.
Speaker 1: It's gonna get crazy out there. And even after the
Speaker 1: Muller probends, AARPS very well known, right, it's senior organization,
Speaker 1: get some discounts and stuff. But the park that's not
Speaker 1: as well known about AARPS, that it's a liberal organization.
Speaker 1: You know, think of this like you think of so
Speaker 1: many other institutions where they actually have progressive politics. Even
Speaker 1: if they don't say. So that's why I recommend that
Speaker 1: you stick with an organization that gives you all the
Speaker 1: upside and also conservative policy. AMAC. Why AMAC Well, AMAC
Speaker 1: has over one point five million Americans who have joined,
Speaker 1: and they realize that their membership in AMAC pushes forward
Speaker 1: the same kinds of policies, whether it's fixing the border
Speaker 1: or advocating for seniors that they want. And I think
Speaker 1: that AMAC is good for you too. You should check
Speaker 1: it out. Join AMAC today as they fight the good fight.
Speaker 1: You can join at AMAC dot us slash buck. That's
Speaker 1: AMAC dot us slash buck because forget AARP, AMAC is better.
Speaker 1: It's better for you, it's better for America. To those
Speaker 1: people who are criticizing the president, how well did you
Speaker 1: do with rocket Man? So yeah, I'm very hopeful that
Speaker 1: when meeting this new meeting will lead to a breakthrough process.
Speaker 1: A meeting with Trump and he didn't meet with anybody else. Interesting,
Speaker 1: maybe he believes that he's serious. Anyway, I think he's scared.
Speaker 1: If you want to get this guy's attention, He's not
Speaker 1: like Iron. Iron's on a religious mission. You know, if
Speaker 1: they ever get NUSO use them. This guy is trying
Speaker 1: to have an insurance policy to keep the mafia state going.
Speaker 1: But if Trump gives him an alternative between life without
Speaker 1: nuclear weapons that is safe and secure, he'll take it.
Speaker 1: If the other alternative is to lose your life. So
Speaker 1: here's where foreign policy needs a bit more attention. On
Speaker 1: the right. We need to stop accepting that what people
Speaker 1: have done in the past, including on our side, so
Speaker 1: to speak, the GOP Republicans, previous Republican presidents, that just
Speaker 1: because something was the way that it was done, it
Speaker 1: does not mean it should always continue to be done
Speaker 1: that way. For example, North Korea, there's a lot of
Speaker 1: criticism right now of President Trump from Democrats and some
Speaker 1: Republicans on his outreach to Kim Jong on a North
Speaker 1: Korea for talks. Now, before I even get into where
Speaker 1: I think this is going and how well it's going
Speaker 1: to go or not well it's going to go, let's
Speaker 1: understand that stretching back to Kim Jong Ill in the
Speaker 1: nineteen nineties and the earliest days of the North Korean
Speaker 1: nuclear program, successive administrations have been lound on this issue.
Speaker 1: They have all looked foolish. Madeline Albright gave like the
Speaker 1: sign basketball to Kim Jong Ill and there was you know,
Speaker 1: the Clinton administration, and then the Bush administration tried to
Speaker 1: tighten the screws a little bit, and then the Obama
Speaker 1: administration really did nothing. I mean, the Obama administration talked
Speaker 1: about a pivot to Asia, but it's a pivot that
Speaker 1: never really occurred. And as I look at this now,
Speaker 1: I see that there's a pushback, a pushback from I
Speaker 1: think some of the previous foreign policy gurus, such as
Speaker 1: they are, the foreign policy consensus makers out there that
Speaker 1: Trump takes this non traditional approach. Well, you have to
Speaker 1: remember that the approaches of the past, which would have
Speaker 1: been the traditional approaches to North Korea have failed. The
Speaker 1: North Korean nuclear and missile program has advanced without any
Speaker 1: meaningful cessation for the last going on thirty years, just
Speaker 1: keeps going up and up and up. Their missiles are
Speaker 1: being shot further and further, their nuclear capability is increasing,
Speaker 1: and their ability to put a miniaturized nuclear warhead on
Speaker 1: a missile that they could then fire at the continental
Speaker 1: United States or Hawaii or Guam for that matter. You know,
Speaker 1: they think of well, or Japan or South South Korea
Speaker 1: already they could hit with They don't need to use
Speaker 1: nukes to destroy South Korea. But this is where you
Speaker 1: have to separate yourself from what the so called consensus
Speaker 1: is because the consensus has failed. There's no question that
Speaker 1: consensus has failed. People who say that North Korea has
Speaker 1: been contained don't know what they're talking about. Yes, North
Speaker 1: Korea hasn't been able to seize territory outside of its borders.
Speaker 1: But North Korean aggression has continued, its nuclear program has advanced,
Speaker 1: and until Trump came along, there was really no hope
Speaker 1: of anything happening to stop this other than an actual
Speaker 1: war with North Korea, an actual fight with the North Koreans,
Speaker 1: which is not something that we would want for a
Speaker 1: whole myriad of reasons, at least of which is the
Speaker 1: massive losses of human life on the North Korean side
Speaker 1: of the border or South Korean side of the border.
Speaker 1: We could lose troops who knows where else they fire missiles,
Speaker 1: chemical weapons, biological weapons. I mean, the North Korean state
Speaker 1: is effectively a state built for the purpose of warfare
Speaker 1: to unite the Korean peninsula. That is the reason for
Speaker 1: the existence of the North Korean state. I mean, that
Speaker 1: is why the North Korean regime believes that it has
Speaker 1: a right to stay in power. So who knows what
Speaker 1: they have stockpiled and what they'd be willing to do,
Speaker 1: what they'd be willing to use in any kind of
Speaker 1: a conflict. Trump has tried to take us off that pathway,
Speaker 1: and he may fail, he may not. But the important
Speaker 1: point is that you see that somebody like Trump to
Speaker 1: come along and look at this problem with fresh eyes
Speaker 1: without being concerned about Hey, do the people at the
Speaker 1: think tanks and the different international journalists do they think
Speaker 1: that this is smart? Do they agree with what I'm doing?
Speaker 1: He comes to this from a very different perspective. He says, Nope,
Speaker 1: that's not the way to look at this. Doesn't matter
Speaker 1: what those people think. It doesn't matter how they view
Speaker 1: the problem set because they've been wrong for a very
Speaker 1: long time. He comes at it and says, how do
Speaker 1: you disrupt this? How do you change it? He looks
Speaker 1: at this the way a businessman would look at a
Speaker 1: failing restaurant or a failing development project. You don't just
Speaker 1: show up and say, well, the people that are supposed
Speaker 1: to know stuff. They say that this is how I
Speaker 1: have to do it. Well, if the people are supposed
Speaker 1: to know stuff are getting it wrong? Why are you
Speaker 1: listening to them? And this is something that is particularly
Speaker 1: powerful about the way Trump approaches a lot of different problems.
Speaker 1: So Lindsey Graham is right when he says that these
Speaker 1: people that the criticism of Trump on this issue comes
Speaker 1: from people who don't really have a leg to stand on,
Speaker 1: all right, And so that that's part one. And another
Speaker 1: part of this is you see the outrage at at
Speaker 1: Tulsi Gabbard, who is running for president of the Democrats side,
Speaker 1: and you know, I kind of like Tulsi Gabbert. You know,
Speaker 1: she serves. There's some stuff about Tulsie that I'm I'm
Speaker 1: kind of a fan of. It has been pointed out
Speaker 1: that she looks a little bit like Miss Molly. People
Speaker 1: have said this to me. I agree, I mean, Miss
Speaker 1: Molly is lovelier in my in my opinion, of course,
Speaker 1: but there's some there's some similarity between the two. So
Speaker 1: there's that. But she also is on the left a
Speaker 1: little bit of a rogue when it comes to foreign policy.
Speaker 1: She had this meeting with a sad years ago. The
Speaker 1: left has never let her forget it, and they're very
Speaker 1: very clear on how they don't want Tulsie Gabbard to
Speaker 1: really even be a part of the Democrat you know,
Speaker 1: she's one of the few candidates who's come out on
Speaker 1: the Democrat side of things. And they're not saying, oh,
Speaker 1: she's adding to the No, no, no, no no. They don't
Speaker 1: want her to be a part of this at all.
Speaker 1: They don't want her name to be in this race.
Speaker 1: They clearly are not in favor of having Tulsie Gabbard's
Speaker 1: viewpoint representative. And here let's play a very short SoundBite
Speaker 1: for you of something that got them really upset. And
Speaker 1: I think she's actually speaking a truth that very few
Speaker 1: people are willing to speak these days. And it crosses
Speaker 1: over into a somewhat trump Trumpian view of our foreign
Speaker 1: policy goal of play fourteen. Assad is not the enemy
Speaker 1: of the United States because the United Syria does not
Speaker 1: pose a direct threat to the United States. She got
Speaker 1: hammered for that. I mean, they are absolute lee all
Speaker 1: over her for this. And you know, on Morning Joe,
Speaker 1: there's this whole back and forth with with you know,
Speaker 1: with with Mika and Joe, and she says, you know,
Speaker 1: he's saying, well, do we, you know, do we call
Speaker 1: him an adversary or an enemy or what word would
Speaker 1: you use? They're they're trying to sound bite foreign policy,
Speaker 1: which is not usually a good thing to do. It's
Speaker 1: the complexities of foreign policy usually make sound bite approaches insufficient.
Speaker 1: But Assad is not, in fact. Assad is not in
Speaker 1: fact an enemy of the United States in the sense
Speaker 1: that we should be making war on him. Assad is
Speaker 1: not e there And people oh about Asad is so horrible, Yeah,
Speaker 1: Sad's horrible. A lot of people are horrible. Are we
Speaker 1: Are we going to go to war with everybody who's
Speaker 1: terrible out there? Are we about to go to war with?
Speaker 1: You know? Would we have gone to war with Zimbabwe?
Speaker 1: Terrible country? In terms of the regime? Are we going
Speaker 1: to go to war with Cuba? Are we going to
Speaker 1: go to war with? You know, when you say the
Speaker 1: term enemy, you could talk about an opponent or or
Speaker 1: an adversary, but that doesn't really matter. When you start
Speaker 1: saying enemy, now you're talking about someone that we have
Speaker 1: to take action against because they are a threat to us.
Speaker 1: Right your enemy is a threat to you. Is the
Speaker 1: Assad regime a threat to the United States right now?
Speaker 1: I think the answer is no. Is the Assad regime
Speaker 1: a problem for us? Is it a vile detestable regime
Speaker 1: that we wish was gone. Yes. Yes, So that I
Speaker 1: think is where Tulsi Gabbard is trying to draw some
Speaker 1: kind of a you know, some kind of a line
Speaker 1: the sand, if you will. Because Tulsi Gabbert is saying, look, Assad,
Speaker 1: it's not us foreign policy for Assad to be overthrown
Speaker 1: by force. We're not involved in that, and we don't
Speaker 1: even want that to happen. Here's the truth. And she
Speaker 1: gets at this, and this goes right in the face
Speaker 1: of a lot of the foreign policy media consensus out there.
Speaker 1: We don't want the Assad regime to collapse if it
Speaker 1: means a resurgence of Islamist factions and forces which are
Speaker 1: the dominant the second you get out of Kurdish areas
Speaker 1: and the people in the media they don't understand this,
Speaker 1: and they don't know and they don't care. The second
Speaker 1: you leave Kurdish areas, you cannot have a Kurdish force
Speaker 1: in charge for long. You cannot have the Kurds overseeing
Speaker 1: Sunni Arabs in Syria. What that means is that if
Speaker 1: the Assad regime were to, let's say completely collapse, it's
Speaker 1: not like we could count on our Kurdish allies that
Speaker 1: fought against Isis to go all the way to the Mediterranean,
Speaker 1: plus the Turks would completely lose their minds over this.
Speaker 1: Assad is the government of Syria, he has won the
Speaker 1: Syrian Civil War. Do we have to have diplomatic relations
Speaker 1: with them? Do we have to be cozy with them?
Speaker 1: Of course not. But is there something that we need
Speaker 1: to accept here as we are making peace with the Taliban?
Speaker 1: The Trump administration is trying to do that right now.
Speaker 1: We should also understand that, you know, we have to
Speaker 1: work within the realities of the world that we live
Speaker 1: in and not the world that we wish we live in.
Speaker 1: And I think Tulsi Gabbard brings an interesting voice into
Speaker 1: this foreign policy discussion. It's so easy to say Assad
Speaker 1: is terrible. Yeah, we all know that Assad is terrible.
Speaker 1: Now what Trump I think realizes this, which is why
Speaker 1: he says, We're not staying there. This is not our fight.
Speaker 1: We're not going to continue to be propping up these
Speaker 1: not just you know, the different governments, but keeping these
Speaker 1: countries from completely imploding. Not our fight. Our men and
Speaker 1: women shouldn't be doing this. It's not their mission set anymore.
Speaker 1: So a little bit of foreign policy heresy out there
Speaker 1: can be a good thing. We'll be right back. I
Speaker 1: got some very tragic news today I have to share
Speaker 1: with all of you. Some of you probably already know,
Speaker 1: especially those of you who know me from my days
Speaker 1: at the Blaze. Doc Thompson. Doc Thompson, who is a
Speaker 1: veteran of many radio stations and somebody that I worked
Speaker 1: with a lot back at the Blaze. He was He
Speaker 1: was killed. He was killed earlier today. It was a
Speaker 1: shock when I saw this. I've had I've had people
Speaker 1: from the Blaze reaching out all day to day and
Speaker 1: they're just reeling. As you can imagine, Doc was. It
Speaker 1: was a terrible accident. It's a terrible tragedy. Doc was
Speaker 1: out jogging and from what I was told, he was
Speaker 1: jogging with his headphones in and did not hear he
Speaker 1: crossed some train tracks and did not know. I did
Speaker 1: and hear that the train was coming. So Michael Doc Thompson,
Speaker 1: forty nine years old, has passed away. He was he
Speaker 1: was killed. Glennbeck wrote, there are no words. Doc will
Speaker 1: be greatly missed. Our prayers go out to his family.
Speaker 1: And he was a one in a million, one in
Speaker 1: a million talents. Doc and I knew each other pretty well.
Speaker 1: We had worked together for years at the Blaze. In fact,
Speaker 1: we even at one point had talked about doing a
Speaker 1: show together at the Blaze that we were going to
Speaker 1: call the Blaze After Dark, which we were going to
Speaker 1: be having beers for me tequila and sit around and
Speaker 1: talk about news the day with a few of our
Speaker 1: fellow Blaze Saltier Blaze folks, and we even gave it
Speaker 1: a shot. One day we did a sit down radio
Speaker 1: room with Doc Thompson, Skip Lacombe, myself, Jay Everin, and
Speaker 1: Glenn Beck coming in and out when he could during
Speaker 1: an event out out in Salt Lake City. This is
Speaker 1: one of those shocks that when it happens, you have
Speaker 1: a hard time believing that it's happened. I was stunned today.
Speaker 1: You know, Doc was a good man, he was a
Speaker 1: colleague and we were we were friends for years, and
Speaker 1: I just can't imagine. You know, he's got a wife,
Speaker 1: and he's got a wife and family that he leaves behind,
Speaker 1: so very very tough. U. There is a go FUNDI
Speaker 1: page that's up. I know that the family is in
Speaker 1: a is in a difficult spot right now, not just
Speaker 1: emotionally and you know that with the tragedy they're dealing with,
Speaker 1: but also financially, I've been told that, you know, this
Speaker 1: is going to be a real burden. So anything you
Speaker 1: can do, I know a lot of you are Doc
Speaker 1: Thompson listeners, and a lot of you are people that
Speaker 1: have enjoyed what he did for for so many years.
Speaker 1: Anything you can do to help, I'm sure would be
Speaker 1: greatly greatly appreciate. And obviously just even you, your prayers
Speaker 1: for his family would be very much appreciated. You know,
Speaker 1: it's been a tough couple of months in this corner
Speaker 1: of conservative media that I operate in. We lost Bree
Speaker 1: Peyton to the flu. And Bree was a frequent contributor
Speaker 1: to my show on Hill TV, and with somebody that
Speaker 1: I was looking forward to working with Moore, and you know,
Speaker 1: she was young and just a total sweetheart, absolutely beautiful.
Speaker 1: Diet of the flu, rising conservative media star and now
Speaker 1: Doc Thompson, another conservative media personality that I've worked with
Speaker 1: for and known for many years, and he got killed
Speaker 1: out for a jog hit by a train. You just
Speaker 1: don't know, folks. I don't have any insights. I don't
Speaker 1: have any particular wisdom to shed here. You just know
Speaker 1: every day is precious, and every moment you can spend
Speaker 1: with the people that matter in your life is something
Speaker 1: that you should try to cherish as much as possible
Speaker 1: because stuff like this happens. I feel terrible for his family,
Speaker 1: but i just know he's in a better place, and
Speaker 1: I'm sorry that I'll never get a chance again to
Speaker 1: do another radio segment with my whole friend Doc Thompson.
Speaker 1: So we'll be back at a moment, Team Buck. It's
Speaker 1: time for roll call, another day, another role call, my friends.
Speaker 1: You know how I love to hear from all of
Speaker 1: you across the country and in some cases around the world.
Speaker 1: I feel like we haven't had a call in from
Speaker 1: Team Buck South Korea or Team Buck Afghanistan in a
Speaker 1: little while. So if you're out there listening, you know,
Speaker 1: let's let's get little shout out Team Buck Austria yah kutintag,
Speaker 1: Team Buck Germany also yah kutintag. What else we have
Speaker 1: we've had obviously Team Buck Canada, a and some other places.
Speaker 1: It basically, if you live in an English speaking country,
Speaker 1: you're in a military base or Israel, then you pretty
Speaker 1: much might listen to the show. So that's that's the
Speaker 1: good news. We got that going for us, which is nice.
Speaker 1: Let's get to it, my friends. First, up here, Philip
Speaker 1: rights Buck. I'm a bit younger than you. We were
Speaker 1: in Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time. I've loved
Speaker 1: your show and have since the Saturday broadcasts since I
Speaker 1: started listening. Rather on your final Saturday broadcast. Oh okay,
Speaker 1: cool like you. I'm a dog lover. We got Pepper
Speaker 1: shortly after my last employment to Afghanistan, and she's helped
Speaker 1: me immensely with the demons that came back with me
Speaker 1: from overseas. This past Tuesday, February fifth, Pepper lost the
Speaker 1: use of her hind legs out of nowhere and she
Speaker 1: needs surgery. I was wondering if you would share my
Speaker 1: go fund meat with the team. My wife and I
Speaker 1: have our first baby on the way, so this is
Speaker 1: an unexpected expense that is not optional for me. I
Speaker 1: hate to ask the team for help, but I know
Speaker 1: it's hard to get help without asking. I appreciate anything
Speaker 1: you can do best, Phil, Phil As we speak, I
Speaker 1: am sending this to producer Mike and we are going
Speaker 1: to put it up on our social platform so we
Speaker 1: can try to get the word out so you can
Speaker 1: see if you can get some help here. Thank you
Speaker 1: for your service, my friend, and thank you very much
Speaker 1: for reaching out and also for listening to the show.
Speaker 1: I do appreciate it, and it is indeed posted on Facebook,
Speaker 1: and folks, I appreciate whenever you ask me for help
Speaker 1: with causes or to raise money. We do what we can,
Speaker 1: but there's there are limitations to how much I'm able
Speaker 1: to help. Look, I wish I had some of the
Speaker 1: big time radio host money where I could just send
Speaker 1: any of you that really needed a check, But unfortunately,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna need some of you to send me a
Speaker 1: check at the rate we're going here. Alrighty, just kidding,
Speaker 1: the show's kicking butt. I know, I know, self deprecating
Speaker 1: isn't always the way to go. Let's get back into
Speaker 1: our roll call here for a moment. Sorry, I had
Speaker 1: I posted that while we were on air, so it
Speaker 1: is up on Facebook dot com. Slash buck sexton and
Speaker 1: writes two things. First, I want to know who's backing
Speaker 1: AOC who arranged for her to run for Congress. I
Speaker 1: don't believe a twenty eight year old bartender just a
Speaker 1: side of one day to jump into the political big leagues.
Speaker 1: I'm sure it's a follow the money situation, but I
Speaker 1: haven't heard anyone ponder or dig into who is the
Speaker 1: power behind this woman. Second, regarding the New York abortion bill,
Speaker 1: all I can see in my mind's eyes Governor Cromla's
Speaker 1: face and the Carl character and ghost being dragged into
Speaker 1: the depths of hell by shadowy demons. Well, and that's
Speaker 1: pretty it's a pretty intense scene. And I think I
Speaker 1: know what you're going forward that As to aoc I
Speaker 1: don't know if there's anything really be if there was
Speaker 1: anything behind her other than that she has really harnessed
Speaker 1: this no nothing socialist millennialism that is popular because they
Speaker 1: control the different outlets of our culture. Unfortunately, the Left
Speaker 1: has seized the telegraph office when it comes to it's
Speaker 1: an old expression from the Russian Revolution. They've seized the
Speaker 1: telegraph office when it comes to all of the cultural
Speaker 1: programming that is mainstream. And that means that people like
Speaker 1: Ocasio Cortez can honestly get away with not knowing very much,
Speaker 1: not being particularly well read, and having some very damaging
Speaker 1: ideas for the country. But it's appealing to people who
Speaker 1: don't know any better. Sharon writes, this is the greatest
Speaker 1: State of the Union since Reagan. And Sharon also, it's
Speaker 1: my favorite State of the Union moments. It seemed like
Speaker 1: every time Nancy Pelosi stood up to clap, she checked
Speaker 1: the paper copy of the speech and was late sitting
Speaker 1: back down. Yeah, Pelosi was checking the paper copy obviously
Speaker 1: as a little way of I think undermining the president, like, oh,
Speaker 1: when is this going to end? But there's a fair
Speaker 1: amount of that going on. So there you have it.
Speaker 1: We have Buck. Oh that's me, Don writes Buck. Checkout
Speaker 1: US Law Title ten, section eight two four. It allows
Speaker 1: the military to build fences in drug corridors at the
Speaker 1: request at the request of any government agency, no emergency required.
Speaker 1: I will check this out. It's on the Cornell dot
Speaker 1: Edy Support for counterdrug activities and activities counter transnational crime.
Speaker 1: This is currently the law. The Secretary Defense may provide
Speaker 1: support for the counter drug activities or activities to counter
Speaker 1: transnational organized crime of any State department, of any other
Speaker 1: department or agency of the federal government, or any state, local, tribal,
Speaker 1: or foreign law enforcement agency, for any of the purposes
Speaker 1: set forth in the subsection, and then it goes into
Speaker 1: describe transnational organized crime, and yeah, yeah, look it's you're right.
Speaker 1: I've heard this before, and you're giving me the specific statute.
Speaker 1: It is the law. The president can order them to
Speaker 1: build a fence. The president should order them to build defence,
Speaker 1: order the federal government to do so. But keep in
Speaker 1: mind that whether it's through a national emergency or the
Speaker 1: invocation of existing statute, they're still going to claim that
Speaker 1: this is illegal, and they're still going to challenge it
Speaker 1: right away. So that's what I wanted to just get
Speaker 1: out there as a response to what you're saying. Hold
Speaker 1: on a second. Here we have Lance, who writes buck
Speaker 1: what up, pham, keep up the good work your political
Speaker 1: analysis and sense if humor. Crack me up. You make
Speaker 1: my commute home much easier. By the way, if you
Speaker 1: want to get in phenomenal shape, start training with jiu jitsu.
Speaker 1: You'll be hulked out by summer. Thank you, Lance, Lance.
Speaker 1: Jiu jitsu seems cool to me. I'm hoping that I
Speaker 1: can switch my schedule around here pretty soon where I
Speaker 1: don't lack knowledge about how to train, and I don't
Speaker 1: lack the will, I do lack the time and the
Speaker 1: sleep and I have for the last nine months or so,
Speaker 1: which has been a frustration for me. But I think
Speaker 1: that's going to change soon. It's not going to change,
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with this show, but we'll see
Speaker 1: what the future holds. Eric right hey Buck. Speaking of
Speaker 1: Super Bowl commercials, people say the Verizon commercial was good. Yes,
Speaker 1: it was nice to recognize emergency services, but it was
Speaker 1: more of them kissing up the emergency services for when
Speaker 1: they got called out for throttling their service during the
Speaker 1: California wildfires. Also, I see you're coming to Fort Wayne
Speaker 1: and you're going to be at Sweetwater Sound. If you
Speaker 1: love music, you will fall in love with Sweetwater. If
Speaker 1: you're looking for a good burger, you should try brob Us,
Speaker 1: best burger in town. Love the show shieldside, Eric, Indeed,
Speaker 1: I will be out in Fort Wayne, Indiana, coming up
Speaker 1: here in April. I think the off the top of
Speaker 1: my head. I got to check what the date is
Speaker 1: to be honest. Oh, yes, April thirteenth. I'll be out
Speaker 1: there with Todd Starnes and Tommy Laren. We'll be doing
Speaker 1: a conservative talk tank out there, just hanging out with folks,
Speaker 1: telling them what we see going on in politics. A
Speaker 1: lot of stuff. So if you're in the Fort Wayne,
Speaker 1: Indiana area, or if you just want to swing by
Speaker 1: that's coming up in April, you can get tickets and
Speaker 1: I'll have more for you on that when we get
Speaker 1: a bit closer. And certainly all of our who who
Speaker 1: land listeners out there, Hey, all of you who know
Speaker 1: that your favorite radio show is on nine eastern to
Speaker 1: midnight in fourt Wayne, Indiana. That's your favorite, you should
Speaker 1: be sure to come out to that event. We will talk,
Speaker 1: we will hang out. It'll be a lot of fun. Christian, right,
Speaker 1: someone needs to get Eric off camera. He is tanked.
Speaker 1: Bad image, Christian. I don't know who you mean, which
Speaker 1: Eric you mean? I don't know, I don't I don't
Speaker 1: know who you're talking about, but let me know. Thank
Speaker 1: you for the heads up, Mike Rites. I've found this
Speaker 1: in an Irish pub in Wisconsin. Sexton Single malt Irish Whiskey. Indeed,
Speaker 1: Sexton Single malt Irish Whiskey. I'm gonna tell you something.
Speaker 1: I do not love the Sexton single malt Irish Whiskey
Speaker 1: logo because it is a little macabre. And I think
Speaker 1: it's because a sexton technically technically a sexton is a
Speaker 1: grave digger for a church. So and then whenever I
Speaker 1: say that, I think of a friend of mine who
Speaker 1: told me that he went to a monster Truck rally
Speaker 1: once and thought it was just amazing how many adorable
Speaker 1: little ten year olds were yelling grave dagger, Grave dagger
Speaker 1: with like the monster truck. Grave digger is apparently a thing.
Speaker 1: But the sexton also collects the alms at a church
Speaker 1: or the offerings, not the olmst pardon me, the offerings
Speaker 1: at a church and cleans up the church. He's kind
Speaker 1: of like the church janitor. So you are listening to
Speaker 1: the syndicated church janitor radio show here the Bucks Exton show.
Speaker 1: There you go. A sextant is a device that uses
Speaker 1: astronomy essentially to tell you where you are on the sea.
Speaker 1: It's a nautical a nautical early geolocation device, if you will,
Speaker 1: it's not really geolocation. You get the idea, Jesse writes
Speaker 1: Buck first trip to New York. I'm headed to New
Speaker 1: York on business. I've never been there before. I'm planning
Speaker 1: to visit the World Trade Center, Memorial and grabs some
Speaker 1: good grub somewhere. What do you recommend nearby? If you're
Speaker 1: in town, I'd be honored to meet you and buy
Speaker 1: you lunch. VP Quality for the company who make batteries
Speaker 1: for every guided munition in the US arsenal. Wow, it's
Speaker 1: really cool. Your podcast is my co pilot each week
Speaker 1: on my four hour commute to work. Weekly commute to work.
Speaker 1: I appreciate your input in my trip to I see
Speaker 1: cheers well, Jesse. Very kind of you. Sounds like you've
Speaker 1: got a super cool job, and I appreciate the offer.
Speaker 1: Though I live in DC now, I am a swamp dweller.
Speaker 1: I'm doing this show for you live from Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: I'm not in New York, much to my chagrin. As
Speaker 1: to advice for you, oh Man, what to do yet?
Speaker 1: Go see the World Trade Center memorial. It's incredible. It's
Speaker 1: well worth the time, absolutely something that would I would
Speaker 1: recommend that you check out if you're looking to grab lunch.
Speaker 1: I don't know of any great places. There's this whole
Speaker 1: new food gallery that's down near you know. It's kind
Speaker 1: of a food mall. I think it's called Beakman Place
Speaker 1: or something like that. I've been once. It's new, very
Speaker 1: very new that has an incredible assortment of different kinds
Speaker 1: of restaurants. But I would say go to the World
Speaker 1: Trade Center Memorial and then make your way up into
Speaker 1: the West Village and into Chelsea. If the weather's nice enough,
Speaker 1: go for a walk on the high Line Park. You
Speaker 1: can check out Chelsea Market. These are all places. These
Speaker 1: are my kind of standard go to places to check
Speaker 1: out there. If you want to a really good Italian meal,
Speaker 1: that's in the West Village. It's a really charming place.
Speaker 1: You can go to Mirandi, Mr A and d I.
Speaker 1: And if you want the best burger in New York,
Speaker 1: I would say go to J. G. Mellins in the
Speaker 1: Upper east Side. But there's also if you want a
Speaker 1: more pub feel downtown, you can go to Corner Bistro,
Speaker 1: which has been very famous for a long time. I
Speaker 1: love the Spotted Pig is really cool. You can check
Speaker 1: that place out too. All Right, you know what I'm
Speaker 1: gonna people like buck It's for one guy's trip. I know.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I get excited about New York stuff. I'll
Speaker 1: write to you, my friend Jesse. I'll give you some
Speaker 1: more recommendations here on Facebook. And yes it is me
Speaker 1: who responds. For those of you who I was like,
Speaker 1: are you responding yes, Yes, I am team an honor
Speaker 1: and a privilege to be here with you. Thank you
Speaker 1: for hanging out. I will talk to you more tomorrow.
Speaker 1: Shield tie By. Now most of us have started racking
Speaker 1: our brains and it's into last minute, folks. What Valentine's
Speaker 1: gift is gonna make her day or his day truly special? Well,
Speaker 1: with one eight hundred flowers dot com, it's easy. It's
Speaker 1: almost already done for you. All you gotta do is
Speaker 1: go to the site and check it out. Roses from
Speaker 1: one eight hundred flowers dot com are a no brainer
Speaker 1: right now. When you order early, you can get the
Speaker 1: eighteen stem and chanted rose medley for twenty nine ninety nine,
Speaker 1: or double it to the thirty six stem and chanted
Speaker 1: roses for twenty bucks more. Look, don't tell anybody this
Speaker 1: is what I'm sending to Miss Molly. It's going to
Speaker 1: make a special day out of this. Make this easy.
Speaker 1: This is what you want to do yourself. Okay. To
Speaker 1: order the eighteen stem and chanted rose medley for twenty
Speaker 1: nine ninety nine, or double the roses for twenty dollars more,
Speaker 1: go to one eight hundred flowers dot com click the
Speaker 1: radio icon entercode buck again. Order to day and say
Speaker 1: go to one eight hundred flowers dot com radio icon.
Speaker 1: Just click on that and enter promo code buck Today